THANK YOU

Veterans Day Tribute - A funny movie is a click away

It's the Veteran... not the preacher,
who has earned for us freedom of religion.

It's the Veteran... not the reporter,
who has earned for us freedom of the press.

It's the Veteran... not the poet,
who has earned for us freedom of speech.

It's the Veteran... not the campus organizer,
who has earned for us freedom to assemble.

It's the Veteran... not the lawyer,
who has earned for us the right to a fair trial.

It's the Veteran... not the politician,
who has earned for us the right to vote.

It's the Veteran... who salutes the flag,
who has protected and served under the flag

Thank you.

MEMORANDUM FOR SLAUGHTER

On October 25, 2010, President Obama signed a memorandum that will exempt four countries from 2008's Child Soldiers Prevention Act - Yemen, Sudan, Chad, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. This Act was a bipartisan effort to block countries that recruit child soldiers from getting US military assistance or buying US arms. Two other countries mentioned in the law, Myanmar and Somalia, are still prohibited.


So let me get this straight - if a kid in this country makes a gun shape with her finger and pretend 'shoots', she is suspended for making a "terroristic threat" to a teacher. But if some third world hellhole forcefully 'recruits' a kid, gives him a real gun, trains him and sends him off to war, they get Uncle Sam to supply the weapons and foot the bill.

Isn't this genocide? Why are we now supporting this?

For those not aware of the genocide in Darfur, many of those fleeing the violence are seeking refuge in Chad - another of the four exempted countries. Could there possibly be a spillover of violence?

This has gotten little notice, but it should. How can Obama in good conscience exempt these countries? What in the world is he thinking? The reason given for the exemptions is 'national security', and yet there is no explanation forthcoming on how, exactly, this affects our national security. Is there some crisis he sees down the road where we will need armed children at our disposal? Or does he believe the armed youth will be the voices of reason that will overthrow the government and then create a peaceful utopia?

Darfur is already in chaos. Tacit approval of child soldiers by the US government is like throwing gasoline on a brushfire. Please remember that this isn't economic aid, aid for reugees or food and other supplies for the poor. This is a block on military aid. Places like Darfur most definitely do NOT need more weapons. What they need is a functioning, accountable government and a return to sanity. This memorandum all but ensures they will not get it.

Cross Posted at Sisterhood of the Mommy Patriots.com

UNITED IN STRENGTH

Today is Armed Forces Day.  This is a day to honor the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard.  To those who serve, thank you. 

You are the face of the ideal modern soldier.  Never has the world seen a military to equal you.  Your fierceness, your determination, your ingenuity and strength are unparalleled.  Those traits are tempered by your caring and generosity, and the combination is unprecidented in the annals of history.

Our allies respect you and our enemies fear you. 

You are the heart and soul of America, and we thank you for your service.

Stay strong, stay safe, and God bless you all.

THREE AND OUT

The third Navy SEAL up on charges of assaulting a terrorist in custody has also been found not guilty.  PO 2nd Class Matthew McCabe is a free man, but even so, in the larger scheme, the enemy can claim a victory.

Three of our elite warriors, Navy SEALs, were taken out of the action on the say-so of a known terrorist.  The argument that it is an effort to rehab our troops' image in the wake of Abu Ghraib is hogwash.  The enemy sees actions like this as weakness, and weaknesses are to be exploited in times of war.  It's not about getting convictions, although that would be a nice little cherry on top for them, it's about taking people out of the game.  In this, they were extremely successful.

This will not be the last accusation of abuse - it's in the al Qaeda handbook.  And if the trials of these three SEALs have proven anything, it's that the ruse works. 

Hopefully our military will take these claims of abuse with a boulder of salt from now on.  There is a difference between holding yourself to a higher standard and allowing yourself to be sabotaged and undermined. 

It's a fine line, but there is no doubt that if any military in the world can walk that line, it's ours.

FIRST SEAL VINDICATED Updated

Yesterday, the trial of United States Navy SEAL Petty Officer First Class Julio Huertas on charges of dereliction of duty and impeding an investigation began.  Two other SEALs, Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe are awaiting trial.  PO McCabe is the only defendant accused of assault.  PO Keefe is only accused of dereliction of duty.

Today, PO Huertas was found not guilty.  Even still, this whole situation is a fiasco. 

The terrorist they are accused of assaulting is himself accused in the deaths of four Americans.  In 2004, four Blackwater guards were killed, and their lifeless bodies were burned, hacked at, decapitated, and dragged through the streets of Fallujah before two were hanged on a bridge over the Euphrates to the cheering of crowds of insurgents.  These atrocities were captured on video by members of al Qaeda to be posted on the internet.  The man who planned the attack on the guards and the ensuing atrocities perpetrated upon them was one of Iraq's most wanted terrorists, Ahmed Hashim Abed. 

Abed was captured on the battlefield last September and placed in custody.  There is photographic evidence that he had a fat lip, but was it obtained during battle or his "arrest", was it self-inflicted so that he could claim abuse, or was it really a case of one of our men going too far?  It's hard to say, the testimony is conflicting.  And, quite frankly, if all he got was a fat lip, he should be thanking his lucky stars.  Many al Qaeda fight to the death to ensure they are not captured alive; many end up with broken bones and other injuries for their efforts. 

The predicament our SEALs find themselves in illustrates a larger problem.  Our enemies recognize our government's obsession with political correctness for what it is in the theater of war - weakness.  A savvy leader exploits any weakness in his enemy that he can, and so they are.  It's appalling.  This ridiculous exercise has taken three of our top warriors off the battlefield, all on the word of a known killer. It is also demoralizing the warriors still on the battlefield and endangers them because they are constantly second-guessing themselves, for fear they themselves might end up court martialed.   It also proves to al Qaeda that their tactic of accusations works spectacularly - they have one soldier off the battlefield, we have three.  What great odds - especially if the dirtbag terrorist ends up getting his own charges dropped due to the "assault" he has allegedly suffered while in custody.  After all, we are now apparently prosecuting enemy combatants captured on the battlefield as common criminals, and common criminals get off on such loopholes all the time. 

The jury in the court martial deliberated for a mere two hours before handing down the not guilty verdict.  They cited the conflicting testimony of the one US military member who testified on behalf of the prosecution and the lack of credibility of the "victim", Abed.  The al Qaeda field manual actually encourages any of it's soldiers who are captured to claim abuse because, as this case so clearly illustrates, our military, in their quest for political correctness, are fine with tying our own soldier's hands to attain the moral high ground.  What we need to remember is that these people we are fighting are barely one step away from rabid animals.  We need to understand that we are fighting an enemy that not only is not bound to the Geneva Conventions but sees our adherence to it as a weakness to be exploited. 

Our enemies have no rules and we have bound, gagged and shackled ourselves with rules.

 It is important to say that hitting someone who was handcuffed and hooded, terrorist or not, is certainly beyond the realm of acceptable. Abed's testimony that he was punched in the stomach has been backed up by testimony from another sailor, but the jury found his testimony to be conflicting with other sailor's accounts of events.  I have to admit a bit of puzzlement, because Abed testified that he was still hooded, but the serviceman testified that after the stomach punch he saw blood come out of Abed's mouth (via Fox News):

He testified Wednesday that he was sitting in a chair with his hands bound behind him and hood over his head when he was hit from behind on the shoulder and back, fell to his knees and was then picked back up and struck in the stomach....

....In earlier testimony, Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Kevin DeMartino testified he saw SEAL Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe punch the prisoner in the stomach and watched blood spurt from his prisoner's mouth.

How can that be, if he had a hood on?   Is it possible Abed was taunting them, specifically for the purpose of claiming abuse?  All we really know for sure is that this enemy has no boundaries  - there is nothing they won't stoop to (hmmmm...I wonder if they've been reading Alinsky).  I have not heard any testimony about whether Abed was taunting the accused men, but I find it hard to believe that these SEALs, who all had years of service under their belts, would have risked their own careers just to punch some terrorist for no reason.  Above and beyond all of that, it seems our military brass are missing an important fact. The fact is, sometimes you have to speak in a way the opposition understands. These people seem to only understand brutality. Anything else is seen as weakness.

Tomorrow PO Keefe's trail begins, and hopefully he will be vindicated as well.  PO McCabe will be on trial in May.  For those who would like to show their support for the SEALs, please check out this facebook page or this "Support the SEALs" site.  I will update as verdicts come in.

UPDATE:  PO Keefe has been found not guilty.  The verdict wasn't a surprise, considering the  "victim" changed his testimony from yesterday.  Today he claims he was kicked in the stomach, not punched.  Seems like the al Qaeda handbook needs to be updated to remind the terrorists to be consistent on the witness stand.  Two vindicated, one to go....

A NEW LOW

My fury and disgust has left me practically speechless, so I will allow Mitch Berg at Hot Air do the talking, as he does it so succinctly.

The depths this administration will sink to is just mind boggling. 

The big question is, now that they are taking credit, are we allowed to say we won?  Can we finally give our troops the accolades for this victory that they so richly deserve? 

It is not a matter of if  they back away from this stance, but when. 

It had better be soon.

THE STATE OF OBAMA

Was it just me or was that an incredibly boring speech last night from the Great Orator?  It just seemed like a rehash of the past bazillion speeches he has given.  Blah, blah, blah, blame Bush....blah, blah, blah, party of no...blah, blah, blah, attack, complain, deceive.  No wonder his democrat supporters wanted to get drunk.

At least he expanded his rhetorical attacks to include the Supreme Court, so that's a refreshing change - I'm sure congressional Republicans and Wall Street bankers are happy for the break.

The only thing that kept the speech from being a total snoozefest was the remarkable amount of, shall we say...inconsistencies.  The AP does a fact check analysis of the speech and finds it wanting.  Here are some highlights:

• Spending Freeze - It's unrealistic, probably won't pass, and doesn't rescind the 12% average increases democrats instituted last year with the stimmulus bill.  Pelosi, tone-deaf idiot that she is, called today for the freeze to include defense spending as well.  For the details on what a waste a freeze would be, check this out.
• Bipartisan Fiscal Commission - A lame attempt to shield democrats from their profligate ways by forcing republicans to help make unpopular spending cuts and tax increases.  This is also remarkably redundant, because one of the jobs of Congress is to be fiscally responsible and monitor their own spending.
• Lobbyists - Is he kidding us with this?  Does he really think we don't know there are at least 12 lobbyists currently holding top positions in his administration?
• Jobs - Obama trotted out the number "two million" when he spoke about jobs 'saved or created'.  This number is a joke.  Back in December, the number on their website was about 650,000, but many of those were highly questionable.  It's amazing that in one month they managed to add an additional 1.35 million jobs, even though the unemployment figures took another 'unexpected' dip.  I guess that comes from their new calculation method - if a company takes stimulus dollars, every job in the company is now considered saved or created.  Quite a racket.
• Transparency - I'm surprised the man doesn't clang when he walks - he must have a huge brass pair to tout transparency after the past year.  FOIA requests are ignored by the White House, and we all know about his broken promise of CSPAN cameras capturing the health care debate.  Backroom deals and dead-of-night passage of legislation has become the norm for this administration.  Not only are bills not posted for 5 days for the public to read before voting, but now they aren't even released to members of Congress to read - vapor bills have become the norm.  They are actually voting before they write the bills now.

That isn't the complete list, but they are the most egregious ones.  On top of flat out lies, he also omitted quite a bit.  In a State of the Union speech, especially in our post 9/11 world, and even more especially because of the failed Christmas Day attempt, national security should be a main talking point.  It was barely given a paragraph, and even then it was a slam on George Bush:

"And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed - far more than in 2008."

The insinuation, of course, is that he is tougher on terror than Bush was.  First, it is impossible to verify, as we do not release body counts.  Second, it's hard to project that image when he insists on treating terrorists who are actively trying to kill American civilians as common criminals and has restricted our military's ability to combat our enemies by forcing them to follow the Army field manual - effectively giving our civilian police forces more options and tactics than our military.

He basically stated that, Massachusetts election or not, he was sticking with his agenda.  He has heard the people and found them to be wrong.  He knows best.  Health care is still a priority and he is still determined to spend us into collapse prosperity.  He is not misguided in his plans, he is determined.  He is a fully committed socialist who is refusing to bend to the will of the people.  His tactic is to attack any and all resistance and force his will on the People. 

When, exactly, do we cross the threshold from tone-deaf to tyrannical?

'AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES'

In my research for various posts, I have had to read a fair amount of congressional legislation. In all of the bills I have read, there is one thing that is consistent. On the title page of all of the bills is the name of the bill and its sponsors, and then there is this phrase:

"And for other purposes"

Those four little words have cost us literally billions of dollars.

That phrase is how a military spending bill can also be used to finance non-military things like the Hawaii Federal Health Care Network and the Edward M. Kennedy educational institute. In this one bill alone there are 778 earmarks, to the tune of $2.6 billion. That's $2.6 billion that is NOT going to training, protecting or arming our troops, in a time when we are involved in not one but two hot wars. You can be sure that $2.6 billion will be counted in the overall cost of the wars, though, when opponents talk about the cost of war being too high.

The phrase 'And for other purposes' should be outlawed from legislation.

Lawmakers like to call earmarks 'sweeteners' - a way of enticing support for a less than popular bill. The problem is, all of these sweeteners have given this country a near fatal case of fiscal diabetes from all of the 'goodies' it has been force fed for the past few decades.

This administration touts 'transparency' and 'accountability', and yet continues to support the plague of earmarks flowing out of Washington. Instead of billions in sweeteners, how about crafting truly bi-partisan legislation that a majority can get behind without having to be coerced.

Stop laughing, it could happen....

Those earmarks are nothing more than vote buying mechanisms for congressional re-election bids, and the fact that the cumulative effect is crippling our country is a minor concern to legislators desperate to stay in office, no matter the cost.

Wouldn't it be a refreshing change if our federal legislators left the local pet projects to local and state governments where they belong and instead concentrated on doing what was best for the country as a whole?

SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO?

Well, all those warm fuzzies I had from Mr. Obama's shrewd playing of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are going...going...gone.

Our Marshmallow-in-Chief is showing his squishy side again, but this time our fine men and women in uniform will pay the price. He has 'back burnered' a troop request, stating that:

""You don't make determinations about resources, and certainly you don't make determinations about sending young men and women into battle without having absolute clarity about what the strategy is going to be." "

So let me get this straight: he's been in office for nine months, increased troop levels by more than 17,000 back in February, launched a new offensive and replaced generals on the ground, but still doesn't have a plan yet?!

Seriously?

Maybe he is unaware of the unprecedented level of casualties our troops have been suffering. Perhaps he thinks that leaving them in the field, under funded, under manned, and under estimated is a viable option while he flits from city to city speechifying about everything from health care to inspiring our youth to a nuclear-free utopia, not to mention his whirlwind Sunday chatfest marathon of saying the exact same thing five different ways.

There's no rush, after all.

Did you know that as soon as he decides to increase levels, all our Anointed One has to do is snap his oh so nimble fingers and - voila! - the troops are in the field and ready to go. No recruiting, training, transporting or staging required! It's not like a request made now wouldn't be delivered until, say, January or February.

No rush, though, no rush.

It's obvious you have weightier issues on your mind.

Take your time. It's not like lives depend on your decision....

Choose your position, sir, and stand by it. If you choose withdrawal, do it quickly, so no more lives are lost.

But if victory is your goal, then man them, fully fund them, and let the generals do their jobs. McChrystal knows that it's not just about winning battles - it's about winning the hearts and minds of the civilians, showing them what freedom can bring. Talk to your generals.

We are America - if we set our minds to winning, we will win.

Of all the enemies that deserved to be beaten, the Taliban is second only to the Third Reich.

How did we beat the Reich? Determination, sacrifice, support and the deep-seated belief that we were doing what was right and good. We were not left or right, we were Americans. We did not start the fight, but we sure did finish it, didn't we?

We can do it again. Just give us the chance.