Loading ...
6/24/2008
Touching History: A Summer Must Read
Going off the recommendation of Pinch over at Blackfive I decided to pick up the book Touching History by Lynn Spencer. It’s about the countless untold stories of heroism performed by pilots and air traffic controllers on 9-11. Stories like that of Billy Hutchison, a pilot for the DCANG (DC Air National Guard) who was ordered to — if necessary — take out flight 93 with his own un-armed F-16. He accepted the order, and proceeded towards Pennsylvania to intercept United flight 93 knowing that he might end up sacrificing his own life to save the lives of people on the ground. Of course, as we all know now, the passengers of flight 93 took matters into their own hands and attempted to retake the cockpit and defeat the hijackers. They succeeded, giving America it’s first victory in the war against Islamofacism. Touching history is also about the amazing on the fly adaptation of rules and procedures that had to be made on that day as well.
One thing that has struck me while reading this book though, is how much the book seems like a work of fiction. Even after living through the events of that day, and witnessing it all unfold in front of me on TV and on the radio it all still seems so unreal. I wonder if that’s how Pearl Harbor felt to those that experienced it looking back on the event seven years later.
Tags: 9-11, GWOT, Military
Project Letters From Home 2.0 Update
Well, we seem to be stuck at 70 letters. Thank you, everyone that has sent a letter so far. I can’t tell you how much I appreciate it. The sailors on board the Russell appreciate it as well. I’m still hoping for 250 letters, so we’ve got a long way to go yet. Any help you all can give in terms of getting the word out would be greatly appreciated. In the mean time, if you haven’t yet sent in a letter — or if you haven’t heard about the project — I’m collecting letters of support for the men and women serving on board the U.S.S. Russell. Once I’ve collected 250 letters (there are 250 serving on board the Russell) I will print them out and send them via US mail. Please send the letters to letters@thinking-right.com.
I’m also working with Severe Studios to collect donations for the Little Sioux Boy Scout camp that was devastated by the tornado last week. If you’d like to make a donation to help out there, it can be made via paypal.
Tags: GWOT, Military, Navy6/22/2008
Never Too Soon To Play The Race Card
I thought Barack was going to be the candidate that wanted to get elected based on his policy ideas rather than his race. He signified “hope” and “change”. But, in yet another example of how Barack represents nothing more than identity politics as usual he made a statement during a speech that tries to portray the Republican party — and anyone else that would oppose him — as nothing more than racist fearmongers.
“We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run. They’re going to try to make you afraid.
“They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?”
No one I associate with cares about the fact that Barack is black. What we do care about is that — by his own admission — he intends to negotiate with the world’s worst regimes without precondition. He is woefully inexperienced. He intends to withdrawal from Iraq snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and in doing so destroy the hard won gains made by our troops. He has had a long time association with a radical racist preacher that preaches hatred and divisiveness from the pulpit. He’s had a long time association with an admitted terrorist, and We still don’t know how deep his ties run with convicted felon Tony Rezco.
That’s what we care about. I resent (and I think many other Americans will too) the implication that because we disagree with him over vital policy issues, and don’t think that he would be a good President, we are racists. If that’s the way this game is going to be played, then this will be a long election season indeed, and America will be much worse for it.
Tags: Democrats, Election, Obama, Politics6/9/2008
How Many More Reports Do We Need That Say The Same Thing?
Fred Hiatt has penned an excellent column in yesterday’s WaPo that summarizes the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s Phase II report on Iraq intel. To make a long story short; surprise surprise… President Bush didn’t lie when he spoke about Iraqi WMD’s.
…But dive into Rockefeller’s report, in search of where exactly President Bush lied about what his intelligence agencies were telling him about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and you may be surprised by what you find.
On Iraq’s nuclear weapons program? The president’s statements “were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates.”
On biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories? The president’s statements “were substantiated by intelligence information.”
On chemical weapons, then? “Substantiated by intelligence information.”
On weapons of mass destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)? “Generally substantiated by intelligence information.” Delivery vehicles such as ballistic missiles? “Generally substantiated by available intelligence.” Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs? “Generally substantiated by intelligence information.”
As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you’ve mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment. So, you think, the smoking gun must appear in the section on Bush’s claims about Saddam Hussein’s alleged ties to terrorism.
But statements regarding Iraq’s support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda “were substantiated by intelligence information.” Statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda “were substantiated by the intelligence assessments,” and statements regarding Iraq’s contacts with al-Qaeda “were substantiated by intelligence information.” The report is left to complain about “implications” and statements that “left the impression” that those contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation…
That didn’t stop committee chairman John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) from mischaracterizing the findings of the report though. Here’s what he had to say about the findings.
“In making the case for war, the administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when it was unsubstantiated, contradicted or even nonexistent,” he said.
This makes no less than three reports that all say the same thing; President Bush did not lie about the case for war. When will the Democrats stop lying about the war and start concentrating on winning it?
By the way, The American Thinker’s Rocco DiPippo has a great article that explains the Democrat’s strategy for the last seven years. These paragraphs sum it up nicely I believe.
Less than a year after the 2000 election was finalized, September 11, 2001 arrived. In the baleful blink of a jihadist’s eye, most of the issues that normally occupy the American polity in peaceful times were swept off the table. Issues that normally help Americans differentiate between the two major politicalparties and define those party’s respective agendas — health care, taxes, the environment, social programs and civil rights — took a far-distant back seat to two far more pressing matters: Exacting justice for the 911 atrocities and protecting the homeland from additional attacks.
Since the American electorate historically views Republicans as being more competent and trustworthy than Democrats in matters of war and security, and since all other issues that Democrats could normally use to make political hay with had been blasted off the table by 911, the Party was facing the threat of irrelevance. There was another factor that did not bode well for the future political fortunes of the Democratic Party in the wake of the 911 attacks: George W. Bush had become an extraordinarily popular president.
Whatever patriotism was stoked within the hearts of Democratic Party leaders by that September Day of Infamy was likely tempered by an unsettling reality: If America stayed united behind George W. Bush and the Republicans during the coming military response to 911, the Democratic Party would be out of power for a long time. [Emphasis added -- Jim C]
As they say; read the whole thing.
Tags: Democrats, GWOT, Iraq, Military, National Security, Politics, President Bush, WMD6/8/2008
It has come to my attention that Rima Barakat — who’s running for the Republican nomination to House District 6 in the Colorado State house — against Joshua Sharf has made an issue of a comment I left on Joshua’s blog View from a Height. I’d like to address a couple of issues that surround the controversy.
First of all, it’s a bit ridiculous to attribute comments left on a blog to that blog’s owner. I leave comments up on Thinking Right all the time that I disagree with. In fact, my comment policy states:
I love getting feedback from my readers, and I enjoy debating the issues with those that disagree with me. However, I will not tolerate foul language or people running down either other commenters or me. I also would appreciate a valid email address so that if necessary we can continue the debate outside of the comment section.
I will not stand for trolls, they will be dealt with swiftly and decisively. I pay for this website out of my own pocket, and just so you know, the first amendment doesn’t protect your right to be offensive or pick a fight on my website.
I believe that’s a pretty fair representation of most blogger’s comment policy, although there’s certainly no one size fits all prescription. Mr. Sharf does not endorse my views. I don’t even know if he holds the same views as I do regarding the Palestinian situation. I’ve – quite frankly – never asked him about it.
As far as my comment, what I intended to say was that typically those that defend the atrocities committed by groups like Hamas (atrocities committed against Israelis as well as their own people by the way) run away from the debate when confronted with the facts. Ms. Barakat seems to fit the mold. To my knowledge, rather than address the issues brought up in Joshua’s post, she has brought out her defenders to help her in her efforts to play the victim.
As a matter of fact, rather than address the issues raised by Joshua, she accuses the State Republican party of declaring war on everything Muslim, everything Arab, and everything immigrant.
Here’s a quote from the article linked above that’s along those same lines.
“What surprises me is the condoning of these types of attacks by some party members and officers who have done nothing to stop them,” she said.
Might I suggest that Ms Barakat grow a thicker skin, and start addressing the issues raised by her critics? Or would I be accused declaring war on everything Muslim if I suggested that?
Either way, Ms Barakat’s handling of this situation says far more about her than Mr. Sharf, or I.
Tags: Colorado Politics, Rima Barakat6/2/2008
The Disgusting “Father” Pfleger
More video tape has surfaced of “Father” Pfleger’s “sermon” from last Sunday. In it, he says that America is the greatest sin against God. Pfleger bases this claim in the fact that racism is still America’s greatest addiction. How this man can say that in the face of all the evidence to the contrary (a black Secretary of State, a black man on the verge of clinching the nomination of the Democratic party, high levels of black home ownership, unprecedented levels of success for all Americans) speaks volumes about how his race baiting antics are a practiced schtick based more in audience reaction than reality.
American Thinker blogger James Lewis calls for the Catholic Chruch to do something about the Excreble Pfleger, and points out Pfleger’s long time ties to Obama, Louis Farrakahn, Wright, and Marxist front group ACORN.
The Catholic Church has a responsibility in this matter. It has bent over backwards to protect the privacy of ordained priests who have been engaged in regular sexual abuse of children. I have not seen evidence that child abuse occurs more often among priests than in the general population. I understand the Church has its own ways of dealing with errant priests. Nevertheless, the public seems to have the accurate impression that the Church is tainted with the worst public behavior in centuries. This has done immense damage to its reputation among Catholics and the general public all around the world. The response of the Church is widely considered to be grossly inadequate, even by faithful Catholics.
Father Pfleger brings public scandal to the Church. He clearly and obviously, on videotape,preaches racial hatred. He does so with plenty of prior rehearsal and maybe coaching, in order to sound just like race-baiting ole’ Reverend Wright, who has apparently been conducting a school for race baiters over at Trinity United. The Democrat Party of Chicago, Louis Farrakhan, the whole den of thieves of the Illinois Democrat Machine has obviously known about this for decades. The radical Left and ACORN (Obama’s “community organizing” radicals) must have known all about it. The Obamas were up to their necks in guilty knowledge. The Clintons knew. Everybody knew.
By the way, how many of you knew that as an Illinois State Senator Obama directed over $200,000 in earmarks to Pfleger’s church?
Tags: Election 08, Obama, Pfleger, Politics6/1/2008
Things have truly passed the tipping point when the defeatists in the MSM can no longer ignore the good new coming out of Iraq. In the WaPo’s editorial board has finally taken notice.
THERE’S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks — which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington’s attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have “never been closer to defeat than they are now.”
Iraq passed a turning point last fall when the U.S. counterinsurgency campaign launched in early 2007 produced a dramatic drop in violence and quelled the incipient sectarian war between Sunnis and Shiites. Now, another tipping point may be near, one that sees the Iraqi government and army restoring order in almost all of the country, dispersing both rival militias and the Iranian-trained “special groups” that have used them as cover to wage war against Americans. It is — of course — too early to celebrate; though now in disarray, the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr could still regroup, and Iran will almost certainly seek to stir up new violence before the U.S. and Iraqi elections this fall. Still, the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments — and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the “this-war-is-lost” caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
This indeed presents a major problem for Barack Obama. He and his enablers in the MSM are so heavily invested in defeat in Iraq that they have nowhere else to turn. It will be interesting to ee how they try to spin their way out of this one.
Tags: GWOT, Iraq, Media, Military, Politics