Brother... this kind of reporting out of Afghanistan is really getting old... quick.

How do you win a war when the sitting president of the country... doesn't want the war won?

Real Clear Politics
Don't Stop Special Ops: Karzai Sides with Taliban--Again

Within Afghanistan, only a single US program continues to do real damage to the Taliban. And President Hamid Karzai wants it to stop.

Our special operations forces (especially, the Army's) have been gutting the Taliban's leadership. Karzai doesn't like that. He didn't like our use of airpower and artillery, either. The Taliban feared them too much and told wild lies about civilian casualties. Most fire support ceased. More soldiers and Marines died.

Now Karzai wants to put a stop to "night raids" by our special operators. If he were actively allied with the Taliban, he couldn't do the terrorists a bigger favor.

A source deep in the fight provided hard numbers-countering Karzai's claims that our strike teams wantonly kill civilians:

--Our "most elite" SOF element struck 1043 high-value objectives over the past year, 80% during the hours of darkness. 45% of those black-ops missions-a very high percentage-were successes that "resulted in the capture or death of the targeted individual."

--Only a third of those missions-366--required our troops to open fire. They don't go in with guns blazing. On the contrary, these are the most-disciplined soldiers on earth. And night raids limit casualties: An enemy taken by surprise is less likely to respond effectively, so you don't unleash a firefight in the streets.

--In over a thousand raids last year, 18 non-combatants died-because they were bunking with the Taliban and got caught up in a fight. Compare that full-year casualty rate to the 93 people killed in a single day in Mexico's narco-insurgency last week.

--Last week alone, the Taliban murdered twice the number of civilians that our special operators killed in an entire year.

--Our top SOF element recently eliminated a half-dozen key Taliban commanders and sub-commanders, seriously disrupting the enemy's chain of command. Top Taliban leaders in Pakistan (protected by our Pakistani "allies") are scrambling to regain control in Afghanistan.

President Karzai's been briefed on these statistics. He ignores them and continues to rail about our SOF forces causing civilian casualties and "violating Afghan culture." Karzai stayed mum, though, about the Taliban's recent hanging of a seven-year-old boy as a "spy." Lynching kids is culturally acceptable.

The fact conventionally minded generals and Are-we-there-yet? pols won't face is that Afghanistan always was and remains a special-ops fight. Privately, SOF veterans mock our counterinsurgency doctrine as "a disease just short of paralysis."

That doctrine-for which soldiers and Marines are dying in growing numbers-assumes that we're partnered with a host government that has or can build credibility with its people, a government worth fighting for that has the interests of its people at heart. Instead, our troops serve as bodyguards for gangsters.

And President Karzai (rhymes with "our guy") has all but dropped the pretense that he wants to defeat the Taliban. He's rushing to cut deals behind our backs.

To show good faith with our enemies, he's methodically stripped us of our military advantages. Air and artillery support were all but eliminated. Our "decisive" Kandahar offensive was neutered. Originally planned for May, the campaign's theme is now "See You In September." Maybe.

Now Karzai wants to halt our SOF stirke missions-the only thing left that works in Afghanistan. While CIA drone missions across the border in Pakistan do great service, our troop surge is meaningless-because our troops aren't allowed to do anything useful.

According to one officer on the ground, the Army's elite 82nd Airborne Division, which recently wrapped up a thirteen-month tour, "did not target one bad guy." Those splendid soldiers were wasted.

Only our special operators are still in the fight. The rest of our forces have been reduced to serving as pop-up targets. Billions in aid have been squandered. Drug lords rule. Our local "allies" rip us off at every turn.

And the man we backed as the "George Washington of Afghanistan" is siding with the enemy. If we cave in to Karzai and rein in our special operators, it's game over.

The article is a great reference though for showing how our warriors are not a bunch of killing thugs... indiscriminately killing civilians at will... like our enemy does that we are fighting.

Karzai is beginning to look like the enemy.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The United States Ambassador to the United Nations has left the door open to have the United Nations involved in an investigation of our United States Military.


Weekly Standard article

Rice Accepts Possibility of International Investigation of U.S. Military
BY Daniel Halper June 14, 2010

Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the UN and member of Barack Obama's cabinet, opened the door for the possibility of an international investigation into the U.S. military on Fox News Sunday yesterday. Here's the relevant part of the exchange:

Chris Wallace: And a simple question: Would the U.S. accept foreign participation if this country were investigating actions by the U.S. military?

Susan Rice: I think it depends on the circumstances, Chris.

Naturally, this question came up during an exchange about the pro-Hamas flotillas that Israel prevented from reaching its shores. But it's an extraordinarily short-sighted statement for Rice to make.

President Barack Obama is a wartime president, with many soldiers under his command in Iraq and Afghanistan. Should these heroes be subject to the findings of an investigation conducted by, say, Libya, Russia, and Venezuela? Of course not. And that's why someone in Rice's position should not even allow such a scenario to enter into the realm of possibilities.

So Ms. Rice would be willing to consider anti-American nations to sit in judgment on our military?

This is maddness, esp. during a time of war as we are in this day... and we are going to subject our warriors to the hateful oversight of much of the world... as represented in the United Nations? Why would Chris Wallace even ask such a question?

Why not just give control of our military operations over to the UN? I would imagine there are many at the UN that would love that opportunity.

There must be some consideration underway in high places.

xtnyoda, shalomed

I am again grateful that the US Senate is taking a stand for the rights of families grieving over the loss of their warrior sons and daughters... can do so without the evil hate-speech of the Westboro clan.

And the above video tells more of the story of the disgusting group and ends with their recent kicking a daughter out of their family, Lauren Drain, for no longer being willing to join in their hateful ways.

God Bless this daughter!

American Legion article

Amicus briefs filed in Snyder-Phelps case

Forty-two senators filed an amicus "friend of the court" brief recently in the Supreme Court case of Snyder v. Phelps, which involves the right of a religious group to stage protests at military funerals.

Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., made the announcement during a Washington, D.C., press conference, accompanied by Al Snyder of York, Pa. His son, Marine Lance Corp. Matthew Snyder, was killed in Iraq.

At Lance Corp. Snyder's funeral, members of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan., staged a protest. The church believes that troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan is a punishment from God because of liberal attitudes toward homosexuals in America.

Following his son's funeral, Snyder sued the Westboro Baptist Church, founded by Fred Phelps Sr. A federal court decided in favor of Snyder, but the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that ruling and ordered Snyder to pay Westboro's legal expenses - about $16,000. Snyder refused to pay and took his case to the Supreme Court.

Phil Riley, director of The American Legion's national security and foreign relations division, spoke at the press conference, saying "Anyone who makes it a point to offend, disrupt and, yes, assault the solemn and venerable ceremonies of a military funeral cannot be permitted to continue these acts of clear and intentional invasion of privacy."

... "I never wanted to take away anybody's freedom of speech," Snyder told the audience. "But this wasn't freedom of speech - this was harassment."

Riley said there was no such thing as a "do-over" for the solemnity of funerals, "where bereaved family and friends have the sacred right to feel and share their grief in peace and togetherness, nurtured by their faith.

"The First Amendment is not written to trump their rights to privacy and peaceful ceremony of the closure of life," he said.

The amicus brief filed by the senators argues that verbal harassment and obscene signage in the vicinity of military funerals should be excluded from freedom of speech guarantees under the Constitution.

We need to pray for this evil clan of hate mongers.

xtnyoda, shalomed

PS... I don't know what's up with the silly little tag at the end of the video.

The "Westboro Baptist Church" idiots are about to get a spanking for insulting our fallen warriors in the name of... righteousness.

Military dot com

AGs Support Marine Dad in Westboro Case

Forty-five states attorneys general have signed a "friend of the court" brief in support of the father of a fallen Marine who is taking his case against a radical church that picketed his son's funeral to the Supreme Court.

The Westboro Baptist Church, made up primarily of founder Fred Phelps and his family, picketed the funeral of Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder in 2006 because they believe U.S. troop deaths are God's revenge for tolerating homosexuals. Church members held signs that read "God hates you," "You're in hell," and "Semper Fi fags."

Snyder's father Al sued the church, but an appeals court ruled against him earlier this year and ordered him to pay the church $16,000 in damages. The case is expected to go before the Supreme Court this fall.

Kansas Attorney General Steve Six drafted the brief, in which he argues in part that the Church's practice of targeting service members' funerals "is a particularly intrusive and harassing form of speech," according to the attorney general's office. "The Constitution does not give the Phelpses the right to hijack solemn proceedings such as funerals in order to spread their hateful ideas," Six said in a May 19 news release.

The five state attorneys general who have yet to sign the brief are from Virginia, New York, Maine, North Carolina and Tennessee.

In a separate move, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has asked his fellow senators to join a brief that he is filing in support of Al Snyder.

"The brief will argue that the law should continue to protect, as it long has, the rights of all private persons—including the families of fallen Soldiers—to mourn their loved ones at a peaceful and solemn funeral," Reid wrote in a letter to his colleagues.

Reid plans to argue that the law provides private funerals with protections against disruptions, the letter said.

"Having the support of the United States Senate is immensely comforting," Al Snyder said in a news release. "It is not just symbolic support. It is tangible – and will hopefully make a real difference in helping us win the case, not just for me and my family, but for over 200 other military families subjected to similar abuse by the defendants."

And a H/T to Senator Reid for initiating a supportive brief to the court from our Senate.

The "protesters" actually hope to incite someone to commit an act of violence against them... so they can sue them for whatever... it's all about making the sorry Phelps family money.

They will rot with the lowest of humanities stench.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Let us first take a look at the legal definition of TREASON.

The Lectric Law Library's Lexicon

This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance.

The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death....

Next... consider the following article about what some Red Cross workers are doing in Afghanistan...

Washington Times

Taliban learning first aid from Red Cross workers

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has been providing medical training to members of the Taliban, including some high-ranking combatants, in Afghanistan.

The humanitarian group says in a recent report that it provided first-aid training and first-aid kits to more than 70 "members of the armed opposition" in April.

Christian Cardon, a Geneva-based spokesman for ICRC, said in a phone interview that a wide range of Taliban fighters, including some senior-level militants, received such training.

Combatants of varying ranks attend these camps, but it is important to have "high-rank people also so they can at least transmit this knowledge to other combatants," he said....

Mr. Cardon said the Afghan government and police are aware of activities at the camps and that assistance is provided in a transparent manner. He said the camps "precisely illustrate the core mandate of the ICRC — to give assistance to people wounded during a war.".....

... Therefore... by the constitutional and legal definition of treason... the International Red Cross is committing treason against America and her coalition forces fighting in Afghanistan.

To go into our enemy's camp and provide both training and materials for first aid to fighters preparing to kill our servicemen and servicewomen... and training to kill as many innocent civilians of their own people as they can on the streets of their own cities is... a logic that defies reason.

In other words... this is treason.

Nice touch going into Memorial Day.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The Arkansas Supreme Court has ruled that the terrorist that killed an army soldier in cold blood and critically wounded another... is worthy of Arkansas tax payers money to pay for his private attorney.

Oh... the state sponsored public defender is not good enough for this terrorist... so... we the people of Arkansas get to pay for his private attorney since he is an indigent?

This is not simply ludicrous... this is an atrocity against the people of Arkansas as well as the people of America... as well as a slam in the face of the United States Military.

This is an outrage.

Arkansas Online article

Justices: Man held in GI case due funds

The Muslim convert facing the death penalty over the slaying of a soldier in Little Rock is entitled to state funding for his defense, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled on Thursday in a decision that could significantly affect the operations of the Arkansas Public Defender Commission. One state legislator warned that the ruling could lead to an “open raid” on state money by unscrupulous lawyers.

The high court’s eight page decision, written by Justice Paul Danielson, upholds the January ruling by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Herb Wright that Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, as an indigent, is entitled to funding from the commission....

One of our state senators said this would amount to “an invitation for an open raid on the public treasury...”

So... now the state supreme court has in essence ruled that every indigent qualifies to have a private attorney paid for with state tax money.

This is an insult.... and you can rest assured that this ruling will be followed in other states... by terrorists... and their lawyers will laugh all the way to the bank.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The New Your Post is declaring the truth about our Navy Seals exoneration...



Now... when do we hold the "pentagon" accountable for it's smearing our Seals?

New York Post article

SEALs 3, Pentagon 0

Not guilty. Not guilty. Not guilty.

The third and final Navy SEAL to be court-martialed in the alleged roughing-up of a brutal terrorist in Iraq was acquitted on all counts Thursday -- leaving Pentagon brass a pathetic 0-3 in the proceedings.

Surely, justice was done for Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe, just as it was for his comrades, Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe, who were cleared last month.

But none of these heroes should've been charged in the first place.

Defense lawyers were able to shoot plenty of holes in the government's evidence -- leaving it, more or less, with the testimony of terror mastermind Ahmed Hashim Abed alone.
Matthew McCabe
Matthew McCabe

Now, one expects, the SEALs will be able to return to the battlefield with their honor intact. And the brass will be able to reflect on what a pointless waste the entire episode has been.

Abed, after all, was the thug responsible for killing and mutilating four US contractors in Fallujah in 2004. He was captured by SEALs last September and soon after came down with a cut lip. Aw.

Actually, the government should be ashamed of having charged the SEALs. The only result was that Americans lost the services of three decorated warriors for the better part of a year -- and Abed got the sick satisfaction of seeing his captors in the dock.

Not to mention, fighting men and women throughout the armed forces were given cause to question whether the chain of command had their backs.

Now, at least, justice has prevailed.

Congratulations to McCabe, Keefe and Huertas -- and good hunting.

Former Senator Murtha would have been proud of the pentagon... of course... Murtha was a traitor.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The last of the 3 Navy Seals has been redeemed...




David Bellavia site

Free At Last! Shameful PC Witch Hunt Over
May 7, 2010

A military jury in Virginia found a Navy SEAL not guilty on charges of punching a suspected Iraqi terrorist.

Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe was tried at Naval Station Norfolk on accusations of assaulting Ahmed Hashim Abed, who is suspected of plotting the 2004 slayings of four U.S. contractors in Fallujah.

A Navy prosecutor said in closing arguments that SEALs were trying to protect one of their own. “They circled the wagons,” said Lt. Cmdr. Jason Grover. “They don’t want Petty Officer McCabe to be held responsible for this.”

The defense suggested throughout the trial that Abed employed a standard terrorist tactic of feigning injury, perhaps even biting his own lip to spill blood onto his clothing.

“We’re here because a mass murderer, a vile person cloaked in a human body, claims he was beaten,” said Defense attorney Haytham Faraj.

Two other SEALs who were accused of covering up the assault were acquitted last month in Iraq after a judge heard much of the same evidence and testimony that was presented in McCabe’s trial.

Thanks for keeping us posted men!

Now... they should all get promoted at least one pay-grade for enduring this assault on their reputations.

xtnyoda, shalomed

First Navy Seal vindicated in Iraq.

Breitbart news report

US Navy SEAL cleared in Iraq abuse case

BAGHDAD (AP) - A U.S. Navy SEAL was cleared Thursday of charges he covered up the alleged beating of an Iraqi prisoner suspected of masterminding the grisly 2004 killings of four American security contractors.

A six-man Navy jury found Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas not guilty of dereliction of duty and attempting to influence the testimony of another service member. The jury heard too many differences between the testimony of a sailor who claimed he witnessed the Sept. 1 assault at a U.S. base outside Fallujah, Iraq, and statements from a half-dozen others who denied his account.

Smiling and composed as he left the courthouse at the U.S. military's Camp Victory on Baghdad's western outskirts, Huertas said he felt vindicated.

"It's a big weight off my shoulders," said Huertas, 29, of Blue Island, Illinois. "Compared to all the physical activity we go through, this has been mentally more challenging."

Huertas said he would rejoin the SEALs, the Navy's elite special forces, as soon as possible. His was the first trial of three SEALs accused in the assault of Ahmed Hashim Abed and its alleged cover up....

One down... two to go.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Covered here at Brutally Honest

Captain Myer is the third from the right.



Another case developing of our military coming down on our soldiers for performing exceptionally in combat... call it "Friendly Fire."

Army issues career-ending letter to soldier who saved base

The Battle of Wanat, the name given to the July 2008 incident in which two hundred Taliban fighters nearly overran a U.S. army base, remains one of the deadliest days in Afghanistan for U.S. troops. Nine soldiers died in the fighting, and several more were wounded.

This week, there’s one more apparent casualty: the career of a soldier who fought to defend the base and, at one point, called in close air support to destroy targets less than ten meters from his position inside the walls of the besieged outpost in Kunar Province.

U.S. Army Cpt. Matthew Myer received a Silver Star for his valor in the incident, but he’s now also received what is generally regarded as the kiss of death for a career in the military: a letter of reprimand for not properly securing the base in the first place.

The letter can be appealed.

Reports CNN — with the money line at the end:

..... Four-star Gen. Charles C. Campbell was chosen to review the final investigation and make disciplinary decisions. Campbell decided Myer would receive a career-ending letter of reprimand for failing to prepare the base’s defenses sufficiently against an enemy attack.....

.... Army officials acknowledge the base, built to protect the people in Wanat, was at the bottom of a valley surrounded by high hills, an almost impossible location to defend....

xtnyoda, shalomed

It's about time some congress persons get on this travesty taking place against our Navy Seals...


Yet.... I'll be honest with you... there should be 300 congressmen petitioning the Pentagon instead of only three...

CNN report

Congressmen to Pentagon: Exonerate Navy SEALs in Iraq incident

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

* Three Navy SEALs accused of assaulting an Iraqi
* Iraqi suspected of orchestrating '04 killing, mutilation of four U.S. contractors
* Rep. Dana Rohrabacher: "These men should be given medals, not prosecuted"
* Congressmen say they have petitions signed by thousands supporting SEALs

Washington (CNN) -- A trio of congressional Republicans passionately appealed to the Pentagon on Thursday to drop charges against three Navy SEALs accused of assaulting an Iraqi suspected of orchestrating the 2004 killing and mutilation of four U.S. contractors.

Flanked by about a dozen retired Navy SEALs at a news conference near the Capitol, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-California; Rep. Dan Burton, R-Indiana; and Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, insisted that the U.S. is sending the wrong message to its troops.

"These Navy SEALs were apprehending a terrorist murderer, and they are being accused of roughing him up? Give me a break! These men should be given medals, not prosecuted. These men are heroes," Rohrabacher said.

Burton agreed, saying, "These people are laying their lives on the line every day, and they can't go into a combat situation with kid gloves on."

The congressmen said they plan to present to Pentagon officials petitions signed by thousands of people supporting the SEALs.....

... and why has it taken three months for these three to get on board?

I guess three is better than nothing... barely.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Sad to say that we're not really suprised... but I suppose we mush say it anyway...


and The Borg Conspiracy says it as well any anybody.

Hollywood Gets It Wrong Again

Some Iraq, Afghanistan war veterans criticize movie 'Hurt Locker' as inaccurate

If there has been one constant over the past forty odd years that I have observed, it is the continued usurpation of entertainment media by the secular progressives and the social relativists and communists in Hollywood. And it looks like the latest offering from Hollywood addressing the war in Iraq, continues to pursue the same goals and formula of it's predecessors.

Time magazine called "The Hurt Locker" "a near-perfect war film," but Ryan Gallucci, an Iraq war veteran, had to turn the movie off three times, he says, "or else I would have thrown my remote through the television."

So why does the film illicit such gut retching reactions from Iraq veterans? Simply put...the film is just so much more horse hockey and bull chips and anyone who has served in Iraq can immediately see that apparently.

But these departures from reality haven't seemed to stop the film's producer and director from producing this little piece of self edifying dream scape in the hopes that some people will view it as gospel. On the contrary, they seem to have struck a note with their secular hedonist brethren in Hollywood and managed to gain nine academy award nominations for their version of the 'way things ought to be' in Iraq. (AKA "Our version of reality")

Many in the military say "Hurt Locker" is plagued by unforgivable inaccuracies that make the most critically acclaimed Iraq war film to date more a Hollywood fantasy than the searingly realistic rendition that civilians take it for.

To which you might say: It's just a movie and an action flick at that. It's Tinseltown fiction -- an interpretation of war such as "Full Metal Jacket" or "Apocalypse Now." It's supposed to entertain. It's not a documentary, not real life.

But to those who were there, Iraq is real life. And they're very sensitive -- some would say overly so -- when their war is portrayed via a central character who is a reckless rogue.

Hence a rising backlash from people in uniform, such as this response on Rieckhoff's Facebook page from a self-identified Army Airborne Ranger:

"[I]f this movie was based on a war that never existed, I would have nothing to comment about. This movie is not based on a true story, but on a true war, a war in which I have seen my friends killed, a war in which I witnessed my ranger buddy get both his legs blown off. So for Hollywood to glorify this crap is a huge slap in the face to every soldier who's been on the front line."

Those paragraphs sum up the sentiments of the real soldiers who have seen the film and experienced the real life realities of war in Iraq. And from the looks of it, they damn well don't appreciate the approach or the message that this film conveys.

As a Vietnam veteran, I know the feeling. I spent twenty five years slogging through the surreal dream scape world's of Oliver Stone and others and their "interpretations of Vietnam." And in the end, there have only been two films that even remotely approached the reality of the war and the emotion as it occurred in Vietnam for those who served. One such film was directed by Mel Gibson and was titled "We Were Soldiers." The other was titled "Hamburger Hill" directed by John Irvin.

These two films were appreciated by Vietnam veterans? Because neither one attempted to moralize or politicize some anti war director's protester's perspective of the supposed larger philosophical issues of the war (according to their own skewed viewpoint).

As it presently stands, Hollywood seems hell bent once again to follow the same formula covering the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as they did during the war in Vietnam. To date, there have been approximately six films produced dealing with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and to date, not the first one has scored a hit with the public at the box office.

Perhaps the public is far more savvy today than they were over the last thirty years. Perhaps they aren't as willing to plop down their money to see these political diatribes dressed in military camouflage by those in Hollywood with the money and influence to produce them. Perhaps they are just tired of Hollywood venting its collective spleen and turning every script they can lay their hands on, into some must see political thesis of "how and why America and capitalism and Christian values and Americans in general are evil and wrong."

I remember back in 1968 when the film The Green Berets starring John Wayne debuted in the midst of the Vietnam war. There were shouts and screams by the anarchist and anti America left then, but other Americans still went to see the film and enjoyed both the message and the man behind the portrayed image. Later I read where nothing ever bothered John Wayne quite as much as witnessing many of his countrymen turn against him and belittle him for having starred in a film that portrayed American soldiers as something other than baby killers.

In either event, it will be interesting to see how Hollywood fawns over this film, or fails to give it the critical acclaim that so many seem to think that it deserves when the Oscars come out. As there is more than a reasonable reality that the other nominee for nine Oscars (Avatar) may just sweep this year. That will surely piss off a large segment of the Hollywood elite. And it couldn't happen to a better gaggles of people IMO.

As for me? I will get around to seeing the film, once it makes it's way to cable and I don't have to pay to see it. I've done that a lot over the last twenty years and it seems to work well for me as it concerns rebutting these glitzy pieces of tripe that pass for film making these days.

Thanks Lo.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Believe me when I say that you DO want to go read David's entire post!





He has spoken eloquently to the feelings and emotions of the men and women that served in Korea, Vietnam, and now Iraq and Afghanistan.

MUST READ!

Our Mission is Finally Accomplished… Anyone Care?
By David Bellavia

New York Times

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military mission in Iraq will soon be getting a new name.

As of Sept. 1, Operation Iraqi Freedom becomes Operation New Dawn.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in a memo Wednesday that the name change — which is to immediately follow the scheduled withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq — will send a strong signal that American forces have a new mission. He also said it reinforces the U.S. commitment to honor its security agreement with Iraq and recognizes ”our evolving relationship” with the government there.

I am not naive. I understand that there are individuals who opposed the war in Iraq from the very beginning and I believe their passion, although misguided at times, is rooted in a deep desire for peace. What always baffled me was the reaction they had to pro-victory veterans when we came home. As if we were some robotic arm of the Bush White House. It was foreign for them to understand why winning in Iraq was so important.

Our friends died in this cause. There is no honor in their death unless we complete the mission they died fighting.

Everyone is exposed to the death of someone close to them at least one time in their lives. Cancer, accidents, sometimes it is sudden or violent. Rarely do we see it. But when we do our lives are affected forever because of it. We live in a culture where there must be a reason for everything that goes wrong. Obama is responsible for job loss. Bush ruined the housing market. The tires that blew out on my car that I was driving was a manufacturing error and not due to the fact that I was driving on the sidewalk.

Someone is responsible for everything that goes wrong in America. It makes us feel better to know it wasn’t our fault.

The war in Iraq was no different. While many scurried to blame Donald Rumsfeld, General Franks or President Bush for losing the war in Iraq, they bet against the American fighting men and women to turn the tide of the war. “The mission” in Iraq was evil. The troops would never be maligned as they were in Vietnam.

I don’t begrudge these people. They simply will never get it. They are the type of people you need to protect in a society. They are innocent and naive.

It is the job of the warrior to hide them under the bed and tell them it will be okay, before we run off to combat the threat.

The ones that hold my contempt are those who, even today, know of the sacrifice made, the incredible progress gained and still will not acknowledge what was won on the ground in Iraq. They cheapen the sacrifice of how it was earned. Operation Iraqi Freedom is no more.

Operation New Dawn (the exact same name of the Battle of Fallujah in November 2004) is the new name of the deployment to Iraq.

What we achieved in the face of an implacable enemy, overcoming many in our own government willfully ignorant of our struggle, is what I believe to be the defining moment of my generation. The veteran today is the embodiment of what it means to be an American. Even when our valor was used for political sport, we continued to serve quietly......

Thank you David for your service sir... we are a grateful nation... the rest can... well... you know.

xtnyoda, shalomed

H/T Kathleen McKinley!

OK...... I'll follow the time honored rule about not speaking adversely about the dead...

.... but it will be interesting to watch the coming race to fill the person's seat in congress...



Daily Caller

Congressman John Murtha dead at 77; competitive special election likely in Pennsylvania

Democratic Rep. John P. Murtha, who just Saturday became Pennsylvania’s longest serving member of Congress, died Monday at a Virginia hospital from an infection relating to a recent surgery.

Murtha, 77, the powerful chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, “passed away peacefully” at 1:18 p.m. Monday at Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, according to spokesman Matthew Mazonkey.

Murtha had recently undergone gallbladder surgery at Bethesda Naval Hospital and had developed an infection.

Mazonkey said Murtha, who in 1974 became the first Vietnam War veteran elected to Congress, “dedicated his life to serving his country both in the military and in the halls of Congress.” In recent years, he was known for his ardent opposition to the Iraq War and his call for an immediate pullout of U.S. troops there....

....The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza noted that Murtha’s death will set off a competitive special election, likely to be held on May 18, the date already set for federal primaries around the state. Cillizza writes that “Murtha’s district is the only one in the country won by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in 2004 and by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in 2008, according to Republican sources, and that trend line coupled with the volatile national environment for Democrats ensures Republicans will heavily target the contest.”

Good by John.

xtnyoda, shalomed

Gratifyingly... even TIME Magazine Online is amazed at the lack of honest questioning and discerning the cause of the Fort Hood terrorist tragedy.









TIME online

The Fort Hood Report: Why No Mention of Islam?
By Mark Thompson / Washington Wednesday, Jan. 20, 2010

The U.S. military's just-released report into the Fort Hood shootings spends 86 pages detailing various slipups by Army officers but not once mentions Major Nidal Hasan by name or even discusses whether the killings may have had anything to do with the suspect's view of his Muslim faith. And as Congress opens two days of hearings on Wednesday into the Pentagon probe of the Nov. 5 attack that left 13 dead, lawmakers want explanations for that omission.

John Lehman, a member of the 9/11 commission and Navy Secretary during the Reagan Administration, says a reluctance to cause offense by citing Hasan's view of his Muslim faith and the U.S. military's activities in Muslim countries as a possible trigger for his alleged rampage reflects a problem that has gotten worse in the 40 years that Lehman has spent in and around the U.S. military. The Pentagon report's silence on Islamic extremism "shows you how deeply entrenched the values of political correctness have become," he told TIME on Tuesday. "It's definitely getting worse, and is now so ingrained that people no longer smirk when it happens."...

Now... we can cry foul from the top of our PC lungs about some scribed Bible references on some military sighting mechanisms... but to actually name a radical, terrorist, traitor as having been possibly motivated by radical Islam is just not appropriate these days according to our military authorities.

There needs to be some serious house cleaning in the military... and it should begin in the house that is at the top of the military chain of command.

Mr. CIC... you could speak up... and tell those who are afraid to do the same to... shut up... then go find someone who will take the bull by the horns.... for the sake of this nation and her slaughtered warriors... and their families.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The official review finds that the Army is unprepared to deal with internal threats?

Perhaps if they would shake themselves lose from the PC mess they could deal with it... like taking serious soldiers who are in contact with radicals over the internet!

Houston Chronicle

Fort Hood review finds Army unprepared
Pentagon: Military is unable to stop internal threats; warning signs of suspect ignored

WASHINGTON — A Pentagon review of the Nov. 5 shooting rampage at Fort Hood has concluded that the military remains unprepared to stop internal security threats at its U.S. installations, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday.

Gates said the independent review found that the Pentagon, like other federal departments and agencies, remains rooted in Cold War thinking designed to stop state-sponsored threats, not terrorism, and that the Fort Hood gunman's supervisors failed to act on disturbing behavioral signs before the tragedy occurred.

“We have not done enough to adapt to the evolving domestic internal security threat to American troops and military facilities that has emerged over the past decade,” Gates said at a Pentagon news conference.....

.... An FBI terrorism task force discovered e-mails that Hasan had exchanged with a radical Yemeni cleric, but the contact raised no red flags because it was considered consistent with Hasan's research. FBI Director Robert Mueller has ordered a review about how the agency handled the information.

Ought to be able to connect dots that are being shoved right in one's face.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The US Navy is moving the trials of two of our heroic seals that captured the terrorist who masterminded the slaughter of the four US contractors in Iraq... burning their bodies... hanging them from a bridge in Fallujah.... to.... are you ready for this... moving their court-martials to... IRAQ.

Not to mention that this has never been done to our fighting men in our history... but our own government prosecutors said they would not bring the "detainee" to our Naval Station in Norfolk to testify.... so we are going to take our men to Iraq...

This is our brave new PC world at work... and it has infected our military establishment.

CNS News

2 Navy SEALs' Detainee Abuse Trials Moved to Iraq

Richmond, Va. (AP) - Two Navy SEALs accused in the mistreatment of an Iraqi detainee should be tried at the U.S. base in Iraq where the alleged victim is being held, a military judge ruled Monday.

Cmdr. Tierney Carlos moved the trials after government prosecutors said they would make the detainee available for deposition at Camp Victory in Baghdad but would not bring him to Naval Station Norfolk to testify. The judge ruled that Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe of Yorktown, Va., and Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas of Blue Island, Ill., have a right to face their accuser in open court.

A hearing for a third defendant, Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe of Perrysburg, Ohio, is tentatively set for Wednesday before a different judge.

McCabe is accused of punching Ahmed Hashim Abed, the suspected mastermind of a 2004 ambush that killed four U.S. security contractors in Fallujah. The contractors' bodies were dragged through the streets and hung from a bridge.

McCabe and the other two SEALs also are charged with dereliction of duty for failing to protect the detainee, and with lying to investigators. Huertas also is charged with impeding the investigation....

If our government prosecutors refuse to bring the "detainee" to America then our military court should have dropped the charges against our Navy Seals.

Pure and simple.

xtnyoda, shalomed

The Patriot Post has some sobering reflections on the up coming court martial of the Navy Seals and another sick case of our military shooting our national heroes in the back... what is known as Killed by Friendly Fire.

Patriot Post

Department of Military Correctness: Friendly Fire

As Christmas approaches, the Obama regime's assault on our own warriors continues. As detailed previously, court-martial preparations continue for three U.S. Navy SEALs accused of mistreating a captured jihadi. But another case of political correctness gone wild recently came to light -- that of Army Ranger 1st Lieutenant Michael Behenna, who is now serving a 20-year sentence at Fort Leavenworth. Lieutenant Behenna was found guilty by a court-martial of unpremeditated murder in the shooting death of a jihadi named Ali Mansur, despite the fact that an expert prosecution witness had evidence that backed up Behenna's claim of self defense. The expert, Dr. Herbert MacDonell, a specialist in blood stain forensics, was flown in by the Army prosecutors to testify in the case, though it appears that in order to get a conviction, the Army prosecutors did not call on Dr. MacDonell to testify because his evidence did not support their case.

Thankfully, in both cases, some spine is finally starting to show among our leaders. In Congress, 40 members led by Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN) sent a letter to Army Major General Charles Cleveland, commander of Special Operation Command Central and the man who ordered the SEALs' court-martial, calling on him to dismiss the charges and exonerate the SEALs. Scandalously, but not surprisingly, the letter was signed only by Republicans, few though there were. And in Lt. Behenna's case, an e-mail from Dr. MacDonell explaining his testimony surfaced. A clemency hearing for Behenna is set for Jan. 7 in Arlington, Virginia. May justice be done.

We should be placing badges of honor on these men... instead... they receive the stigmata of being taken down by political correctness.

They have xtnyoda's prayers... and yours.

xtnyoda, shalomed

blackwater pro shop

Blackwater radio logs: Guards took incoming fire

By MATT APUZZO and LARA JAKES

WASHINGTON – Radio logs from a deadly 2007 shooting in Baghdad cast doubt on U.S. government claims that Blackwater Worldwide security guards were unprovoked when they killed 14 Iraqi civilians. The transcripts of Blackwater radio reports, obtained by The Associated Press, describe a hectic eight minutes in which the guards repeatedly reported incoming gunfire from insurgents and Iraqi police.

Five guards face manslaughter and weapons charges for their roles in the shootings. A sixth has pleaded guilty. Prosecutors said the men unleashed a gruesome attack on unarmed Iraqis, including women, children and people trying to escape.

But the radio logs from the Sept. 16, 2007 shooting suggest otherwise. Copies of the logs were turned over to prosecutors by Blackwater.

Because Blackwater guards were authorized to fire in self-defense, any evidence their convoy was attacked will make it harder for the Justice Department to prove they acted unlawfully.

The logs, which document radio traffic heard by the company's dispatch center inside the U.S.-controlled Green Zone, show that the Blackwater convoy known as Raven 23 reported taking small arms fire_or SAF_ from insurgents within one minute of shutting down traffic in Baghdad's Nisoor Square.

"Mult insuirg SAF @ R23," the log states at 12:12 p.m.

One minute later, the Raven 23 convoy reported taking fire from Iraqi police: "R23 rpts IPs shooting @ R23."

It's unclear why Iraqi police would fire on the Blackwater convoy. Prosecutors could argue the police fired because they believed Blackwater was attacking civilians. It's also common for insurgents to dress as Iraqi police or military officials.

Raven 23 was told to leave the square and return to the Green Zone at 12:14, according to the logs. But one minute later, the convoy reported that one of its heavily armored vehicles was disabled. Guards jumped out of another truck and set up a tow rig, still under fire, according to the logs.

"R23 in trfc still under sporadic SAF," the log shows at 12:20 p.m., as the convoy made its way back to the Green Zone.

"Unless these guys are lying to their command watch in real time, making up stuff, that's real-time reporting that they were taking small arms fire," said defense attorney Thomas Connolly, who represents Nick Slatten, a former Army sergeant and indicted Blackwater guard.

Connolly provided the logs to the AP because he said prosecutors knew there was evidence of a firefight, yet unfairly described it as a massacre.

"The Justice Department began their presentation to the American people with a lie," Connolly said.

Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd declined to discuss the contents of the logs. "We cannot comment on evidence related to a pending case, but we are fully prepared to address in court arguments made by the defense concerning the documents you reference," he said....

news from yahoo

OH... and now the "justice department" doesn't want to comment...after they were more than willing to comment before hand that Blackwater was involved in a massacre! Sorry, lowlife, cowardly, no good, lily livered, pansy faced, turn coats, not worthy of the title American.

There should now be criminal charges as well as civil lawsuits against your sorry prosecutorial hides for your attempt at prejudicing the American public as well as the world against Blackwater. Right next to treason...you are.

You are liable, lying, refuse.

Yesterday it was ol' Barney I quoted as to his desire to slash the military budget.

Today it is Barack himself you will see promise to not only drastically cut the military budget...but he actually promises to begin working with Russia to DISARM the United States of America!

here is the link

And, here is what he clearly says he will do as president.

“I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems....I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons. I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material. And I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBM’s off hair-trigger alert.”

With the current world situation of crazed terrorists and genocidal hatred this sounds just a little...bizarre to me...to say the least...OK...it sounds absolutely preposterous or remarkably naive...

Go watch the video for yourself...he is quite determined in his one minute declaration.

H/T to Bill Whittle of National Review you can read here