Sunday, March 30, 2008

If Al Sadr Wants a Truce - He's Getting His Ass Kicked!

So-called militia fighters, who in reality are little more than organized criminal gangs hiding behind a religious facade, have been a wild card in the efforts to build a new and better Iraq since Saddam Hussein's army fell in 2003.

The best known, but not necessarily the worst, of the bunch is the Mahdi Army run by a renegade self-anointed cleric known as Muqtada Al Sadr. To give you an idea of his street credibility, there is a slum in Baghdad named after him. Big Whoop!

Last week the elected government of Iraq ordered a crackdown on Mookie's army, which has basically been running the show in Basra, and walking around Baghdad scowling and threatening anyone who even dares to hope for peace and prosperity. These are Islamo-fascists, people. They don't believe in peace and prosperity for anyone except them and only under their warped view of their religion!

In response to the crackdown several days of fighting erupted in which the fledgling Iraqi Army bore the brunt, although they did call in US air strikes on occasion and are getting some help from our special ops people. Mookie was posturing all through this fighting, making demands and threatening to hold his breath until he turns blue if the US and Iraq's legitimate government don't take him seriously.

Sunday, today, Mookie issued a call for a truce, attaching all kinds of conditions to his Oh, so generous offer, like releasing all of his loyal hoods who have been captured in the fighting, and, lest we forget, the US has to get the hell out of Iraq!

Did I mention that this self-absorbed poser is hiding in Iran, which is funding and arming his troops? He is, Iran is, and they can all go to hell.

The biggest fear I have at this point is that our diplomats and bureaucrats once again will interfere with our military people and pressure the Iraqi government to accept this truce offer. This guy has shown repeatedly that he comes out from under his sludge pile when he thinks he has power, and then scurries away like a craven coward when the going gets tough.

If Mookie is calling for a truce he is getting his ass kicked, his army is getting the crap beat out of it and the last thing we should do now is acquiesce to his demands. What we should do is press the issue even harder, kill even more of this guy's criminals, lock up the rest, and do everything in our power to help the Iraqi army get its hands on him.

Bring this jerk to justice, let him follow Saddam to the promised land ;-) and make the point to his minions that the same fate awaits them if they continue their illegal activities. That is how you bring peace to Iraq, not by negotiating with a fake cleric because you are concerned about people's feelings.

People will let you know exactly how they feel the second they don't have to worry about a gun barrel pointed at their heads.

Remember, it was only last August that this cretin called off all actions against the US, and headed out to Iran in fear for his life. Why? Because we started the surge, his troops got smacked big time, and he had nothing left with which to fight.

So he offered a cease fire, until he rebuilt and rearmed. This time it wasn't the US that kicked his ass, it was the Iraqi Army and it only took three days, minor setbacks and desertions not withstanding.

As I wrote last August, "Al Sadr is the guy whose terrorists shot at our forces from inside a mosque in 2003 as they were moving toward Baghdad to topple Saddam Hussein. Due to horrendously uninformed political interference, Al Sadr was allowed to live, build an army of terrorists from hundreds to more than ten thousand, and shoot at and bomb our forces with impunity ever since.

Only when our leadership finally got serious about putting the hammer down on internal terrorists in Iraq did Al Sadr's fortunes begin a slow reversal. He fled to Iran where his partner in terrorism President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave him shelter, sanctuary, communications abilities, arms, and support, just like Saddam Hussein did for Abu Al Zarqawi, the number two guy in Al Qaeda, before we invaded Iraq.

Al Sadr made a brief foray back into the country a few months ago in an effort to rally his followers who already were getting slammed during the buildup to the Surge, the offensive now ongoing throughout Iraq. When the Surge actually kicked off in June, one of the first areas to benefit from the gloves coming off was the Sadr City slum area of Baghdad where Al Sadr's terrorists had freely roamed ever since our politicians had allowed Iraqi politicians to declare it off limits to American military efforts.

That little scenario should tell us all we need to know about political considerations interfering with military operations, and about Al Sadr. The political world should never, ever, interfere with the methodology of military operations, except to authorize them at the outset, give a clear definition of the end goal, and set reasonable rules of behavior for our forces, which are already contained in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions.

People like Al Sadr never really surrender. They will appear to surrender if they are physically bashed almost to death, are within seconds of meeting their maker, have no other recourse, and know in their hearts and minds that the entity which administered their bashing will without hesitation finish the job.

Then they will appear to surrender. Then they will live, curse the existence of the force that defeated them, and plan in every waking moment, as well as in their dreams, how to exact their revenge.

That is what Al Sadr is doing now. He hasn't called a cease fire because he has seen the light and now wants to cooperate.

His forces have been taking a walloping from US forces, and quite likely are tremendously weakened due to deaths, capture and desertions. He is waving the white flag to give himself and his Iranian allies time to find some new recruits, rebuild his devastated forces, and reconsider his political options without the pressure of getting shot.

His attempts to initiate a temporary truce have nothing whatsoever to do with wanting to get along and be part of a new progressive Iraqi government. He is buying time, and plotting.

He is what he is and nothing can change that. Snakes do not evolve into koala bears, sharks don't morph into guppies, and street fighting terrorists don't suddenly become benign ambassadors of peace and goodwill.

The worst possible thing our troops and our politicians can do is to give credence to his cease fire, back off the military efforts against his terrorist forces, and give him and Ahmadinejad time to figure how to get out of the mess they are in thanks to the Surge.

I wrote all this last year, and here we are once again dealing with this guy and his ever shrinking "army." Remember the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result!?

How about this time we take the sane course and crush this crumb before any more or our troops or Iraqi troops are killed or wounded by his thugs. Why the hell are we negotiating with a self-proclaimed Messiah who doesn't even have real support in his own country or his own religion?

Don't make me come in here in six months and write this same column all over again! If Al Sadr goes down to defeat, and does it right now, in six months we will be way, way down the road to the outcome every sane person wants in Iraq.

Otherwise, we'll be back here and the American people will have all the reason in the world to be questioning what we have been doing, how and why in Iraq!
Thursday, March 27, 2008

Move America Forward Demands Federal Investigation of Berkeley Council, Police Force in Marine Recruiter Harassment

The pro-troop organization Move America Forward is seeking a federal investigation of the Berkeley, California City Council's efforts to prevent US Marine Corps recruiters from doing their job in that city, and the refusal of the Berkeley police to stop or prevent attacks on pro-troop supporters at the recruiting station.

Move America Forward, the nation's largest pro-troop organization, was involved in a peaceful demonstration in Berkeley on February 12 this year, to show support for US Marine recruiters, whose office is besieged daily by anarchists, pro-terrorists and communists who are attempting to shut it down, force it out of the city, and prevent recruits from entering.

The anti-troop demonstrators are led by a bunch of freaks who label themselves Code Pink, in reference to a shade of the international color of the communist philosophy. The anti-military demonstrations have included physical assaults on those who support our military.

On February 12 Move America Forward had a permit from the city to peacefully demonstrate at the recruiting office in support of the Marines, but the MAF rally was attacked by "peace" activists who assaulted the pro-troop organizers.

MAF states that the Berkeley police stood by and did nothing despite repeated pleas for assistance from MAF personnel.

In a letter to US Attorney Joseph P. Russoniello, MAF states that "The City of Berkeley is actively, through the legislative action by the City Council, encouraging private organizations to disrupt the lawful governmental operations of the United States in the City of Berkeley, by encouraging groups to "impede" the efforts of the United States Marine Corps to recruit qualified young people to serve in the Corps.

"There is little question that Berkeley, as a college town, is an appropriate place for the Marine Corps to recruit qualified, patriotic young people to serve their country as United States Marines."

The letter, sent by attorney James F. Sweeney of the firm Sweeney & Greene LLP, further states that "We hereby request an investigation into the lack of timely response by the City of Berkeley and the Berkeley Police Department during the events of February 12, 2008. In short, the City of Berkeley failed to protect its citizens engaged in the lawful exercise of their rights under both the First Amendment and federal civil rights laws.

Further, Move America Forwards requests that your office inquire into the legal propriety under applicable federal law of the efforts of the City of Berkeley to "encourage" through legislative action, organizations actively committed to undermining the ongoing military operations of the United States, both at home and abroad to impede the lawful activities of a federal agency operating with the city limits."

Now, let us see, whether the Bush administration, which got into so much hot water a year ago for lawfully firing a handful of US Attorneys, has kept at least one in place who will do the job of protecting all of America's citizens. Or, will this just be swept away like the more than 100 attacks on recruiting stations nationwide while anarchists and pro-terrorist moonbats work to destroy this country.

Let's see, by the actions of US Attorney Russoniello whether we still have a government of the people, by the people and for the people, or if we have a government of elitists that won't lift a finger to help keep this country safe for all citizens.

If I was a betting man I'd start a pool on this.

Was Hillary A Navy SEAL? Wounded Under Fire? Shhh! It's Classified!

In the wide and desperate world of posers, wannabes, embellishers and valor thieves there is one constant that usually allows the worst perpetrators of service fraud to carry on their charade in the open for long periods.

They invariably claim to have served in the elite of our armed forces - Army Rangers or Green Berets, Navy SEALS or their predecessors the Underwater Demolition Teams, Marine Recons, Snipers or Counter-terrorism specialists, Delta Force Commandos, Coast Guard Rescue Swimmers, Air Force S.E.R.E Specialists and Pararescue forces.

These elite forces require highly specialized training that most members of the armed forces never encounter, and many are employed on secret missions that put their highly valued skills to work. Due to the hazardous nature of such operations many of the real elite forces engage in combat under the least favorable of circumstances and often are awarded a disproportionate number of medals for valor under fire.

Posers use the truth of elite service to hide their falsehoods. Invariably, these frauds claim their service was secret, "behind the lines," and always "classified," so there are rarely any public records of their deeds. Records are scarce they claim, because the world still can't know what they did. Even their awards were kept secret, they say, although in truth the military records everything it can and keeps it all in triplicate.

Thus when a person shows up in a veteran community with a chest full of medals, a story of deep undercover operations and membership in one of the elite organizations, it is initially difficult to determine whether the medals are real or undeserved, whether the person served, or is posing. It is human nature to take people at face value, unless or until evidence surfaces indicating that the stories may not be true.

If questions arise, however, the instant communications offered by the Internet and the existence of military records data bases, as well as organizations that list everyone who serves or served in the elite forces, and recipients of medals for valor, make unmasking these frauds a fairly straightforward process.

Into this mix we now have presidential candidate, former First Lady, and New York Senator Hillary Clinton, who is under fire for claiming that she was under fire during a visit to Bosnia with her daughter Chelsea when Bill Clinton was president.

First she made the claim that Bill, the cowardly president, often sent her to unsettled areas as an envoy when things were too dangerous for him to go. Meaning, apparently, that he sat safely back in DC and sent his wife and daughter to combat zones in his place when he determined it was in the nation's interest. I believe that makes him the only US president to use that tactic, which brings up questions about his true intent, which we won't go into here.

In recent campaign speeches Mrs. Clinton claimed that on one of these initial assault troop insertions in which she participated, her aircraft had to spiral down to the landing zone - a hot LZ in Vietnam veteran lexicon - to avoid ground fire, and then she and Chelsea had to run for cover to avoid snipers.

Uh-huh. Problem was, the press was along, as it always is, and the press had videos galore that showed Mrs. Clinton and Chelsea in a peaceful, nearly pastoral setting, with cute little greeting kids offering hand shakes and smiles and photos and peace and love - and no bullets.

After a couple of weeks, as she became mired in the quagmire of the War With Obama, WWO from here on out, Mrs. Clinton was forced to admit that she "misspoke" when she repeatedly related this story of heroism under fire that would do the most brazen embellisher proud. I'm not sure which word was "misspoken" but it appears there were quite a few of them and they were all strung together.

Here is where, in the world of embellishers, Mrs. Clinton made her big error. First, let's not fool ourselves into thinking that she just came up with this story recently, and that it was only in the last couple of months that it came to the attention of the Main Stream Media, aka American Terrorist Media, aka National Democratic Party Public Relations representatives.

You can bet this story was out there for a long time, and was ignored as long as Mrs. Clinton was calling the shots in the Democratic Party. But now we have Sen. Barack Obama making life miserable for her, many Democratic loyalists deserting the Clintons to side with Obama, and suddenly the press has developed a conscience.

Taking that into account, Mrs. Clinton should have known that sooner or later someone was going to call her on this story, and she should have been ready for it. This is where it helps to have a president who actually has served in the armed forces because at least he or she would have spent some time in the service clubs after work and developed an understanding of the concept of "War Stories" - otherwise known as bulls**t.

If she really had the experience she wants America to believe she has, Mrs. Clinton would have claimed membership in one of the elite services, and created the illusion that the encounter with friendly locals that was filmed by the media was a diversion.

"We did that to keep attention focused on one place while we were really conducting special operations in another area where things were really dicey. We didn't allow the press in because we didn't want to upset the delicate nature of our undercover operations, and besides we didn't want any of our dear friends in the media to get hurt."

"Actually, that wasn't really me in the videos," she could have claimed. "That was my stunt double that I sent in to do the "Meet and Greet" ceremonies while I was taking on the really dangerous jobs. Remarkable likeness isn't it? We even had the press fooled."

Mrs. Clinton could have gone so far as to falsely claim to have been wounded under fire, as some of her Senate colleagues have done, and demurred in her most First Lady-like manner when asked to show her scars.

"I'm sorry, but I am a former First Lady and presidential candidate and I don't think it is appropriate to display that part of my anatomy to the world media. The American public demands and deserves far more decorum from its elite public servants."

Hey, bigger lies have been told in Congress and the media has gone along with it like a batch of mindless lemmings in the past. So why not now?

I bet she even could have produced some medical records showing the nature of the wound and when she got it. If you are a former First Lady with a last name of Clinton, you also can use your husband's powers to create a fake persona.

Even the organizations that keep track of membership in elite units and valor awards would have a difficult time unmasking your story as they do so readily with run-of-the-mill posers.

Yes she really blew it this time. Mrs. Clinton had all the means at her disposal to totally deflect this story.

Instead WWO drags on, sound bite by sound bite, minute after minute, hour after hour, day after day, month after month, news cycle after news cycle with no end in sight. Casualties are mounting on both sides, innocent Democrats are caught in the crossfire, the party is spread far too thin to sustain this type of urban political combat, and the party leaders simply continue to mutter "Stay The Course."

Where, oh where, will it all end?

Meanwhile there is one last, lingering question regarding Mrs. Clinton's Fantasy Trip to the Combat Zone. Her daughter was with her.

Granted, the Former First Kid was a teenager back then, but she is a full-grown adult now and out on the campaign trail just like her mom, spreading the Gospel According to Clinton.

If she was on that trip she knew full well that she and Mummy didn't have to duck any snipers. So what did she do or say to put a stopper on her mom's fake war stories, and when did she do or say it?

Or am I supposed to sit here and make believe I too am bound by the self-imposed rules of the American Terrorist Media that only prints the news it feels like printing whenever it gets the urge, and not question the actions and veracity of the Former First Kid?

I'll have to think about that for a bit.

But ... fingers ... are ... twitching; ... brain cells ... firing ... full automatic! ... Please ... help! ... Stop me ... before ... I ... type ... again!
Saturday, March 22, 2008

Barack's Speech Was a "C" At Best; Media Spin Isn't Working, and Can't Change the Facts

I have been watching the media go through convolutions for several days now over the great, the wonderful, stupendous speech on racism in America given by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

The senator from Illinois was trying to dispel the notion left by his pastor Jeremiah Wright, that everyone who attends the same church as the senator and his pastor is a racist bigot.

He didn't succeed. He just dug himself into a deeper hole, that keeps getting even deeper every time he tries to explain his last explanation.

Did I mention that I teach university courses on public speaking? Did I mention that I have been a public speaker since the late 1970s. OK, just in case you missed it, I have been a public speaker since the late 1970s and I teach public speaking university courses.

In any given semester, a third to half of my students are of African-American descent. On any final speech day, I would put 90 percent of those students up against Obama and they would win hands down.

I am not particularly a fan of Sen. Obama's speaking style. I find it somewhat stilted and halting, apparently used as a device for effect, but it doesn't work for me.

But that is not why I don't think he did very well with his speech. I think he did a mediocre job because he delivered what is termed in formal courses a "Persuasive Speech," yet he did not succeed in persuading very many people at all, if any, of his position.

He pandered. He tried to keep one foot planted in a community where every ill on earth is conceived of and delivered by "rich, white men," and the other foot in modern America - referred to as Post-Racial - where a black guy or a white woman can aspire to the presidency with equal chances to win as anyone else.

Barack said he disagreed on the pastor's anti-white rhetoric, changed his story on whether he had actually sat in a pew during services when the pastor was spewing his vitriol, and yet said he wouldn't abandon his mentor. That doesn't come across as well-deserved loyalty, that comes across as a guy who doesn't want to alienate his base.

At the same time he disparaged his white grandmother, and blamed white America for making race an issue in his campaign.

Frankly, I don't think "white" America is buying it. I also don't think brown, red, yellow or any other color America is buying it, and I know from watching the news all week that plenty of black Americans aren't buying it either. This despite the cacophony of mewling left-wing news commentators and anchors who are trying to drown out the sucking sound of a campaign going down the drain by shouting their praises as loudly as possible.

I have heard people compare Obama's speech to the best moments of President Lincoln, President Kennedy, Martin Luther King and other giants of the spoken word. That kind of comparison is actually more sad than pathetic, because it shows that the people who are making it either are insufferably uninformed and undereducated, or they are such simpering pawns that they have no professional ethics or veracity.

I watched the speech as it was delivered, much as I watch the delivery of my students' speeches - somewhere in the vicinity of 400 speeches each semester - and when he was finished I would have given him a C. That's it. If he had been punctual, didn't cut class, did all his assignments on time and was an enthusiastic participant, he might have gotten a C Plus.

If Barack Obama had really wanted to succeed with his speech, he would have embraced the obvious and said so. He could have and should have said that there is a segment of America's black community, that while not suffering the horrors of slavery itself, and regardless of benefiting from civil rights legislation passed two generations ago, still has a simmering resentment of whites.

He would have noted that it doesn't help that America's Hispanic community is now outpacing the black community numerically and is getting more attention. He would have said "Yes, I grew up in this community, I have heard and understood its positions, and at times I have taken those same positions myself."

I call that embracing the obvious, because it is obvious to everyone except the senator, his immediate family, and the fawning media that he grew up in that community and has at times embraced its positions.

What was it, only two weeks earlier that his wife, who was educated in Harvard and makes a substantial six-figure salary here in America, made the comment that only since her husband became a presidential candidate has she been proud of her country?

That floored a lot of white people because most white Americans don't get to go to Harvard and don't make six-figure salaries, nor live in million-dollar mansions.

So most people already knew where he was coming from on that issue. But what most white Americans were waiting to hear, was that he is a forward-looking candidate, who is well aware that slavery ended in America nearly 150 years ago, and that civil rights legislation has enabled black Americans to achieve economic powerhouse status.

He could have said that despite lingering racism across the board, he is well aware that more than 400,000 white Americans died so Americans of all other races could live here on an equal footing, and have equal opportunities to succeed or fail. He could have noted that the negative aspects of our country were not solely American problems, but in fact were problems of the entire human race.

He could have noted that while white shippers and plantation owners were on one end of the slavery spectrum, blacks who kidnapped and transported slaves to the coast of Africa for money were on the other end. He could have noted that for more than a century, white American presidents and Congresses have worked successfully to end segregation, and pass legislation that gives all Americans the same status and opportunities.

He then could have said that when he becomes president, he will be mindful of our shared history, but look to the future. He could have said that he will prove his value, and by extension the value of all Americans, regardless of race, by showing America and the world that as America's first black president he will work to reach out to all Americans.

He could have said he will work to show that American is indeed a land of equal opportunity and that while human failures still exist, he will set the example of rising above them. He could have said he will work to make all Americans proud of our country, our status in the world, and proud of our history of overcoming human frailties and prejudices.

He could have. But he didn't. Instead, he came across as another angry black man who is out to redress 300 years of oppression. How he would improve on the Civil War and civil rights legislation is somewhat of a mystery. It also is difficult to see what oppression he will end considering that the Civil War was fought nearly 150 years ago.

Sen. Obama left the audience gasping and grasping. He tried to be all things to all people and ended up being nothing to anyone. Except to the fawning, mewling media which once again is trying to cover up an insufficient performance by braying to what it assumes is an uneducated audience of lemmings that what they witnessed was a historic moment.

About the best thing I can see coming out of this is that in the near future another black man or woman will declare for the presidency and understand that unity, not division, is what will get them elected. I hope when that moment comes, the next African-American candidate is a Republican.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Earth Moves - Brit Hume, Juan Williams Agree! Jennifer Griffin is a Class Act

Those of you who read this column regularly know that sometimes I take the long way home, meaning that I like to offer up background before I hit the main point. The headline will tell you where I am going, but, as I am doing right now, I like to enjoy the scenery on the way.

So first and foremost, from this vantage point, I don't care what happens or what is said, Barack Obama's candidacy is over. He may still beat Hillary Clinton and still get the Democratic nod, but he is not going to be elected president.

This is not because America is not ready for a black or woman president, we are. It is because we are not ready for a suspected racist to be president, no matter the gender, ethnicity, national background, whatever.

The Barack as a Rock Star movement is over, he has been compromised through association, and nothing is going to bring that sense of inevitability back. Period.

There is a dirty little secret about race relations and racism in America that has been exposed through the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's anti-white diatribes, that being that racism goes both ways, or should I say, many ways.

There are many black Americans who simply don't like whites, or Asians, or Hispanics, or anyone of any other race. This isn't unique, this is universal. Humans can and do carry prejudices with them, and race is not a prerequisite for racism. Some people will carry with them generations of hatred due to events that may have only peripherally affected them, or perhaps not at all.

I heard the word "lynching" on the news the other day, used as if it is a common practice today, rather than a despicable reminder of a bygone and good riddance era. The media can ignore reality and history all the media wants, but it isn't going to change.

That being said, I believe there are far more black Americans who are taking advantage of the level playing field provided by civil rights legislation passed nearly a half-century ago, and aren't hung up on what people did pre-1860. I have made the point in this column before and I'll make it again: my family came to America from Scotland and Ireland in the early 1900s, and had nothing to do with the slave trade that existed from the 1600s to the 1800s.

In fact, no one, of any race, is alive today who had anything to do with the slave trade of that period. Want slavery? Go to Africa and Asia, you'll still find plenty of it there.

But here in America, black Americans have quietly been amassing wealth and status, and according to the 2003 census, rank very close to France, which has twice the population, as an economic power!

Then along comes Barack, and what do we get? Rehashed, restoked, regurgitated racism! Sorry Charlie, people can say whatever they want between now and Election Day, but when they get in the voting booth, they won't be voting Democratic.

That point of view was touched on during the Fox News Sunday panel discussion, when the earth actually moved, the heavens held fast, and the sun went dark as Juan Williams, the resident liberal commentator, who happens to be black, agreed with Brit Hume, a white conservative or moderate, depending on where you stand on the political spectrum!

For those of us who see political debate as a form of sport, the sparring between Hume and Williams on Fox News Sunday is a great way to start the week. They usually are diametrically opposed, and strong in their opinions, leading to some great commentary and thus great political television.

But Sunday they agreed, because, truth be told, they both are reasonable, intelligent gentlemen with differing priorities, but similar goals. That they agree on the impact of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's anti-white, racist rhetoric and that Barack has done an abysmal job of dealing with it pretty much covers what most thinking Americans believe, in my humble opinion.

Of course we also have to deal with charlatans like Al Sharpton, the professional race baiter, who sees some underlying conspiracy behind people wanting to know what a man who is running for President of the United States really thinks. Sharpton told Fox News on the 10 a.m. segment today that there has been a "saturation" of news coverage on this issue that is unlike any he has ever seen.

I guess Sharpton wasn't looking when the media fell all over George Bush because he had given a speech at Bob Jones University. Again, hypocrisy from professional race baiters.

The truth of race in America is that there are racists of all ethnic backgrounds. That isn't going to end in our lifetimes, and the best we can do is chip away at it one issue at at time, and meanwhile ensure that our country continues to provide equal opportunities for all citizens, by law.

Juan Williams has done well in America, as have Charles Payne, Bill Cosby, Thomas Sowell, and on and on. They have succeeded even though racism exists, because they know that the law is on their side, as is public opinion in most cases.

If Colin Powell were to run for president, he would have a strong following in white America, as would Condoleezza Rice. But Barack Obama did not rise to the occasion when he could have, he dithered and wavered when he should have been strong, and he shifted his position too often, and unbelievably.

America is ready for a black president, just not Barack Obama.


While I am on the subject of Fox News there is an issue that I should have written about a week ago, but I was travelling and had to put it off.

I enjoy this communication age, simply because I am a communicator and the opportunities that exist today are unparalleled in human history.

When I work at my computer I constantly receive emails, listen to Internet radio -Melanie Morgan was my favorite when she was on KSFO - and keep a television on in the corner. I can watch, listen, read and write pretty much simultaneously and I enjoy it.

If I hear something on Internet radio or see something on the television that moves me, I can respond, usually with an email that I dash off and send to the person who is talking or reporting.

I did this often during Melanie Morgan's show, since she was always topical and didn't shy away from the tough issues, tough questions or tough positions. What was really great was that Melanie would monitor her emails during her show and not only would respond, but often would mention the issue I had written to her about.

I like that kind of contact with our national opinion makers.

Thus it was that about two weeks ago, during the Brit Hume Special Report which airs weekdays on Fox at 6 p.m., and is my favorite news show, hands down, Jennifer Griffin, who covers the Pentagon, War and the Middle East, did a report on an incident in Somalia involving American forces.

In her wrap up she noted that there has not been a permanent military presence in Somalia since the Marines evacuated Mogadishu after the Black Hawk Down incident. The way it was worded made it sound as though the Marines were involved in that fighting, when it actually was Army Rangers and Delta Force troopers.

My Marine antennae are always on full alert, and I dashed off a note to the Special Report email, noting my concerns. I expected to hear nothing more about it. I was wrong.

A day or two later up pops an email from none other than Ms. Griffin herself, acknowledging the error, noting that much of what is reported gets condensed in a two-minute segment, but that I was right!

This I did not expect! This, however, makes a major point about why I watch Fox News as my premier television news source.

I am not a big fan of news reporters as personalities. I remember all too well the snow job that Walter Cronkite and subsequent network news anchors did on America. I remember all too well the havoc that was wreaked on the world and the millions of deaths caused because we believed that these oh-so-trustworthy personalities would never dream of lying to us.

But they did and the world suffered unimaginably as a result.

But there are people out there who I gravitate to, not because of how they appear on camera, but based on the thoroughness of their reporting. I watch Brit Hume because he was a newsman long before he was on television and even though I don't always agree with him on political matters, I firmly believe he is accurate, fair and complete.

I noted long ago that Jennifer Griffin was granted access to some of the highest levels of the Marine Corps, including travelling with the Commandant. That kind of access is not granted to your average hack. It raised her credibility level considerably in my eyes.

There are other journalists I trust, quite a few of them in fact, and the bulk of them are on Fox. I watch other shows and outlets to see what they are doing, but I keep coming back to Fox, even if I disagree from time to time. I still have my own views, but I can get the best information from Fox.

So it really mattered when I got an email from Jennifer Griffin. She didn't have to answer me at all, and for that matter, if an answer was deemed necessary, a staffer could have sent it.

But she did. This wasn't the biggest deal in the world. But an obviously busy and productive reporter took time out to personally answer a concern about accuracy, raised by an average viewer who cared enough about the issue to send her a note on it.

That ladies and gentlemen, is why I watch Fox News. And that is why if you look up the word "class" in the dictionary, you'll find a picture of Jennifer Griffin. Subhead - integrity.
Monday, March 17, 2008

IVAW's Winter Soldier A Bust! But Who Was Inside The Black Limousines?

"The most dramatic testimony out of the IVAW's Winter Soldier II hearings is that American troops are using bullets in Iraq!" Col. Harry Riley, US Army, Retired, at Eagles Muster, Washington, D.C., May 15, 2008.

There is a saying that sunlight is the strongest disinfectant. That was certainly the case this past weekend in the Washington, D.C., area when American veterans and troop supporters gathered to counter the Iraq Veterans Against the War's ill-conceived Winter Soldier II "hearings" at the National Labor College in Silver Springs, Maryland.

The original Winter Soldier "investigation" was a farce put together by John Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War in 1971 during which American troops who served in Vietnam were maligned and labeled murderers and baby killers by Kerry and his pro-communist cohorts.

The word behind the scenes this past weekend was that the IVAW was being coached by left-over relics from the VVAW's days of disgrace, and hoped through the use of innuendo, slander and outright lies, to have the same impact on this generation of warriors. This, by the way, is part of the communist playbook and game plan for its long-term goal of destroying democracy from within. It isn't working.

The big difference between now and the 70s is that Americans from all walks of life are well aware of Kerry's traitorous activities then, how they impacted America and caused the Southeast Asia holocaust during which millions of our allies were slaughtered by the communists after America left the region.

Many of these Americans joined forces in Silver Springs on Friday, March 14, 2008, to expose and oppose what had been planned. In that we were eminently successful.

Pro-troop demonstrators gathered at the entrance to the National Labor College's George Meaney campus to greet the IVAW as its minuscule membership arrived to "testify" inside a campus building to participating in, or being accessories to, war crimes and atrocities.

Inside, independent bloggers dutifully took down every word from every "witness." For months prior to this staged event, I have been writing that if there is to be a true investigation of these claims, and witnesses testifying, then they should adhere to the same rules that apply in our courts.

I said in this column and it has been repeated far and wide, that there should be verifiable names, addresses, military service details, and specifics on what was alleged, when and where it allegedly occurred, who was there, the military units involved, other individuals on the scene, by name and rank, times and dates.

This is not unfair, nor does it put an undue burden on those who planned to testify. It merely applies the same rules of law that exist in every court in our country. The IVAW is charging President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney with instigating war crimes, and as such, they have the right to confront their accusers.

When all was said and done, the IVAW produced nothing but rehashed left-wing talking points, and a limited forum for malcontents, a couple of whom were really over the edge. In the days leading up to the IVAW's event, some of its members had openly threatened physical harm and bombings to anyone who opposed them, specifically Michelle Malkin and other bloggers, which forced the IVAW to disavow them.

In addition, the sunlight focused on Winter Soldier II and the very reasonable demands that those involve identify themselves, verify their claims, and repeat them to the appropriate military and federal law enforcement officials, put that group on the spot to either put up or shut up. In the end, the IVAW shut up.

Oh, they rummaged around in ancient history, raising issues ranging from the My Lai massacre in Vietnam in 1968 to the Abu Gharib prisoner incident from several years ago in Iraq. But when all was said and done, there was no flood of left-wing reporters calling the rewrite desk to deliver a breaking scoop on American atrocities. All in all it amounted to a very poorly staged farce.

There were a couple of low points, the most astounding of which occurred when a Vietnam veteran entered the IVAW forum unopposed and unchallenged, walked to the front of the room and denounced the proceedings. I was told the gentleman was tackled from behind by at least two IVAW goons, and thrown to the floor.

He was then physically ejected from the auditorium and taken into custody briefly by county police. He was ultimately released, and then promptly filed assault charges against the IVAW. I don't know him personally, but from the looks of him, I'd say he could also file charges for assault on a person over 60 years of age.

Let's hear it for free speech and the IVAW's version of the Hitler Youth. What's next, book burning and gas chambers?

I also had to laugh at the IVAW's use of "reporters" I have dubbed the Lenin News Network, who under the guise of conducting interviews, repeatedly tried to debate the pro-troop forces at the college entrance. Using terminology straight from the left wing of the Democratic Party's approved talking points, the Lenin "truth squads" were repeatedly stymied when pro-troop forces were strong in their points, leading to numerous aborted interviews.

The fact was, we went to Silver Springs simply to enforce the concept that anyone who testified that they witnessed or participated in war crimes should identify themselves and provide verifiable evidence of their identities and their claims. That is not a violation of free speech. Tackling an aging veteran and physically throwing him to the floor is a violation of free speech.

As usual the leftists in America make outrageous claims against the rest of us, but do far worse themselves. Typical hypocrites.

The other really, really interesting facet of the IVAW Winter Soldier theater was the presence of black limousines with heavily tinted windows, bringing unidentified passengers to the labor college. This went on all day long, and rumors abounded about the passengers - John Kerry, Dennis Kucinich - among others.

I never found out myself, although one of my friends from Eagles Up said he saw an unhappy looking Kucinich. Possibly some of the others were just shuttles bringing IVAW participants to the event. The only "official" IVAW vehicle was a panel van with a sign painted on the side. But the black limos with the tinted windows caused untold commentary about who was backing the IVAW and how much money was behind Winter Soldier II.

At one point during an interview with the Lenin News Network, I was asked if the turnout was disappointing, since we didn't have thousands of pro-troop forces in attendance. I made the point that our presence wasn't about numbers, it was about symbolism - we were standing up for the current generation of warriors and the generation that was screwed by Kerry and his group.

It was obvious that the organizers of IVAW's Winter Soldier don't know much about small unit tactics. We do.

We had a class group at Silver Springs, including bloggers ranging from Concrete Bob the DC Protest Warrior, to Viper Ash, and many in between. We had veterans from all generations and organizations, supporters from across the country including the ladies from A Soldiers Wish List, and Missouri Moms for the Military, plus the Eagles Up organizers, members of Gathering of Eagles, Rolling Thunder, and Move America Forward. We had characters, and our characters have character. Together we were successful.

I was asked to speak Saturday at a rally at the base of the Washington Monument and there I noted that by shining sunlight on the IVAW proceedings in Maryland, we required the IVAW to adhere to the truth.

I spoke on the one-year anniversary of the original Gathering of Eagles when tens of thousands of American troop supporters descended on DC to shut down Code Pink, the ANSWER coalition, and other anti-American, pro-communist and pro-terrorist organizations. In the year since we have raised America's awareness of the intent of these organizations, have stood up to them in dozens of places across the country, and made the point strongly that America's streets belong to us all, not just the malcontents.

Code Pinkos were in DC this weekend too, interrupting a news conference where Move America Forward unveiled research showing that more than 100 military recruiting stations have been attacked across the US by the anti-Iraq and Afghanistan War forces. Once again, a splinter group that whines perpetually about its "rights" attempted to stifle free speech, once again unsuccessfully.

But the far left is getting more desperate, as our forces win battle after battle, and political milestones are met too. Shouting has been replaced by physical assaults and bombings, and I fear we are only seeing the beginnings of new and more lethal tactics.

The left is following the same playbook it followed in the 60s and 70s, in which it ultimately resorted to bombing corporations and college campuses, wrongly believing that wanton murder would cause the US to collapse.

They follow this game plan not because they are stupid, but because they believe it will work. Communists and collaborators like John Kerry and jimmy carter nearly proved these anarchists correct a generation ago. "Nearly" is the key word.

It didn't work that time, and it won't work this time, and all they will gain is the undying enmity of the American populace.

Yet, as I noted during my speech at the Washington Monument, two groups of Americans with totally different viewpoints met within two hundred yards of each other last week. We both had our say, without confrontation, and without bloodshed.

The county emergency response team was on site, but no tanks and troops. In the end both sides had their say, and neither was stifled. Which means that the American system works when it is given a chance.

And I will leave you with my conclusion from Saturday, when I made this same point. There are many people who use the American system to attempt to tear down the American system. These individuals would not be able to exist, nor to spread their viewpoint, in many other societies in the world. But they can do it here, repugnant though their messages may be at times.

Hence my conclusion America is NOT the PROBLEM, America IS the SOLUTION.
Thursday, March 06, 2008

Pinkos In Berkeley, Bombs in Times Square; Are Attacks on Congress or a Presidential Candidate Next?

America awoke today to the news that anarchists had bombed a military recruiting station in Times Square.

The attack occurred in the early morning hours, no one was on duty at the time, and there was no word of casualties.

Nonetheless this attack has all the appearances of a dramatic escalation of the anti-American tactics sweeping through the pro-terrorist ranks in wake of the overwhelming military and political successes in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have to question whether this is just the first step in copy cat violence that mimics the anti-war tactics of the Vietnam era.

There is no question that the pro-terrorist forces are losing their argument. It is hard to make your point that we never should have invaded Iraq when evidence abounds that Al Qaeda's leadership, having been solidly defeated in Afghanistan, was planning to use Iraq as the next launching pad for terrorist attacks.

In what appears to be mounting frustration that their position on the war was wrong and unsupportable, anti-war forces have been escalating their attacks on recruiting stations and the military for months now. But contrary to the "Silent Majority" that sat by a generation ago and allowed pro-communists like John Kerry and John Murtha to take the streets and dictate the course of the debate on Vietnam - with devastating consequences - pro-troop Americans have been actively opposing the left's anti-military activities.

Thus the pro-terrorist factions have not had a monopoly on the media as they did in the 60s and 70s. And even though the Main Stream Media often refuses to publicize the pro-military efforts to support the troops and the government, the Internet has proved itself to be more than equal to the task, hence the frustration and escalating violence from the pro-terrorist forces.

The worst of the anti-military groups include the whackos at Code Pink, the communists, anarchists and pro-terrorists at the ANSWER coalition, and a splinter group claiming to be former members of the military calling itself Iraq Veterans Against the War. I'm not accusing any of these groups of being involved in the bombing, but they do advocate violence and destruction of public property, including war monuments, as part of their tactics.

ANSWER and the Pinkos have resorted to blocking entrances to recruiting stations, anarchy in the streets and transparent attacks on our government officials. Meanwhile, the IVAW has modeled itself after Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War, which ironically had far fewer Vietnam veterans in its membership than communists. The new bunch - IVAW - even is planning a "Winter Soldier Investigation" next week patterned after Kerry's false and malicious attack of the same name on American troops in 1971.

Considering that Code Pink's infiltration of the Berkeley City Council has resulted in unprecedented official support for its attacks on the US Marine recruiting station in that city, and IVAW is mimicking Kerry like an aged shadow, it is worth questioning whether more vicious attacks on members of our government are in the planning stages.

The membership of Kerry's VVAW included anarchists who were planning assassinations on members of Congress back in the 70s. These plans proceeded parallel to violence by other radical groups such as the Students For A Democratic Society, which has resurfaced in recent years, and its military arm the Weather Underground, which majored in setting off bombs and killing people, especially on college campuses.

To be fair, Kerry distanced himself from the more lethal members of his organization, but the question still remains. Are today's anarchists planning to go the same route as the VVAW, SDS and the Weather Underground?

Are members of Congress who support victory, meaning most of the GOP, being targeted for attacks even as police are seeking the identity of the Times Square Bomber? Is John McCain safe, considering he supported the military offensive labeled The Surge that has been so successful in Iraq?

Will we hear Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton denounce the bomb thrower, the bomb makers, and their supporters?

Will they promise to throw the weight of their political status behind any investigation into the bombing? Or will they sit silent as they have done since the Code Pinkos started their assault on the Marine recruiting station in Berkeley?

In this case, silence is tantamount to acquiescence. Both are unacceptable.
Monday, March 03, 2008

Nice to See You, How Was Your Vacation? Hit The Bricks? KSFO in San Francisco Axes Melanie Morgan

Melanie Morgan came back from vacation this morning to do her morning show on KSFO radio in San Francisco, and before the day was over, her 14-year career at the station was too.

That will make some people happy, notably communists, socialists, anarchists, terrorists, leftist politicians, phony rightist politicians, anyone associated with Code Pinkos, the Berkeley California City Council, and a few perpetually unhappy cranks who never have a good thing to say about anyone.

But for those of us who appreciated her willingness to stand tall and do for this generation of veterans what the women (and men) of the Vietnam generation never did, it is not a good day.

There is always an inside story in situations like this, but at the moment I don't know what it is. The official explanation is that her contract was up and the parent company of her station had already proclaimed sweeping personnel cuts. There have been numerous other hits on the conservative talk circuit across the country and if you have a penchant for conspiracy theories, this is probably a good place to start.

I do know that Melanie's morning drive time show was a forceful voice for America's veterans and active duty military, and she skillfully used her radio exposure. Her outspoken support for conservative issues makes her a favorite guest on CNN and FOX News too.

Her views weren't always welcome, especially at CNN, but she got them out and she got them across.

Melanie took on Code Pink in their own back yard and beat them at their own game. She stood up against communists like ANSWER, and organizations associated with it. She is an ardent environmentalist, and has the history to prove it, and she called them as she saw them.

Melaine didn't hide behind her microphone; she traveled to Washington twice in 2007 to stand up with the troops, and she manned the barricades with us when we counter-demonstrated against the communists, anarchists and pro-terrorists in ANSWER's ranks. She is an unabashed patriot and supporter of the military, for which she will always be appreciated.

Since I have no more scoop I will simply post the news release she sent me today.

Conservative Melanie Morgan Cut from KSFO Radio
* Vows to Continue Her Role as Conservative Activist *

SAN FRANCISCO - Renowned radio personality and national conservative leader, Melanie Morgan, delivered her final broadcast on talk radio powerhouse KSFO 560 AM today - Monday, March 3, 2008.

The owner of KSFO radio, Citadel Broadcasting, decided not to renew Morgan's contract as part of the company's announced across-the-board financial cost cutting.

Melanie Morgan has been a fixture on KSFO for the past 14 years, enjoying a run from 1994-2008 that far exceeded industry standards for longevity. During that time, Morgan emerged as one of the nation's most dynamic conservative activists, using the radio airwaves to motivate listeners who shared her passion to take action and fight for causes important to them.

Morgan's on-air activism included an effort that removed the carcinogen MTBE from gasoline in California, launching of the historic Recall Gray Davis campaign that led to the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger as Governor of California, and co-founding the nation's largest pro-troop organization, Move America Forward (website:

"It has truly been an honor for me to work at KSFO for the past 14 years. What I loved most about my time at KSFO was that it allowed me to connect with listeners and take action to make real changes in the world," Morgan said.

"We never had a one-way dialogue with our listeners, and we never believed that we had to resolve ourselves to accept the status quo. We got out of our chairs, left our homes and offices, and circulated petitions, rallied for our troops and met with government leaders.

"We did all this to make sure that we left an even better world for our children than the one we had inherited from generations before us," Morgan said.

As part of her ongoing conservative activism, Morgan has traveled to the Middle East twice to interview U.S. Troops stationed in Iraq and Kuwait. Her broadcast efforts from Iraq resulted in her winning the Associated Press's Mark Twain Journalism Award, and The Peninsula Press Club's award for Best Interview or Talk Show.

"Meeting our troops who are on the frontlines of the war against terrorism stands as the most powerful experience in my broadcast career," said Morgan.

Morgan's career with ABC began in 1981 when she was a television reporter for KGO TV. In 1984, she became an on-air personality for KGO radio where she worked for six years before switching over to ABC-San Francisco sister-station, KSFO 560 AM, co-hosting the Lee Rodgers and Melanie Morgan show. In 2006, Citadel Broadcasting acquired the ABC Radio group.

She has reported on the scene from the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut, Lebanon; the Mexico City earthquake; and the Tiananmen Square massacre in China. Morgan says her focus in the days ahead remains unchanged: She will remain a conservative activist leader.

"My commitment and dedication to serve as a leader in the movement to support our military men and women continues to grow, and I am very proud to serve as Chairman of the pro-troop non-profit group, Move America Forward," Morgan said.

Morgan is not compensated for her work with Move America Forward, a fact since the group was first launched in 2004.

Morgan will also continue her weekly column for the news website and will continue to serve as a television analyst on news programs on cable and broadcast television stations and networks.

"My passion and commitment to the troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world are foremost in my heart.

"While I will miss my good friends Lee Rodgers and Officer Vic, and our great producer Sheri Yee, I am excited to stay close to the conservative grassroots. And I'll always lead with my chin out," Morgan concluded.


hypoctite sm

Granny Snatching


Signed author copies


NEW! e-Book Available on Amazon

Masters of the Art

Masters final cover
Personalize inscription


NEW! e-Book Available on Amazon and Barns & Noble

Blog Archive





Popular Posts