Saturday - January 27, 2007

The Sequel

With the Leftist Moonbats marching on Washington today, I’ve been surfing around cyberspace getting glimpses of their freakish festivities. While doing so I had a hallucinatory experience. I suddenly felt myself transported back in time to 1970. There was Jane Fonda in the middle of a crowd of anti-war protesters, and scrawled signs filling the air with all too familiar slogans and the media trumpeting the deaths of 6 or 10 or 20 US soldiers on the battlefield.

The vision refused to fade away and allow me to return to 2007. Then I realized I had not been time-traveling. This was 2007, not 1970. I suddenly wanted to puke. Literally. The sequel to the Vietnam War was following the same formula. Hollywood knows that for a sequel to be successful it has to follow the same basic formula as the original. What we are seeing now on the big screen is “Vietnam: Part II, The Sandbox”.

There are several significant differences however. First, the Viet Cong never attacked the US directly and never even came close to blowing up any major buildings inside our country. Second, the VC didn’t have billions of petrodollars and a worldwide network of religious fanatics backing them - all they had was their puppet-masters in Moscow. Third, the North Vietnamese had only a local goal - to unite their country, albeit under a communist regime that went against the Truman doctrine of “containment” of communism. On the other hand, radical Muslims and the Wahabbi movement have already spread their poison to several countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Somalia and sleeper cells in nearly every major country - including here in the US.

These differences are significant purely for one simple reason: this time the enemy we face is intensely stronger, more dangerous, more ambitious, better financed and more determined to destroy our way of life. In other words, this time we face an escalation by several orders of magnitude of the Vietnam conflict. Yet there are still American citizens who are following the same game plan: “peace at all costs”, “the wrong war”, “bring the troops home NOW”.

These people refuse to believe their own eyes and ears and understand the situation we find ourselves in today is much, much worse that it was in 1970. What is going to happen if/when the next sequel (“Vietnam: Part III, Nuclear Armageddon”) comes to a theater near you. If the escalation continues what will we see? Major cities being wiped off the face of the Earth with nuclear weapons smuggled across our porous Southern border? Millions of Americans wiped out in a terrible instant of blinding hatred?

What will the peaceniks say then? My guess is they will say, “See! We told you this would happen if you went into Vietnam and Iraq?” The murderers will be pardoned in their eyes and all blame will reside with “neo-cons” and whoever is in charge in Washington at the time. Then they will start scheduling another march on Washington even before all the bodies of millions of dead Americans are buried.

This sequel sucks but the peaceniks are still buying tickets. The next one will be a boxoffice bonanza unless we the movie-going (voting) audience decide to force a rewrite of the script. Iraq may already be lost if this screenplay follows the formula. Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard goes into a little more detail below. Grab your buttered popcorn, Raisonets and jumbo Coke and settle in for the rest of the show. I already know how it is going to end but I won’t spoil it for you ...

Not This Time
-- by Fred Barnes

A new general, David Petraeus, is taking over in Iraq with a credible new strategy, counterinsurgency. Four decades ago, General Creighton Abrams became the American commander in Vietnam, also with a new strategy. It called for taking and holding the villages and hamlets of South Vietnam.

In a word, it was counterinsurgency, and it worked. Now in Iraq, Petraeus has as good a chance of success, starting with the pacification of Baghdad, as Abrams had. And the painful lesson of Vietnam applies in Iraq: Don’t give up when victory is at hand.

Those in Congress who advocate retreat in Iraq refuse to acknowledge this lesson. And they may have their way, whatever Petraeus accomplishes. With their calls for troop withdrawals and fund cutoffs and their antiwar resolutions, they have put America on a slippery slope in Iraq. And we know where it leads: to defeat while victory remains quite possible. This happened in six descending steps in Vietnam, and today’s coalition in Congress of antiwar Democrats and vacillating Republicans has started pushing us down that dangerous slope.

The first step is, when the war goes poorly, public support falls and politicians dramatically increase their criticism. In Vietnam, this occurred after the Tet offensive in 1968. In Iraq, it occurred gradually at first, then rapidly once violence and chaos in Baghdad flared over the last year.

Step two consists of growing criticism of the foreign government that America is supporting. In Vietnam, the target was the government of President Thieu. In Iraq, it’s the elected government of Prime Minister Maliki. Senator Hillary Clinton, for instance, insists Maliki has failed to seek reconciliation between Shia and Sunnis--that is, a political solution. “I do not support cutting funding for American troops, but I do support cutting funding for Iraqi forces if the Iraqi government does not meet set conditions,” she said two weeks ago.

The third step involves resolutions and threats. This week, the Senate will take up resolutions opposing the addition of 21,500 troops to Iraq, a buildup Petraeus says is indispensable to his plan to secure Baghdad. If resolutions fail to force President Bush to begin winding down the war, Senator Joe Biden promises the Senate will take stronger measures. In the Vietnam era, congressional critics passed limits on funding.

The fourth step--the one we’re approaching now in Iraq--would put restrictions on troop deployments. In 1970, the Cooper-Church amendment sought to bar funding for any American troops in Cambodia, a sanctuary for invading forces from North Vietnam. Today, Hillary Clinton would put a cap on the number of American soldiers in Iraq. Webb, echoing many others in Congress, said withdrawals should begin “in short order.”

Step five is the last resort of war opponents: a fund cutoff over the protests of the president. In Vietnam, it came in 1974, after American combat troops had been withdrawn, but with the United States still supporting and funding the South Vietnamese government. What’s striking is how much the congressional majority then resembles today’s antiwar coalition, mostly Democrats but with more than a handful of Republicans. True, only a minority in Congress favors a cutoff today, but that bloc could grow.

Step six: the collapse. In Southeast Asia, it led to the deaths of more than two million people in Vietnam and Cambodia after the Communist triumph. The members of Congress whose actions prompted the collapse expressed no shame or embarrassment for having betrayed allies. And practically no one held them accountable. Their perfidy was greeted with silence.

- Read Fred’s entire editorial at the WEEKLY STANDARD ...

   Friday - January 26, 2007

Unlikely

_{Bill Schorr - United Media}

Democratic Party Insanity

Just what in hell do the Democrats in Congress think they’re doing? These asshats have gone way beyond the pale on this one. They just spent days grilling General Petraeus before confirming him to take command in Iraq. General Petraeus stated flatly that he needed the 21,500 troops promised and time to bring things under control. Democrats agreed and wished him godspeed and good luck. Now they’re going to cut him off at the knees before he even sets foot in Iraq.

Is there any lunacy the Donks won’t participate in? How do they get away with this s**t? Russ Feingold is preparing to get the ball rolling next week to cut off all funds for the troops and the war effort. Do Democrats not know any other military strategy than to turn tail and run? That seems to be what they’re best at lately. Roosevelt and Truman must be rolling over in their graves looking at this duplicitous crowd of hypocritical pissants.

I say we, the people of America, should be looking into how we can impeach Congress - not the President. The partisan cowards in the Senate and the House are laying us wide open for another attack, leaving our borders wide open for terrorists and others to invade and just generally NOT providing for the common good, which is their sole reason for being in Washington. Impeach all 535 of the bastards and let’s start over with a fresh crop. This bunch is starting to really stink up the capitol ...

Feingold Pushes Plan to Cut Off War Funds
_{(POLITICO) - January 26, 2007 07:43 AM EST}

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., has scheduled a hearing next Tuesday in his Judiciary Committee subcommittee to explore whether Congress has the authority to cut off funding for the U.S. military campaign in Iraq. The move comes as Congress prepares to vote on a congressional resolution opposing President Bush’s escalation of the war.

Feingold, a fierce war critic, will force Democrats to consider an option many consider politically suicidal: denying funds to the military and U.S. soldiers to force a quicker end to the war. Democratic leaders have privately called on members to restrain from cutting off funding and focus on congressional resolutions condemning the Bush policy. The resolutions are nonbinding and therefore symbolic.

Republicans “would like this debate to be as whether or not we are going to be cutting off money for the troops,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently told The Politico. “The logical conclusion is that a lot of things can happen. But right now, the most important thing is to tell the president that what he has done with the escalation is wrong. And that’s what we are doing, bi-partisanly.”

Feingold, who chairs the Subcommittee on the Constitution, will question several witnesses, including a Library of Congress official and legal experts from Harvard, Duke, and the University of Virginia, on the issue. Senior Bush administration officials have publicly argued that Congress has no such right, but Feingold plans to introduce legislation to force President Bush to pull American forces out of the troubled country.

“Congress holds the power of the purse and if the president continues to advance his failed Iraq policy, we have the responsibility to use that power to safely redeploy our troops from Iraq,” Feingold said in a statement released by his office on Thursday. “I will soon be introducing legislation to use the power of the purse to end what is clearly one of the greatest mistakes in the history of the nation’s foreign policy.”

Taking The Gloves Off

Personally, I think this should have been done two years ago. In fact, on Day One of the invasion of Iraq, orders should have been given to “shoot to kill” anyone carrying a gun or even just throwing a rock at our soldiers. Things would be a lot quieter today if they had.

Iran has been asking for this for some time and I hope they get a full dose. The Mad Mullahs have been training and shipping out insurgents not only to Iraq but to Lebanon and Gaza. Maybe blowing away a few thousand of these troublemakers will make Teheran stop trying to interfere and stir up trouble everywhere in the Middle East.

If this doesn’t work and President Ahmawhackjob and his Mad Mullah overlords don’t get the point maybe the next step is to fill the skies of Iran with laser-guided bombs and missiles. That should take their mind off of meddling in outside countries. If that doesn’t work then proceed to Phase III: turn Iran into a lake of melted sand that glows in the dark. End of story ...

Troops Authorized to Kill Iranian Operatives in Iraq
Administration Strategy Stirs Concern Among Some Officials
_{(WASHINGTON POST) - Friday, January 26, 2007}

The Bush administration has authorized the U.S. military to kill or capture Iranian operatives inside Iraq as part of an aggressive new strategy to weaken Tehran’s influence across the Middle East and compel it to give up its nuclear program, according to government and counterterrorism officials with direct knowledge of the effort.

For more than a year, U.S. forces in Iraq have secretly detained dozens of suspected Iranian agents, holding them for three to four days at a time.

The “catch and release” policy was designed to avoid escalating tensions with Iran and yet intimidate its emissaries. U.S. forces collected DNA samples from some of the Iranians without their knowledge, subjected others to retina scans, and fingerprinted and photographed all of them before letting them go.

Last summer, however, senior administration officials decided that a more confrontational approach was necessary, as Iran’s regional influence grew and U.S. efforts to isolate Tehran appeared to be failing. The country’s nuclear work was advancing, U.S. allies were resisting robust sanctions against the Tehran government, and Iran was aggravating sectarian violence in Iraq.

“There were no costs for the Iranians,” said one senior administration official. “They are hurting our mission in Iraq, and we were bending over backwards not to fight back.”

Three officials said that about 150 Iranian intelligence officers, plus members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Command, are believed to be active inside Iraq at any given time. There is no evidence the Iranians have directly attacked U.S. troops in Iraq, intelligence officials said.

But, for three years, the Iranians have operated an embedding program there, offering operational training, intelligence and weaponry to several Shiite militias connected to the Iraqi government, to the insurgency and to the violence against Sunni factions. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the director of the CIA, told the Senate recently that the amount of Iranian-supplied materiel used against U.S. troops in Iraq “has been quite striking.”

“Iran seems to be conducting a foreign policy with a sense of dangerous triumphalism,” Hayden said.

The new “kill or capture” program was authorized by President Bush in a meeting of his most senior advisers last fall, along with other measures meant to curtail Iranian influence from Kabul to Beirut and, ultimately, to shake Iran’s commitment to its nuclear efforts. Tehran insists that its nuclear program is peaceful, but the United States and other nations say it is aimed at developing weapons.

The administration’s plans contain five “theaters of interest,” as one senior official put it, with military, intelligence, political and diplomatic strategies designed to target Iranian interests across the Middle East.

The White House has authorized a widening of what is known inside the intelligence community as the “Blue Game Matrix”—a list of approved operations that can be carried out against the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. And U.S. officials are preparing international sanctions against Tehran for holding several dozen al-Qaeda fighters who fled across the Afghan border in late 2001. They plan more aggressive moves to disrupt Tehran’s funding of the radical Palestinian group Hamas and to undermine Iranian interests among Shiites in western Afghanistan.

In Iraq, U.S. troops now have the authority to target any member of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, as well as officers of its intelligence services believed to be working with Iraqi militias. The policy does not extend to Iranian civilians or diplomats. Though U.S. forces are not known to have used lethal force against any Iranian to date, Bush administration officials have been urging top military commanders to exercise the authority.

- More ...

   Thursday - January 18, 2007

An Idea Whose Time Has Come

Now this is an idea I can really get behind. Give every man, woman and child in Iraq a cheap Chinese ripoff AK-47 and 1,000 rounds of ammo ... and withdraw all American troops into forts or fortified areas. Tell the Iraqis they have exactly one week to settle all old feuds and kill every single foreigner in the country (except our troops).

You gotta admit, for a “Plan B” it does have its good points.

Give Us Guns – And Troops Can Go, Says Iraqi Leader
_{BAGHDAD (TIMES-UK) - January 18, 2007}

America’s refusal to give Baghdad’s security forces sufficient guns and equipment has cost a great number of lives, the Iraqi Prime Minister said yesterday. Nouri al-Maliki said the insurgency had been bloodier and prolonged because Washington had refused to part with equipment. If it released the necessary arms, US forces could “dramatically” cut their numbers in three to six months, he told The Times.

In a sign of the tense relations with Washington, he chided the US for suggesting his Government was living on “borrowed time”. Such criticism boosted Iraq’s extremists, he said, and was more a reflection of “some kind of crisis situation” in Washington after the Republicans’ midterm election losses.

Mr al-Maliki conceded that his administration had made mistakes over the hanging of Saddam Hussein. But he refused to accept all criticism over the execution. When asked about the Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi’s attack on Iraq’s capital punishment laws, Mr al- Maliki cited the Italians’ summary killing of Benito Mussolini and his stringing-up from a lamppost.

Asked how long Iraq would require US troops, Mr al-Maliki said: “If we succeed in implementing the agreement between us to speed up the equipping and providing weapons to our military forces, I think that within three to six months our need for American troops will dramatically go down. That is on condition that there are real, strong efforts to support our military forces and equipping and arming them.”

The US Government is wary of handing over large amounts of military hardware to the Iraqis because it has sometimes ended up in the hands of militias and insurgents. Gordon Johndroe, the White House national security spokesman, conceded that some of Mr al-Maliki’s criticism was “valid”. The training and equipping of Iraqi troops would be speeded up, he said, adding that by “self-admission we have had to redo our training and equipment programme”.

Although Mr al-Maliki’s tone was measured throughout, he is clearly irritated at US criticism that he has failed to curb Shia militias. Robert Gates, the new US Defence Secretary, said that Mr al-Maliki could lose his job if he failed to stop communal bloodshed and Condoleezza Rice, the Secretary of State, gave a warning that he was living on “borrowed time” and that American patience was running out.

Challenged on the point, Mr al-Maliki remarked acidly: “Certain officials are going through a crisis. Secretary Rice is expressing her own point of view if she thinks that the Government is on borrowed time, whether it is borrowed time for the Iraqi Government or American Administration. I don’t think we are on borrowed time.”

He added: “I wish that we could receive strong messages of support from the US so we don’t give some boost to the terrorists and make them feel that they might have achieved success. I believe that such statements give moral boosts to the terrorists and push them towards making an extra effort and making them believe that they have defeated the American Administration, but I can tell you that they haven’t defeated the Iraqi Government.”

- More ...

   Monday - January 15, 2007

Resurrection

Finally! I gots my TV and internet back a little while ago. Power flickered out yesterday around 10:00am and came back on about an hour later. Unfortunately, cable service from Charter stayed out ... and stayed out. No football yesterday so I didn’t get to see the Saints win or the Chargers lose. Up ... down. I figured the Chargers would go all the way. Oh well.  New Orleans vs. Indianapolis should be a good Super Bowl (if Peyton Manning can break the Patriots playoff jinx).

In related news ..... KMOV-TV, CBS in St. Louis SUCKS! I thought cable companies were greedy but our local CBS station has trumped them this time. I tuned in to channel 786 (CBS-HDTV) on Saturday and found a message from Charter. It seems KMOV decided to start charging Charter for the HDTV broadcasts and Charter told KMOV to shove off. Charter still carries KMOV but on channel 3 (no HDTV). What makes KMOV a real goober in all this is that they broadcast HDTV over the air for free (well, paid by advertisers). What makes them believe they can charge cable for what they broadcast for free? Greed? Yup.

So I can watch the games on FOX (KTVI-TV) in HDTV but not the ones on CBS (KMOV-TV). This greatly sucks - especially with the playoffs and Super Bowl coming up ... and CBS has coverage of Super Bowl XLI. ARGH! Who do these ratbags think they are?

OK, I feel better now that I got that off my chest. KMOV still sucks but I’ll get over it. What else can I do? STOOPID SEE-BS!

I’ve spent the last 24 hours without TV or internet and it was really peaceful. I’ll have to try this more often. It’s 24 degrees outside right now and that will probably be our high today. Brrrrrrrh! I’ve been reading Winston Churchill’s “World Crisis: 1911-1918”. At 880 pages and 2.26 pounds, it’s heavy reading but I highly recommend it. This is an abridged version of the five volume masterpiece Sir Winston wrote in the 1920’s to encapsulate the “Great War”. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to gain a deeper understanding of WWI and the diplomatic, political and military cluster-f**k that saw the death of tens of millions in one of the most useless wars ever fought.

I haven’t finished the Barking Moonbat Hall Of Fame voting poll yet. Sorry. I’ll have that for you tomorrow and the voting will go on all week. We’ll have the big announcement on Sunday. So hang in there, peeps. All things must pass .... except KMOV - which STILL SUCKS!

Head of Saddam’s Half Brother Severed in Botched Hanging
_{BAGHDAD, Iraq (FOX) - Monday, January 15, 2007}

Saddam Hussein’s half brother and the former head of Iraq’s Revolutionary Court were both hanged before dawn Monday, officials said, two weeks and two days after the former Iraqi dictator was executed in a chaotic scene that has drawn worldwide criticism.

Barzan Ibrahim, Saddam’s half brother and former intelligence chief, and Awad Hamed al-Bandar head of Iraq’s Revolutionary Court, had been found guilty along with Saddam in the killing of 148 Shiite Muslims after a 1982 assassination attempt on the former leader in the town of Dujail north of Baghdad.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh confirmed the executions, saying those attending the hangings included a prosecutor, a judge and a physician. He also said Ibrahim’s head was severed from his body during his hanging.

“In a rare incident, the head of the accused Barzan Ibrahim al-Hassan was separated from his body during the execution,” al-Dabbagh told reporters. The official video was screened for reporters by the Iraqi government Monday.

The video showed the two being hanged side by side in red prison jumpsuits with black hoods over their heads. Five masked men surrounded them. After the trap doors opened, al-Bandar could be seen dangling from the rope. Ibrahim’s body was lying on the floor, chest down, his severed head yards away.

The execution was conducted on the same gallows where Saddam was hanged Dec. 30. Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the gallows were built to international standards and in accordance with human rights organizations. “We will not release the video but we want to show the truth,” he said. “The Iraqi government acted in a neutral way.”

Prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi said Ibrahim looked tense when he was brought into the room and said “I did not do anything. It was all the work of Fadel al-Barrak.” Ibrahim was referring to a former head of two intelligence departments.”

   Friday - January 12, 2007

Winning: The Only Thing

As the late Green Bay Packers coach Vince Lombardi said, “Winning isn’t everything - it’s the only thing.” That’s a nice sentiment for football players but is an imperative for warriors on the field of battle. For government politicians since WWII, most of them don’t even seem to have the word in their vocabulary.

You can’t win if you’re in a “police action” or a “UN sanctioned intervention.” All you can do is hold your own until the time arrives when you can withdraw without too much embarrassment. The American way of war says you take the battle to the enemy, kick his ass and come home. It has been for centuries.

At least it had been until we became the dominant world power after WWII. Since then our politicians have forgotten how to win and most don’t seem to care whether we do or not - as long as it makes the other party look bad. Victory in politics overrides victory in the battlefield as far as the partisan ratbags in Washington are concerned.

The Founding Fathers decided our military should be under the control of elected government civilians to insure there was never a military coup or takeover by an independent group of ambitious soldiers - something that happens in banana republics every day.

It was a good idea and has served this country well - up until the last fifty years or so. Since WWII, the media and whichever party is not in control of the White House, where control of the military resides, have tried to manage our troops through political maneuvers and arousal of the public with inflammatory news reports and editorials.

Their strategy worked well when we were involved in Vietnam. Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon will forever be figures of shame and derision because management of war was handed over to 200 million critics by narrow-minded politicians. Not much has changed in the current conflict.

Don’t get me wrong. I blame all ratbags in Washington. I blame the Democrats and the Left for the constant criticism, media-whoring and obstructionism. I also blame the President and Republicans for caving in to the polls ... and the pols.

Like Michael Reagan says below, we’re going to have to try to win if we want to win. It sounds trite but is all too true. President Bush has two years to pull off a victory or he will join Johnson and Nixon in the Losers Hall Of Shame. There is only one way to do that - ignore Congress’ outcries and the media’s criticism and just do the right thing - the right way.

Send in more troops but untie their hands. Unleash the full wrath of the US military on the enemy. Forbid any Congressman to enter Iraq or any country we’re engaged in militarily. Throw the media reporters out and keep them out until the dust clears ... and most importantly, show no mercy to any group who gets in our way.

Muqtada Al-Sadr is indeed a good place to start. Make him and his supporters an offer they can’t refuse. Disarm, cooperate or ... die. Then clean out the rest of that pesthole region. Issue an ultimatum to Iran and Syria: stay out or be prepared to see missiles and bombs incoming. Lots of missiles and bombs.

It’s the only way. If we intend to win. If you still think losing is a viable option then I have nothing more to say to you. Ever.

_{Daryl Cagle - MSNBC}

Iraq: Getting Down and Dirty
-- by Michael Reagan

Just as predicted, President Bush has decided to send an additional 20,000 troops to Iraq in a “surge” specifically designed to put an end to the killing and carnage in the Baghdad area.

Although I want to win the war in Iraq every bit as much as George W. Bush wants to win it, I have not been in favor of a surge in troop levels and I’m still opposed to one unless the troops are to be used for just one thing: to win.

And winning this nasty back-alley conflict, against an enemy that hides among the people in crowded urban neighborhoods, means being just as hard-nosed and determined as the insurgents have proven to be.

Our failure to get down and dirty in this war is the reason why we have reached this sorry state. We have been fighting with the hands of our troops tied behind their backs by both our own government and the government of Iraq. We are shackled by rules of engagement that the insurgents ignore. With them, anything goes.

That’s because we have labored long and hard to satisfy the “elite media” and “left-of-center” politicians singled out by Newt Gingrich the other night as embracing a “level of routine cowardice” that he said works to embolden America’s enemies.

He advised following the example of my father, President Reagan, who he recalled steered America out of the “malaise” of the late 1970s and toward victory in the Cold War.

My dad understood that there is no substitute for victory in war, as General Douglas MacArthur pointed out.

We can win this war if we to take the restrictions off and untie the hands of the military. If we are not going to allow our armed forces to go in and do what they do best – break things and kill people – then we might just as well give up and go home.

In war as in sports, the late Brooklyn Dodger’s manager Leo Durocher’s motto rules: “nice guys finish last.”

President Bush bought himself a little time by advocating a new war policy in Iraq. He has just six months to prove that it will work. If it hasn’t provided results by then the Democrats will de-fund the war, America will withdraw, and all hell will break loose.

One test of the President’s resolve, and the ability of Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki and his government to dig in their heels and do what must be done, will be how they attack the problem of Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi army in their redoubt in the slums of Sadr City.

Muqtada al-Sadr, a Shiite cleric, is nothing less than an instrument of the Shiite regime in Iran, and his army represents an advance guard of the Iranian regime’s armed forces, just as Hezbollah is their advance guard in Lebanon.

It has to be one of the combined U.S. and Iraqi armed forces’ first goals to eliminate al-Sadr and his 10,000-man army of well-armed thugs. We should have dealt with al-Sadr a long time ago before he became as powerful and as popular as he is today among Iraq’s Shiite majority.

Up until now, Maliki has been unable to face up to the al-Sadr problem. If he continues to resist getting rid of him and his army, we might just as well fold our tents and depart. Muqtada al-Sadr must go – preferably following in the footsteps of Saddam Hussein. And soon. Very soon.

As retired army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters wrote in the New York Post Thursday, “Ultimately, it’s the Iraqis, not the additional American soldiers and Marines, who’ll decide Iraq’s future. And the acid test will be their government’s handling of Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army.”

Col. Peters warned that “If we and the Iraqis try to avoid Sadr City’s challenges, you’ll know the entire effort’s a hollow sham.”

---

_{Mike Reagan, the eldest son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is heard on more than 200 talk radio stations nationally as part of the Radio America Network. Look for Mike’s new book “Twice Adopted.” Order autographed books at http://www.reagan.com. Email comments to mereagan@hotmail.com. ©2007 Mike Reagan.}

   Thursday - January 11, 2007

Quote Of The Day

“Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.”

-- President Bush, Address To The Nation - 01/10/07

Pre-Emptive Strike

_{Larry Wright - The Detroit News}

Will It Work?

Democrats were against it a week before the speech was even given. That’s because President Bush made the mistake of reaching out to Democrats to involve them in the planning and get their feedback. They chose instead to take the details of the plan public and announce their plans to do everything in their power to bring about the failure of the changes put forth by the President by (a) a non-binding vote in Congress to “voice disapproval”, (b) taking their case to the media and using every tired “Vietnam quagmire” cliché they could dredge up, and (c) threatening to cut off funding for our troops in the field.

Whether it is a good plan or not, doesn’t it at least deserve a chance? So far none of the “loyal opposition” has given me a solid argument as to why the changes will fail. All I’m hearing from the Democrats is “we object!” No concrete reason given. Just “we object!” What purpose does that serve?

Bush admitted mistakes had been made and accepted full responsibility in his speech. What more do they want? Will anything short of impeachment satisfy those on the Left and their militant base who are in the final stages of Bush Derangement Syndrome?

I’m sorry. I just don’t get it. Sure, I’m dissatisfied with the slow progress in Iraq but if something isn’t working you adjust and try something different. That is what I heard the President proposing. I’ve cruised the blogosphere in the last few hours and tried to get a feel for the general reaction. Most reasonable people seem to think this is Bush’s last chance and he knows it - therefore they are willing to give it time and see what happens.

On the other hand, supporters of the Democrats, almost to a man, have dug in their heels and are talking about “Bush is just trying to protect his legacy” or “Bush only wants more time to allow his cronies in the oil business to make more profit” or “Bush is a failure, always has been, always will be” or “Bush sucks”, with the latter being most prevalent. That’s the part I just don’t get.

It’s almost like the “insurgents” in Iraq and the BDS sufferers here in America are only two sides of the same coin. Hating just to be hating with no real goal in mind but causing strife and dissension. Obsession, taken to its ultimate conclusion seems to be the order of the day. That’s not healthy ... in fact it’s not even rational.

Anyway, that’s my take on all this. What’s on your mind? How do you react to the President’s speech? The full text is here below the fold if you want to read it in its entirety. Speak out, America ...

Ex post Facto:

   Monday - January 08, 2007

And Justice For All

Just in case you thought the Iraqi courts were only concerned with Saddam Hussein (who is now food for worms), here is a short list of the other things that court has been up to. Notice the out-of-country “insurgents” in the list? They’re coming from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and other Middle East countries and either going to the hangman’s noose or to prison for life.

The bad news is these 1,569 individuals who have been brought to justice in the last two years are just the ones who survived long enough to get into court. Allah only knows how many others were “shot while trying to escape or resisting arrest”.

Expect the body count of dead insurgents to dramatically rise as Iraqi forces take over more and more of the policing duties. The Iraqis don’t seem to care much about treating prisoners gently - or even taking them prisoner in the first place. That’s the good news ...

CCCI Convicts 48 Insurgents
Three sentenced to death, eight sentenced to life
_{BAGHDAD, Iraq (CENTCOM) - Jan. 03, 2007}

The Central Criminal Court of Iraq convicted 48 security detainees from December 8 to 28, for various crimes including murder, kidnapping, illegal possession of special category weapons, violation of the terrorist laws, failure to renew resident identification, possessing and using a fake ID, use or attempted use of explosives, and illegal border crossing.

The trial court found a Syrian man and a Saudi Arabian man guilty of violating Article 4/1 of the Terrorist Law.  The defendants were captured June 19 in a targeted raid on Al-Qaeda members.  The defendants were found guarding a house containing a hostage and both admitted that they were responsible for guarding the hostage.  On Dec. 26 the trial panel considered all the evidence and sentenced the men to death.

The trial court found a Sudanese man guilty of violating Article 4/1 of the Terrorist Law.  Iraqi Army Soldiers apprehended the defendant July 7, during a random bus stop.  The defendant is a media leader for Al-Qaeda and produced videos and flyers for the organization.  The defendant confessed to being a member of Al-Qaeda multiple times to both Iraqi and Multi-National Forces.  On Dec. 12 the trial panel considered all the evidence and sentenced him to death. 

The trial court found two Iraqi men guilty of kidnapping in violation of Article 421 of the Iraqi Penal Code. MNF apprehended the defendants Aug. 30, after spotting them randomly stopping vehicles outside of Kirkuk. The defendants were armed with AK-47s and stopped a minivan full of people.  The two defendants and two other men force the people from the vehicle and starting beating one individual.  They then forced this individual into the trunk of a BMW and drove away.  As MNF followed the BMW two men with the defendants exited the vehicle and ran away.  The defendants then surrendered and MNF were able to free the hostage.  On Dec. 13 the trial panel considered all the evidence and sentenced both men to life imprisonment.

The trial court found an Iraqi man guilty of illegal possession of special category weapons in violation of Order 3/2003. MNF captured the defendant Sept. 27, while conducting a raid on his residence.  A search of the residence revealed two large weapons caches consisting of RPG rounds, RPG launchers, mortar tubes, hand grenades, AK-47s, and thousands of rounds of ammunition, as well as execution hoods.  The weapons caches were found hidden on the roof and basement of the defendant’s home.  On Dec. 13 the trial panel considered all the evidence and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

The trial court found two Iraqi men guilty of violating Article 4/1 of the Terrorist Law.  MNF captured the defendants in their home in Ramadi Sept. 24 after following wires leading from an IED in the road to the defendant’s home.  On Dec. 14 the trial panel considered all the evidence and sentenced the men to life imprisonment. 

The trial court found three Iraqi men guilty of use or attempted use of explosives, in violation of Article 345 of the Iraqi Penal Code.  MNF captured the defendants Aug. 25 after spotting a vehicle driving away from an IED site near Rutba in Al Anbar Province.  Upon stopping the vehicle MNF discovered seven 115mm High Explosive Rounds – the same type used to make the discovered IED.  On Dec. 19 the trial panel considered all the evidence and sentenced the men to life imprisonment. 

The trial court found an Iraqi man guilty of murder and illegal possession of special category weapons in violations of Article 405 of the Iraqi Penal Code and Order 3/2003.  MNF captured the defendant Sept. 30, after a spotting him and another man placing an IED.  After a chase through the desert the defendant and another man exited his vehicle and took up a defensive position and fired upon MNF vehicles killing the driver of one MNF vehicle.  The other insurgent placed his hands on his head in order to surrender to MNF.  When MNF exited their vehicles to apprehend the surrendering man, he and the defendant fired upon MNF, killing another Soldier.  Further fire killed the defendant’s companion.  The defendant then surrendered.  Two grenades were found in his possession.  On Dec. 17 the trial panel considered all the evidence and sentenced him to two fifteen year sentences, for a total of thirty years imprisonment. 

Those convicted of illegal possession of special category weapons, failure to renew resident identification, possessing and using a fake ID, and illegal border crossing, were sentenced from between two years to 30 years imprisonment.  Those convicted included 28 Iraqis three from Saudi Arabia, two from Yemen and one each from Jordan, Syria and Sudan.

Since its reorganization, under an amendment to CPA order 13, in April 2004, the Central Criminal Court has held 1,809 trials for Coalition-apprehended insurgents.  The proceedings have resulted in the conviction of 1,569 individuals with sentences ranging up to death.

The Week Ahead

You might as well get prepared for the week ahead. The war is about to begin in Washington. President Bush is scheduled to address the nation mid-week regarding the war in Iraq and his plans for adjusting our military presence. Unfortunately, the Democrats in Congress are already preparing to take control of the military and make a mess of the whole thing.

Pelosi and the Angry Donks are preparing to grill every administration official they can find. They are promising not to suddenly cut funding of the military but I’ll believe that when I see it. There are already grumblings from several of the Democrats’ more strident, Leftist idiots about forcing a vote to cut funding.

Nancy Pelosi’s “Grande Planne” to pass a slew of legislation for minimum wage increases, prescription drug reforms and other “nanny-state” issues is probably going to get sidetracked while she and her pals try to legislate the conduct of war. It looks like all we’ll hear the next week is - Iraq. Strap on your helmet, gang. The confrontation between Congress and the President is about to begin, whether the President wants it or not.

Not wanting to let anyone accuse them of missing a chance to bash Bush, NY TIME’s editorialist Paul Krugman launches a pre-emptive strike in today’s editorial entitled ”Quagmire Of The Vanities” (requires subscription). Here is an excerpt ....

Democrats Revise Agenda To Deal With War in Iraq
With Bush to Announce New Plan, Domestic Policy No Longer Primary Focus
_{(WASHINGTON POST) - Monday, January 8, 2007}

Democratic leaders who had hoped to emphasize their domestic agenda in the opening weeks of Congress have concluded that Iraq will share top billing, and they plan on aggressively confronting administration officials this week in a series of hearings.

Pushed by House members who want a quick, tough response to the Iraq strategy President Bush is expected to announce this week, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has backed off from her initial assertion that nothing should detract attention from the legislation she hopes to pass in the first 100 hours of House debate.

Late last week, she summoned the chairmen of the Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, intelligence, Homeland Security, and Oversight and Government Reform committees to plot a series of hearings. On Thursday, Democrats will call Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to appear before the House Foreign Affairs Committee to defend the war-strategy shift Bush will outline in a nationally televised speech.

A House Armed Services Committee hearing with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, planned for Jan. 19 was abruptly moved to this Thursday after consultations with Pelosi. And leadership aides went to work on a response to Bush’s speech that they hope will be delivered on national television after the president’s appearance.

In the Senate, the Foreign Relations Committee will hold hearings Wednesday on the current situation in Iraq, then grill Rice on the president’s plan Thursday. Pace and Gates will go before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Friday. “Iraq is the elephant in the room,” said Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.), a member of the House Armed Services Committee and a close ally of Pelosi’s.

Democrats had hoped that the headlines and evening news would be dominated by votes in Congress to bolster homeland security, raise the minimum wage, fund stem cell research and grant the federal government authority to negotiate lower drug prices for Medicare. Each of those measures will be taken up on sequential days this week, a bill-a-day approach designed to capture headlines and show the nation that Democrats can get things done.

But with Bush’s long-awaited policy address tentatively set for midweek, those much-touted bills are not likely to lead the news, and the Democratic leaders have been forced to change their tactics.

“The challenge for them is this: Iraq is the central issue. It’s an enormous problem for the president and the Republicans, but it has the suffocating effect of taking attention away from the Democrats’ domestic legislative priorities, and I think they understand that,” said Joe Lockhart, a White House press secretary in the Clinton administration.

To some Democrats, the House leaders’ response to the burgeoning war debate has been too slow and too cautious. A CBS News poll released Thursday found that 45 percent of voters want the Democratic Congress to focus on Iraq, a figure that far outstripped the percentages for the economy and jobs, at 7 percent; health care, at 7 percent; and immigration, at 6 percent. “Americans couldn’t be clearer,” the poll report concluded.

- More ...

   Thursday - January 04, 2007

Saint Saddam?

In America if you want to keep up with the deranged writings of the Liberal press you need look no further than the Washington Post or the New York Times. Our friends in Britain have a similar pair of pathetic press outlets. They are The Guardian and The Independent, with the latter being the worst of the two.

The following editorial is hitting the streets today in London and elsewhere across Ol’ Blighty. Many of our Brit friends will read it. Most of them will use the paper to wrap their fish in. The smart ones will not want to taint the fish with such a foul odor ...

_{Eric Allie - Chicago}

Saddam: From Monster To Martyr?
How Bush and Blair’s choices have led to disaster in Iraq,
culminating in a chaotic execution that is fuelling civil war
-- By Patrick Cockburn
_{(THE INDEPENDENT - UK) - 04 January 2007}

It takes real genius to create a martyr out of Saddam Hussein. Here is a man dyed deep with the blood of his own people who refused to fight for him during the United States-led invasion three-and-a-half years ago. His tomb in his home village of Awja is already becoming a place of pilgrimage for the five million Sunni Arabs of Iraq who are at the core of the uprising.

During his trial, Saddam himself was clearly trying to position himself to be a martyr in the cause of Iraqi independence and unity and Arab nationalism. His manifest failure to do anything effective for these causes during the quarter of a century he misruled Iraq should have made his task difficult. But an execution which vied in barbarity with a sectarian lynching in the backstreets of Belfast 30 years ago is elevating him to heroic status in the eyes of the Sunni - the community to which most Arabs belong - across the Middle East.

The old nostrum of Winston Churchill that “grass may grow on the battlefield but never under the gallows” is likely to prove as true in Iraq as it has done so frequently in the rest of the world. Nor is the US likely to be successful in claiming that the execution was purely an Iraqi affair.

Many Iraqis recall that the announcement of the verdict on Saddam sentencing him to death was conveniently switched last year to 5 November, the last daily news cycle before the US mid-term elections. The US largely orchestrated the trial from behind the scenes. Yesterday the Iraqi government arrested an official who supervised the execution for making the mobile-phone video that has stirred so much controversy.

The Iraqi Shia and Kurds are overwhelmingly delighted that Saddam is in his grave. But the timing of his death at the start of the Eid al-Adha feast makes his killing appear like a deliberate affront to the Sunni community. The execution of his half-brother Barzan in the next few days will confirm it in its sense that it is the target of an assault by the majority Shia.

Why was the Iraqi government of Nouri al-Maliki so keen to kill Saddam Hussein? First, there is the entirely understandable desire for revenge. Members of the old opposition to Saddam Hussein are often blamed for their past ineffectiveness but most lost family members to his torture chambers and execution squads. Every family in Iraq lost a member to his disastrous wars or his savage repressions.

There is also a fear among Shia leaders that the US might suddenly change sides. This is not as outlandish as it might at first appear. The US has been cultivating the Sunni in Iraq for the past 18 months. It has sought talks with the insurgents. It has tried to reverse the de-Baathification campaign. US commentators and politicians blithely talk about eliminating the anti-American Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and fighting his militia, the Mehdi Army. No wonder Shias feel that it is better to get Saddam under the ground just as quickly as possible. Americans may have forgotten that they were once allied to him but Iraqis have not.

When Saddam fell Iraqis expected life to get better. They hoped to live like Saudis and Kuwaitis. They knew he had ruined his country by hot and cold wars. When he came to power as president in 1979, Iraq had large oil revenues, vast oil reserves, a well-educated people and a competent administration. By invading Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990, he reduced his nation to poverty. This was made worse by the economic siege imposed by 13 years of UN sanctions.

- More (if you can stomach it) ...

   Sunday - December 31, 2006

Final Resting Place

---

---

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner

GNU Terry Pratchett

Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.

---

Sponsor's Links

---

Newsfeeds

 RSS 2.0   Atom 

---

Other ways to BMEWS yourself

Most Recent Posts

• Once Again, The One And Only Post
• Gee, Oops
• The ‘Rona Song
• Follow Me !
• eye candy, high plains edition
• Flowers For Algernon?
• The Death Of NYC?
• Very Funny Officer
• Rhubarb !!!
• Fauci Gets One Right
• toldja so
• Of course she isn’t, but you’re uninformed and intellectually lazy so she’ll get away with it
• Walter White Moved To Holland?
• TLH? Typical Leftist Hypocrites
• Biden Picks Kamala Harris For VP
• Feral Child Killers
• Gohmert (R-TX) Much Improved
• Still Here
• A Dark Ending
• Ospreys are up, is Trump in town?

Humor

---

Donations & Stuff

Buy BMEWS High Quality Stuff!

---

Help Support BMEWS

---

PAYPAL donation button

---

Our Sponsors

Your Ad Here

---

Department Of Information

DAILY READS

• Broderland Beat
  
• Hot Air
  
• Gateway Pundit
  
• Michelle Malkin
  
• Right Wing NEws
  

CONSERVATIVE OPINION

• Neal Boortz
  
• Ann Coulter
  
• Hugh Hewitt
  
• Rush Limbaugh
  

NEWS

• Washington Times
  
• Best Of The Web Today
  
• Media Research Center
  
• Newsmax
  
• Townhall
  
• Weekly Standard
  
• WorldNetDaily
  

MILITARY & IRAQ

• US Central Command
  
• US Army
  
• US Air Force
  
• US Navy
  
• US Marine Corps
  
• US Coast Guard
  
• A Soldiers Blog
  
• Citizen Smash
  
• CPT Patti
  
• Front Line Voices
  
• Iraq 2.0
  
• Iraq The Model
  
• Sgt. Stryker
  

GOVERNMENT

• White House News
  
• White House Press
  
• Dept Of Defense
  
• Dept Of State
  
• Dept Of Homeland Security
  
• National Security Council
  
• CIA
  
• FBI
  
• NASA
  
• US Supreme Court
  
• US House
  
• US Senate
  
• US House Votes
  
• US Senate Votes
  
• RNC News
  
• DNC News
  
• On The Floor
  
• US Government Reference
  
• State Governments
  
• America's Job Bank
  

LINKS

• Inside Louisville

Search For It!

Web BMEWS

This Blog Is Rated

Required Reading

• FAQ For Barking Moonbats
• What Is A Moonbat?
• Why Do Moonbats Bark?
• Our Patron Saint

Acknowledgements

Categories

• Abortion - (17)
• Adventure - (22)
• Advertising - (0)
• Advertising - (9)
• Africa - (102)
• Amazing Science and Discoveries - (121)
• Animals - (249)
  • Cat Blogging - (14)
• Archeology / Anthropology - (83)
• Architecture - (41)
• Art-Photography - (339)
• Awards - (77)
• Battling Brits - (23)
• Big Brother - (53)
• Big Business - (53)
• BIRTHDAY - (7)
• Blog Stuff - (270)
• Border Security - (27)
• Bowling Blogging - (187)
• Bread - (19)
• Bridges - (50)
• Canada - (14)
• Celebrities - (125)
• CHESS - (67)
• CHINA in the news - (45)
• Climate-Weather - (442)
• Colleges-Professors - (70)
• Commies - (212)
• Computers and Cyberspace - (80)
• Crime - (1093)
• CULTURE IN DECLINE - (416)
• Daily Life - (730)
• Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists - (1830)
• Passing on, Death and Disaster - (18)
• Disasters - (7)
• Economics - (362)
• DIVERSITY BS - (119)
• Editorials - (318)
• Education - (342)
• Egypt, Then and Now - (0)
• Environment - (209)
• EUro-peons - (310)
• Eye-Candy - (903)
• Fake News - (1)
• Finance and Investing - (36)
• Family - (38)
• Fine-Dining - (168)
• Food - (15)
• FRANCE - (116)
• Fun-Stuff - (838)
• FREEDOM - (121)
• gardening - (1)
• Gardens and plants - (3)
• Gay Gay Gay! - (56)
• Genocide - (12)
• Government - (395)
• Corruption and Greed - (144)
• Guns and Gun Control - (528)
• Health and Safety - (67)
• Health-Medicine - (320)
• Heroes - (72)
• High Tech - (33)
• Hildabeast - (77)
• History - (345)
• Holidays - (63)
  • Christmas - (15)
• Hollywood - (184)
• Homeland-Security - (41)
• Humor - (1876)
• Illegal-Aliens and Immigration - (502)
• Inflation and High Prices - (16)
• Insanity - (252)
• International - (396)
• Iran - (62)
• Iraq - (175)
• Israel - (81)
• Jack Booted Thugs - (124)
• Judges-Courts-Lawyers - (480)
• Justice - LACK OF - (123)
• Latin-America - (19)
• Literature - (32)
• Love-Marriage - (27)
• Media-Bias - (428)
• Medical - (48)
• Mexico - (11)
• Middle-East - (140)
• Military - (596)
• Miscellaneous - (2383)
• Moonbat Award to: - (15)
• Motorvators - (122)
• MOVIES - (29)
• Music - (117)
• muslims - (364)
• Nanny State - (149)
• Nature - (34)
• New Jersey - (3)
• Neat Inventions - (15)
• News-Briefs - (335)
• No Shit, Sherlock - (47)
• North-Korea - (20)
• NOSTALGIA - (10)
• Obama, The One - (431)
• OBITITUARIES - (48)
• Odd-Strange - (244)
• Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices - (126)
• Oppression - (34)
• Outrageous - (453)
• Outsourcing - (8)
• OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT - (39)
• pandemic and epidemic diseases - (61)
  • The New Normal - (4)
• Pandemic Pandemonium - (63)
• Paleswine - (74)
• PAT CONDELL - (43)
• Patriotism - (151)
• Personal - (436)
• Philosophy - (70)
• Pirates, aarrgh! - (158)
• planes, trains, tanks, ships, machines, automobiles - (179)
• Politically Correct B.S. - (147)
• Politically-Incorrect - (117)
• Politics - (860)
• Porkbusters - (11)
• Product Safety - (5)
• Racism and race relations - (283)
• REALLY WORTHLESS and PUTRID PEOPLE - (145)
• Religion - (187)
• Republicans - (132)
• RoPMA - (684)
• Russia - (5)
• Sarah Palin - (16)
• Satire - (64)
• Scary Stuff - (76)
• Science-Technology - (257)
• Self-Defense - (35)
• Sex - (106)
• Sharia law - (10)
• Social-Security - (41)
• Space - (41)
• SPOOKS - (9)
• Sports - (170)
• STFU - (0)
• Stoopid-People - (1015)
• Success Stories - (7)
• Super Seniors - (0)
• Talented Ppl. - (22)
• Taxes - (66)
• Television - (55)
• Terrorists - (715)
• The New Conservatives - (45)
• Travelers/Gypsies/Squatters - (130)
• TURD WORLD - (27)
• Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind - (36)
• Tyrants and Dictators - (94)
• UK - (1715)
• Unions-Labor - (54)
• United-Nations - (136)
• USA - (277)
• War On Terror - (365)
• War-Stories - (218)
• weird stuff - (37)
• work and the workplace - (143)

Monthly Archives

• May 2024
• August 2020
• July 2020
• June 2020
• May 2020
• April 2020
• March 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• August 2016
• July 2016
• June 2016
• May 2016
• April 2016
• March 2016
• February 2016
• January 2016
• December 2015
• November 2015
• October 2015
• September 2015
• August 2015
• July 2015
• June 2015
• May 2015
• April 2015
• March 2015
• February 2015
• January 2015
• December 2014
• November 2014
• October 2014
• September 2014
• August 2014
• July 2014
• June 2014
• May 2014
• April 2014
• March 2014
• February 2014
• January 2014
• December 2013
• November 2013
• October 2013
• September 2013
• August 2013
• July 2013
• June 2013
• May 2013
• April 2013
• March 2013
• February 2013
• January 2013
• December 2012
• November 2012
• October 2012
• September 2012
• August 2012
• July 2012
• June 2012
• May 2012
• April 2012
• March 2012
• February 2012
• January 2012
• December 2011
• November 2011
• October 2011
• September 2011
• August 2011
• July 2011
• June 2011
• May 2011
• April 2011
• March 2011
• February 2011
• January 2011
• December 2010
• November 2010
• October 2010
• September 2010
• August 2010
• July 2010
• June 2010
• May 2010
• April 2010
• March 2010
• February 2010
• January 2010
• December 2009
• November 2009
• October 2009
• September 2009
• August 2009
• July 2009
• June 2009
• May 2009
• April 2009
• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• December 2007
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005
• May 2005
• April 2005
• March 2005
• February 2005
• January 2005
• December 2004
• November 2004
• October 2004
• September 2004
• August 2004
• July 2004
• June 2004
• January 2004
• Complete Archives
• Category Archives

The Stat Monster

---

---

---

Copyright

All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

You may freely use anything for non-commercial purposes as long as you attribute the source. All non-original content must be attributed to the original source. Play fair.

Fair Use

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner or may be authorized or licensed for publication at this site only. Permission to copy, republish or reproduce such material must be obtained from the original copyright owner.

We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc.

We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

GNU Terry Pratchett