Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Indiana fleebagger Democrat: Me skipping town is akin to a soldier being deployed to Afghanistan

Downright friggin’ shameful.

Just so I’m understanding this here: a cowardly politician who flees the state to keep from doing his taxpayer-funded job is just like a brave soldier being shipped off to a war zone where he/she may not return home alive.  Got it.  Thanks for the clarification, you douchebag.

Advertisements

April 1, 2011 Posted by | Afghanistan, moonbats, shameful | 3 Comments

MA AG (and dem Senate candidate) goes after REAL threats…little old ladies of the Garden Club!

The woman who said there are no terrorists in Afghanistan has apparently found where the terrorists really are.  Details:

Attorney General Martha Coakley’s crackdown on Bay State gardening clubs for failing to file financial disclosure forms has left some green thumbs fearing arrest – and many sore at the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate.

Linda Jean Smith, president of the Garden Club Federation of Massachusetts, has been besieged with calls from frightened, angry members after a prickly Jan. 4 letter from Coakley’s office declared many of them were breaking the law for failing to file their financial records for the past four years.

“One club president asked me if she was going to be led away in handcuffs,” said Smith, adding that many members are in nursing homes or in Florida. “These ladies are confused.”

Way to aim for the little old ladies demographic, Martha.

Coakley supports a pullout of Afghanistan, and now we see why: Having a presence in Afghanistan only diverts us from the real threat here at home.

Exit question: If she gets elected to the Senate, should I notify her or DHS about my neighbor who grows magnolias in his back yard?  He kind of creeps me out, you know.

January 13, 2010 Posted by | Afghanistan, Massachusetts, moonbats | Leave a comment

Quote of the day, “What Obama thinks of the troops” edition

B.O. decided to pay our finest a visit in Afghanistan.  Why?  For a supremely important reason:

“You guys make a pretty good photo op,” the president said.

And there you have it…

November 19, 2009 Posted by | Afghanistan, Obama, quote of the day, shameful | 3 Comments

Obama: You know, the Taliban isn’t so bad and might even be partners in Afghanistan

Remember how B.O. talked tough during the campaign about the need to win in Afghanistan?  As with all of his other promises, this one had an expiration date.

What’s worse than lying?  How about not knowing who our enemies are in a shameless attempt to demoralize our troops and lose the war that left swore must be won?  Details:

Bowing to the reality that the Taliban is too ingrained in Afghanistan’s culture to be entirely defeated, the administration is prepared, as it has been for some time, to accept some Taliban role in parts of Afghanistan, the official said. That could mean paving the way for Taliban members willing to renounce violence to participate in a central government — though there has been little receptiveness to this among the Taliban. It might even mean ceding some regions of the country to the Taliban

Obama kept returning to one question for his advisers: Who is our adversary, the official said.

Hint: the adversary is not George Bush!

For those of you who voted for Chairman Zero: Congrats on saddling this country with a vaginal orifice for a commander-in-chief.  I just hate that you had to jeopardize the rest of us normal Americans with you.

October 8, 2009 Posted by | Afghanistan, Obama, shameful | 2 Comments

The left finally admits it: OK, we DON’T support the war in Afghanistan

Remember how, for the last 5+ years, the left told us that we should pay more attention to Afghanistan and less to Iraq?  You know, how the war in Afghanistan was much more important than the one in Iraq?  You know, how you couldn’t support the war in Iraq if you didn’t enlist in the military, all while they were allegedly supporting the war in Afghanistan…without enlisting in the military?

To quote the great Vincent Gambini from My Cousin Vinny: “Everything that guy just said was bull$h!t.  Thank you.”  Details:

Escalation is a bad idea. The Democrats backed themselves into defending the idea of Afghanistan being The Good War because they felt they needed to prove their macho bonafides they called for withdrawal from Iraq. Nobody asked too many questions sat the time, including me. But none of us should forget that it was a political strategy, not a serious foreign policy.

There have been many campaign promises “adjusted” since the election. There is no reason that the administration should feel any more bound to what they said about this than all the other committments [sic] it has blithely turned aside in the interest of “pragmatism.”

Refreshingly honest, no?  A leftist admits that the left doesn’t really like or support the military, but considering the public as a whole adores the military, then said leftist knows that his side must pretend to love and support the military, too.

As I was crafting my retort, I read Ace’s take and decided to quote him instead, since his take is much more eloquently stated that my own:

You claimed to support a war in which American soldiers were fighting and dying, leaving friends and limbs on the battlefield, as a cynical political strategy?

You… um… voiced support of a real serious-as-death war to cadge votes out of a duped public?

We won’t forget, champ. And we won’t let you forget, either.

Again we see a leftist projecting his pathological darkness on to others. They accused Bush of fighting wars for this very reason. And now, when it’s safe to say so (they think), they concede: We supported a war for the reason we accused Bush of doing so for 8 years.

If you voted for B.O. in part because you honestly thought he was more commited to Afghanistan (which, before now, was the left’s “war that must be won”), I’ve got some swampland I’d like to sell you.

September 23, 2009 Posted by | Afghanistan, shameful | 4 Comments

Islamic weirdbeard kidnappers die from botched angioplasty surgery and Navy SEALs, but mostly by Navy SEALs

Heh.  Say hello to your 72 virgins grapes for me, will ya?

November 10, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, religion of peace | Leave a comment

Sick BBC newsbabe laments lack of glowing Taliban coverage

Only from the openly liberal Beeb (or possibly al-Reuters and/or Al Jazeera)!  Details:

A BBC news girl attacked TV yesterday for failing to show viewers the Taliban’s “humanity”.

Presenter Lyse Doucet’s astonishing statement comes as an Apache gunship hero revealed the fanatics aim to capture a British soldier and SKIN HIM LIVE on the internet.

Military Cross winner Ed Macy — whose book Apache is serialised in The Sun from today — tells how an intelligence officer gave details of the Taliban butchers’ sick plan.

It made Army Air Corps Warrant Officer Macy and his comrades even more determined to rescue a mortally wounded Marine from a Taliban stronghold — which they did with four soldiers strapped to the outside of two Apaches.

But BBC World News correspondent Doucet claimed the public also want to seeing the kinder side of the Afghan extremists.

Asked what was missing in media coverage, she said: “It may sound odd but the humanity of the Taliban, because they are a wide, very diverse group of people.”

Canadian-born Doucet, 49, told the Edinburgh TV festival: “Some would like to talk to the British Government. Some of them don’t want to be fighting British troops. Some of them would. This is the ideological Taliban.”

Doucet, with the BBC since 1983, also criticised the reporting of Prince Harry’s Army service in Afghanistan.

She said: “You knew the bombs were dropping and the guns were pointing in that direction but you never got a sense of how Afghans are as a people.” …

Unfriggingbelievable!

August 25, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, Beeb, dhimmitude, media bias, religion of peace, shameful | 4 Comments

Obama uses reviled Blackwater for his security detail

Funny that the Obamaliar has railed against the “evil” Blackwater…yet he used them for his own security detail in Afghanistan!  From US News:

Sen. Barack Obama has not been a fan of private police like Blackwater in war zones, and some news outlets even reported that they were spurned for his trip last week to Afghanistan and Iraq. But Whispers confirms that Blackwater did handle the Democratic presidential candidate’s security in Afghanistan and helped out in Iraq. What’s more, Obama was overheard saying: “Blackwater is getting a bad rap.” Since everything appeared to go swimmingly, maybe he will take firms like Blackwater out of his sights, the company’s supporters hope.

Must not have been “the Blackwater I knew”!

July 28, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, hypocrisy, Obama | 2 Comments

The left’s anti-war hypocrites

Excellent analysis by Ralph Peters that nails the moonbats for their blatant hypocrisy on the war on terror.  Read it, please.  Here’s the intro:

AM I the only one who’s noticed the silence? Mere months ago, left-wing bloggers and demonstrators were wailing Support our troops, bring them home! seven days a week.

Now their presidential candidate has announced that he won’t bring all those troops home, but will simply transfer combat forces from Iraq to Afghanistan – expanding that war. (He’s discussed possibly invading Pakistan, too.)

And the left’s quiet as a graveyard at midnight.

Where are the outraged protests from MoveOn or the DailyKos? I thought the extreme left felt sorry for our service members in harm’s way and wanted to reunite them with their families.

What happened?

We all know exactly what happened. The left has nothing against foreign wars (as long as they don’t have to fight in person). They just want to pick our wars themselves.

The problem with Iraq wasn’t that America toppled Saddam Hussein, but that George W. Bush did it. I’ve been saying it for years: Had Bill Clinton done the job, the left would’ve celebrated him as the greatest liberator since Abraham Lincoln. …

Hit the nail on the head with that one, didn’t he?  Think about it: Bosnia was kosher for the left, since the Clenis was the one prosecuting it.  Sure, there were no American interests involved, but by golly, if the Chief Diddler of Portly Interns said it was needed, then that’s all we peasants needed to know!

July 24, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, hypocrisy, Iraq, moonbats, Obama | 6 Comments

Biden: Iraq is “bad guy”-free

This would be a candidate for “Quote of the Day”, but Dean Barnett already beat me to it:

If we had a “Most Offensive Quote of the Day” every day, Joe Biden would probably come to own the prize. But even by the senator’s lofty standards of chronic obtuseness, he outdid himself this afternoon:

“If John (McCain) wants to know where the bad guys live, come back with me to Afghanistan. We know where they reside. And it’s not in Iraq.”

I know Democrats get a certain tingling in their thighs when their politicos talk butch (“talk butch”…I love it! LOL! – Ed.) in such a manner, but this comment is so over the top, somewhere in America Wesley Clark is probably feeling much better about his public relations acumen. What’s more, Biden’s comment turns what ought to be a serious conversation about two vital foreign theatres into a juvenile schoolyard taunt.

I have a suggestion for the senator: Perhaps he could bring his newly benign assessment to our soldiers who are serving in Iraq and the veterans who have served there. It would surely come as a huge relief to our soldiers currently in Iraq that their work has suddenly become “bad guy free.” Perhaps Biden should also bring his crass bad-guy-appraisal to the attention of all of the Iraqis who have stood by us and who, like our soldiers, have given and still are giving so much for that nation’s freedom. …

But hey…Plagiarist Joe “supports the troops”, right?

July 15, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, Biden, Iraq, shameful | Leave a comment

Mosul’s al-Qaeda leader dies from carpal tunnel syndrome and a hailstorm of bullets…but mostly a hailstorm of bullets

Bad news for the left: Another Al Qaeda leader dies.

Worse news for the left: We’re winning the war on terror on every front.

Sorry ’bout that.

June 27, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, defeatism, Iraq, religion of peace | 3 Comments

Quote of the day

This comes from Drew M., regarding the news that the Taliban had taken over a village before dying due to lack of carbon offsets and Afghan/NATO forces…but mostly Afghan and NATO forces:

Also seriously wounded in the fighting was the conventional wisdom that we are losing in Afghanistan and that operations in Iraq are making it easier for the Taliban to regain power.

Heh.

June 20, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, defeatism, quote of the day | 1 Comment

Taliban big cheese killed in infidel air strike

Fourteen Tallywhackers…er, Taliban…died from Oedipus Complex issues and American missiles.  But mostly American missiles.  From a fellow infidel:

A Taliban spokesman says the house of Taliban leader Maulvi Ubaidullah was targeted in a suspected US missile strike; at least 14 dead.

Villager Ibrahim Khan said local Taliban leaders had gathered for a feast at the targeted house, and at least 15 people were killed. 

My muckrakers “invesitgative in-the-field journalists” from the Crush Liberalism Objective World News Service (CLOWNS) were able to make up out of whole cloth transcribe the final festive moments before Ubaid-bom-ba-ba-bom-a-dang-a-dang-dang-a-ding-a-dong-ding-doo-Blue-Moon was dispatched to greet his 72 grapes:

Ubaidallah:  Ibrahim, pass the goat.

Ibrahim:  Here you go.

Ubaidallah: No, not the live goat!  The one on the silver platter at the end of the table!

Ibrahim:  Sorry, man.  I thought you were ready to satisfy your loins.  I thought it odd to do that at the dinner table, but hey…different strokes for different folks.

Ubaidallah:  Anywho, never mind that.  I propose a toast!  To Ahmed, who risked capture by the infidel forces so he could do Allah’s work and blow up that girl’s school across the canyon.  Salut!

Ahmed:  You’re too kind, my friends.  Fortunately, I was able to wash off the blood from those seven-year-olds before the feast tonight.  I got my monthly bath out of the way, too, so there’s that.

Ubaidallah:  Excellent! You always were the clever…(pauses)  Did you guys hear something?

Ahmed:  It may have been my stomach.  I ate a bit too much couscous for lunch, and my gut’s been rumbling ever since.  But worry not, for I still have room for the goat and falafel on the plate in front of…

Ubaidallah:  Shhhhhhh!  I’m serious, brethren!  Don’t you hear something?

Yasser:  OK, fine, I farted!  Geez, you have impeccable hearing.

Ubaidallah:  No, that’s not it! (pauses, looks out the window)  Hey, why are all of the villagers running into their huts?

Mahmoud:  Isn’t “American Infidel” on TV right now?  Man, that Sanjaya sure can belt out…

Ubaidallah:  No, that’s not it!  I could have sworn I heard a…(pauses)  Aw, sh…KABOOM!

At this point, the transcript ends, but I think CLOWNS did a wonderful job bringing the final moments for Ubeedoobie and his pals to you. 

May 15, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, CLOWNS, religion of peace | 6 Comments

Obama doesn’t know Iraq from Afghanistan

What a dipshiite!  From ABC News:

ABC News’ David Wright and Sunlen Miller Report: Sporting a shiny new American flag pin at an appearance in Rush Limbaugh’s hometown, Sen. Barack Obama came up with some novel reasons why the U.S. may be struggling in the war in Afghanistan.

“We don’t have enough capacity right now to deal with it — and it’s not just the troops,” Obama, D-Ill., told a crowd in Cape Girardeau, Missouri.

Obama posited — incorrectly — that Arabic translators deployed in Iraq are needed in Afghanistan — forgetting, momentarily, that Afghans don’t speak Arabic.

“We only have a certain number of them and if they are all in Iraq, then its harder for us to use them in Afghanistan,” Obama said.

The vast majority of military translators in both war zones are drawn from the local population.
Naturally they speak the local language. In Iraq, that’s Arabic or Kurdish. In Afghanistan, it’s any of a half dozen other languages — including Pashtu, Dari, and Farsi.

No sooner did Obama realize his mistake — and correct himself — but he immediately made another.

“We need agricultural specialists in Afghanistan, people who can help them develop other crops than heroin poppies, because the drug trade in Afghanistan is what is driving and financing these terrorist networks. So we need agricultural specialists,” he said.

So far, so good.

“But if we are sending them to Baghdad, they’re not in Afghanistan,” Obama said.

Iraq has many problems, but encouraging farmers to grow food instead of opium poppies isn’t one of them. In Iraq, oil fields not poppy fields are a major source of U.S. technical assistance.

There are other infrastructure problems both countries share that U.S. advisors have struggled to address — a lack of safe roads, schools, adequate electricity, etc. — but Obama did not mention these.

Obama’s overall point may well be true: that U.S. efforts in Iraq have come at the expense of the battle against al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Still it’s not asking too much to expect the man many say will soon be the Democratic nominee to cite the right facts to back up his thesis.

Facts?  The left doesn’t need no stinkin’ facts!  They’ve gone this long without facts, so why change now?

Barry O’s team responds with righteous indignation, and in the process, keeps tasting their Reeboks:

…This poorly researched and written piece is inaccurate in that it just completely ignores the need for Arabic translators in Afghanistan, and the need for agricultural specialists in Iraq. It is irresponsible to report such issues so matter-of-factly without checking out the actual facts. …

The “the need for Arabic translators in Afghanistan”?  The author didn’t let that nugget of ignorance go unanswered:

As for the point about Arabic translators needed for Afghanistan, the Obama campaign points to the well-documented presence of foreign fighters there, many of whom do speak Arabic. However, these folks are mostly shooting at NATO troops, not talking to them.

Then again, dude wants to negotiate with terrorist nations like Iran.  Such a predisposition towards lethal naivete would explain this Freudian slip.

How much more proof do you need before coming to the only reasonable conclusion, that the dude is an empty suit?

May 14, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, defeatism, Iraq, Obama | 6 Comments

Hilldawg admits defeat strategy

Boy, if this isn’t a perfect glimpse into the mindset of the left, I don’t know what is!  From the b#tch’s horse’s mouth:

We’re going to inherit so many challenges from President Bush.  When you think about it, we have two wars, not one.  We don’t talk about Afghanistan enough.  We’ve got two wars.  We’ve got to end one, we’ve got to win the other. 

Got that?  We need to win the war in Afghanistan, but not the one in Iraq.  Got it.  Thanks for the clarification.

But hey…they “support the troops”, right?

February 29, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, defeatism, Hillary, Iraq | 4 Comments

NYT story: 0.02% of Iraqi and Afghanistan veterans kill back in America

Naturally, the NYT headline doesn’t read that way.  If it did, who outside of the Kos kooks would consider it newsworthy?  From the Weekly Standard:

IN A PAGE-ONE STORY published Sunday, January 13, 2008, “Across America, Deadly Echoes of Foreign Battles,” the New York Times reported on homicides by veterans of the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Seven Times reporters contributed to the lengthy story, which was co-authored by Deborah Sontag and Lizette Alvarez.

The Times “found 121 cases in which veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan committed a killing in this country, or were charged with one, after their return from war.” All but one case involved male veterans. They speculated that their research “most likely uncovered only the minimum number of such cases, given that not all killings” were “reported publicly or in detail,” and because “it was often not possible to determine the deployment history of other service members arrested on homicide charges.” 

The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) and other veterans’ advocacy groups are absolutely correct that not merely “many” but the vast majority of veterans not only remain completely law-abiding but go on to lead stable and productive personal, professional, and civic lives. Assuming 121 homicide cases in relation to 749,932 total discharges through 2007, 99.98 percent of all discharged Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have not committed or been charged with homicide.

And assuming 121 cases and 749,932 total discharges, the homicide offending rate for the discharged veterans would be 16.1 per 100,000. The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) has demographic data aplenty on homicide offending rates. For instance, in 2005, for white males aged 18-24, the rate was about 20 per 100,000. The Times opined that 121 was the “minimum” number, even as it counted veterans charged but not convicted with veterans tried and found guilty. Doubling the number to 242 would double the rate to 32.2 per 100,000.

Such crude but contextualizing calculations aside, the right question to ask is whether the veterans, other things being equal (controlling for age, race, gender, education, income, prior criminal history, and other variables), offend at rates that are significantly different from otherwise comparable groups (including groups that have an extreme PTSD incidence). Without doing the relevant statistical (multiple-regression) analyses with all the requisite empirical data, it is impossible to say. 

Borrowing on that line of reasoning, I am likely to go postal on someone, since I’ve been to Memphis. In 2005, Memphis had a population of 672,277 and had 153 murders. That comes out to roughly 22.76 murders per 100,000…higher than the 16.1 murder rate of the “wacko-vets come home” rate. I’m a ticking time bomb. So don’t p#ss me off!

Nope…no liberal media bias!

January 15, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, Iraq, media bias | 4 Comments

Quote of the day

From Ace, regarding the news that NATO will cut troops in Afghanistan, prompting the U.S. to send more Marines:

My guess is the Taliban and al Qaeda will be begging NATO to send more troops, hell they might even chip in some money. I mean if you were a terrorist thug, who would you want hunting your ass down, some Scandi guy in a soldier suit or a US Marine? 

Semper Fi.

January 10, 2008 Posted by | Afghanistan, Euros, quote of the day | Leave a comment

Brit PM Brown to negotiate with Taliban

From NRO:

The news is stunning. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown will announce that, “in a bid to end the war in Afghanistan,” he will begin negotiations with the Taliban. The quote from the “senior source” merely adds an exclamation point to it all.

The change of tack will be seen as the latest attempt by the prime minister to distance himself from the foreign policy of Tony Blair and his ally George Bush.

In a landmark statement in the Commons he will say that the Cabinet has agreed a three pronged strategy for Afghanistan which will [include] security guaranteed by NATO and the Afghan national army followed by economic and political development in the country.

The third prong of the plan is likely to be most controversial — to engage Taliban leaders in constructive dialogue.

A senior source said last night: “We need to ask who are we fighting? Do we need to fight them — can we be talking to them?”

Do we need to fight them? Do we need to fight them??? I am at a loss for words. Stunned.

Expect al-Qaeda’s propaganda machine, relentless in engaging the Information War, to bat this out of the park in short order. Recall that bin Laden’s latest message to Europe was a reminder of Russia’s futile struggle in Afghanistan. This, for him and for furthering his message in the region, serves to help bin Laden bolster the parallel.

One prays that Mark Steyn was not more right — and sooner — than we care to admit.

Yet, on the other hand, I prefer to be alone than anywhere near the new British policy.

Is it so inconceivable to end a war by winning it?

General Petraeus, if you have some free time in the relative near future, sir . . . 

Here’s how a negotiation with terrorist regimes go:

Good guys (for those of you on the left, that would be the US and its allies): So what do you want?

Taliban: Convert or die.

Good guys: We don’t like either option. What else?

Taliban: Die or convert.

Good guys: Sounds an awful lot like the first set of options. Still not liking it. What else you got?

Taliban: Cease living or become Muslim.

Good guys: What if we let you blow up a skyscraper once a decade and kill about 3,000 of our countrymen?

Taliban: That’s a hoot, but it’s not enough.

Good guys: We can throw in a few Hollywood starlets, minus the burqas, so you can beat and/or stone them?

Taliban: My loins tingle with excitement! Keep talking…

Good guys: How about a queer, gift-wrapped in time for Ramadan. The squeal like a pig when whacked with a rock…or so we’ve heard.

Taliban: Since Iran has no gays to give us, this is most definitely an enticing option! Throw in some free couscous and an Afghan goat for each of our mullahs, and we’ll think about it.

Good guys: Awesome! See? We can strike a deal, if we just put our minds to it.

Taliban: Yes. Trust us (*snicker*snicker*)!

Why didn’t we try this a long time ago, right?  For those of you on the left, the prior sentence was sarcasm.

December 12, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, defeatism, dhimmitude, Euros, religion of peace | 4 Comments

NYT fails to cover first Operation Enduring Freedom Medal of Honor winner

From the New York Post:

Every major daily paper in New York took note of President Bush’s decision to bestow the first Medal of Honor of Operation Enduring Freedom on Navy SEAL Lt. Michael Murphy – a Long Islander who gave his life for his country and his fellow SEALs.

Every paper but one, that is.

And it shouldn’t be particularly hard to guess which one.

By now, most folks know exactly how much The New York Times despises the U.S. military.

How it detests any mission that involves U.S. troops – whether to protect Americans by killing terrorists or to help stave off a bloodbath in the Middle East.

How the paper works tirelessly to promote its anti-war, anti-military agenda – even in its supposedly objective news pages.

So while Bush’s announcement merited stories and appreciative editorials in The Post, The New York Sun, the Daily News and even the front page of liberal Newsday, it shouldn’t be all that surprising that the Times didn’t publish a single word about Murphy’s well-deserved honor.

What did the paper of record focus on yesterday? No fewer than three stories reported on how Americans had killed innocent Iraqi civilians.

Regarding the war, of course, the Times’ “coverage” was pernicious long before the fighting began.

Since then, it has focused obsessively on the mistakes and sins of American GIs (Abu Ghraib, anyone?) – and rarely has it played up U.S. victories.

Indeed, it would be hard to cite a news outlet more responsible for sapping U.S. morale – and emboldening America’s enemies – than the Times.

But Murphy was a New Yorker.

He served with unusual valor and distinction in Afghanistan.

When Taliban militants ambushed his four-man team in 2005, he risked his life scrambling to an open spot to radio for help. He got his call through, but was later killed in the battle.

Surely even editors at the Times could have had the heart to report – if not honor – such courage and self-sacrifice.

Unless, of course, they’re so blinded by their disdain for America’s fighting men and women and their missions that they just can’t muster the decency to do so.

That must be it. 

One of their own, the first to win a prestigious (unlike the Nobel “Peace” Prize) award, and the Old Gray Hag can’t see fit to put it in their fishwrap?  You can be sure that had this guy been accused in a Murthaesque fashion of killing innocent civilians, the NYT would have been on that story like Jimmah Carter on peanut butter.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

October 15, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, media bias | 2 Comments

“When You Can’t Find A Witness, Just Quote Yourself”

More and more often, we’re seeing declining standards of journalism.  From Say Anything:

Good grief…

U.S. fire scatters crowd after Afghan bomb: witness
By Noor Mohammad Sherzai

BATI KOT, Afghanistan (Reuters) – At least one U.S.soldier opened fire to scatter a crowd of civilians and police on Thursday after failed suicide bomb attacks on a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military and witnesses said.

A car bomb targeting a U.S. convoy in the village of Bati Kot, 15 km (9 miles) east of Jalalabad, killed the driver, two passengers and a nearby civilian, but none of the soldiers was hurt, the U.S. military said in a statement.

Afghan police securing the site in eastern Afghanistan were then attacked by an insurgent dressed in police uniform. He was killed by the police and coalition troops before he could detonate his suicide vest, the statement said.

To add to the confusion, a fire brigade vehicle speeding to the scene rammed into the U.S. and Afghan vehicles.

“I saw the fire brigade vehicle rushing to the area at top speed. Somehow its brakes failed and hit one police vehicle and coalition vehicles, then the Americans started firing,” said Reuters correspondent Noor Mohammad Sherzai.

So the premise of the article is that a witness saw at least one US soldier scatter a crowd around an Afghan suicide bombing by opening fire, and that one witness just happens to also be the author of the story.

Professional.  You can’t tell me that in the entire crowd with Sherzai couldn’t fine one single person to get a quote from aside from himself.

By the way, you gotta love how they make it sound as though the troop started firing into the crowd of police and civilians to disperse them.  We don’t learn until the end of the article that the soldier fired shots away from the crowd in order to break them up in case there should be another bombing. 

Nope…no liberal media bias! Not that this should come as a surprise from al-Reuters, the “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” network.

September 28, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, media bias | 2 Comments

One less Taliban camelhumper to worry about

“He’s dead, Jim!” al-Reuters, the “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” network, delivers the bad news:

A wanted Taliban insurgent leader in Afghanistan, Mullah Brother, was killed on Thursday in a U.S.-led raid in the southern province of Helmand, the Afghan Defence Ministry said, citing ground commanders.

Brother served as a top military commander for the Taliban government until its removal from power in 2001 and was a member of the movement’s leadership council led by its fugitive leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar.

Damn that George Bush! Tryin’ to keep a Brother down!

August 30, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, religion of peace | Leave a comment

Obama: We need to stop killing innocent Afghani villagers

I wonder if this was a “botched joke”? From Breitbart/AP:

But during a later appearance before about 800 people in Nashua, Obama made a comment likely to further the spats he was warned about.

Asked whether he would move U.S. troops out of Iraq to better fight terrorism elsewhere, he brought up Afghanistan and said, “We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”

Oh, so that’s what we’re doing in Afghanistan! And here I thought we were fighting terrorists, helping a fledgling democracy, and keeping the Taliban from regaining power! What the heck was I thinking?

“Halp us, Obomma! We R stuk N Afgannestann!”

August 14, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, Obama | 5 Comments

“About those ‘300 dead women and children'”

Rusty nails the MSM on this one:

Remember the 200 -300 civilians that were allegedly killed by a U.S. airstrike against top Taliban leaders? The Taliban claimed that what the U.S. really bombed was a busy market. Upon checking the claims of heavy civilian casualties, NATO investigated. Number of actual civilians killed: ZERO.

It’s not so much that the Taliban makes these claims that bothers me, it’s that the Western press actually reports them.

Zero as opposed to 300? At least they were close, right? I mean, I can understand the MSM’s confusion: the number “0” does appear in the number “300” (twice, in fact). And who among us hasn’t confused zero with 300 at one point or another in our lives?

The MSM just blindly accepts the Taliban’s talking points without checking for themselves, continuing their trend of laziness in journalism.

August 7, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, media bias | 5 Comments

Olbermann’s "chickenhawk" slur turned on him

Ace does a wonderful job of ripping the mind-numbed leftist myrmidons’ “chickenhawk” reflex, in light of that little-watched MSNBC moonbat’s recent rant:

Olbermann’s Theatre of the Absurd ends with his calling upon Bush to go to Baghdad and fight “his war” himself.

Again, the chickenhawk charge — one should be willing to fight wars one advocates, yes?

But the trouble is that part of Olbermann’s, and the entire left’s, schtick is that they’re really super-tough guys after all — not cheese-eating surrender monkeys — because, while they don’t want to fight Al Qaeda in Iraq, they’re just totally gung ho to fight Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and, now, Pakistan. In fact, the subtext very often seems to be that it’s just the stubborn President Bush who is preventing them from grabbing a rifle and hopping on the next plane to Waziristan.

Question for Mr. Olbermann:

When, Sir, can we expect word of your enlistment? To fight in what is, by your own admission — nay, bold proclamation — what is in fact your war?

Breaking the MSM embargo, Ralph Peters finally makes the point I’ve been making for years.

The intelligence report in question said, in essence, that, after the devastating blow we struck against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the terrorists have regained some strength in their safe haven on Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier. It doesn’t say that al Qaeda is stronger than ever – although that’s what the Dems imply.

In 2001, al Qaeda had a country of its own. Today, it survives in isolated compounds. And guess which “veteran warrior” wants to go get them?

Sen. Barack Obama. Far too important to ever serve in the military himself, Obama thinks we should invade Pakistan.

Go for it, Big Guy. Of course, we’ll have to reintroduce the draft to find enough troops. And we’ll need to kill, at a minimum, a few hundred thousand tribesmen and their families. We’ll need to occupy the miserable place indefinitely.

Oh, and Pakistan’s a nuclear power already teetering on the edge of chaos.

Barack Obama, strategist and military expert. Who knew?

I don’t believe any Democrat actually wants to fight wars against Al Qaeda, or anyone else, anywhere at all. But they claim they do, they advocate for huge invasions of 100 million strong nuclear-armed countries, and of course they vote for any stray declaration of war that should reach their desks within 60 days of an election.

So if they are all gung-ho to finally “finish the job Bush wouldn’t” in Islamabad and Karachi, I trust they know we need more troops — and the army does in fact permit liberals to serve openly as such. There is no “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule about being a leftist jagoff, I can assure them all.

So:

When’s the big sign-up day all you super badass warriors have planned? Is it a big surprise you’re waiting to spring on the rest of the country?

I trust they’re just waiting to receive and read the new Harry Potter book, and then they’ll be training to storm the beaches of Southern Pakistan presently.

No thinking required for Olby and his ilk.

July 20, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, Iraq, moonbats, Olbermann | Leave a comment

Moonbat anti-war nut shoots airman, kills self

Ace reports that the MSM is quieter than Michael Moore at a Sanjay Gupta family reunion when it comes to the anti-war motive of this shooter:

Attempted murder is the highest form of patriotism.

Want to know the kicker? The MSM is covering up the anti-war lunatic’s motive, refusing to inform the public why he shot the airman.

this 22 year old guy walked up to him and asked him if he lived in the house. When Jon said yes, the guy said “not any more” and shot him point blank in the chest. He tried to shoot him again, but his gun jammed. Jonathan made it into the house. The guy then shot himself. Turns out the guy left a couple of suicide notes stating how much he hated the military and he wanted to go out making a statement, so he chose to make his statement on Independence Day trying to kill a soldier.

The most the MSM will say is that he was “angry at the government.” Angry in what way? They’re not telling. They know, but they’ve decided the public doesn’t need to know such trifling details.

The American Thinker on the media’s code of leftist omerta:

If Airman Schrieken had been an abortionist or homosexual, this story would be front page news for the New York Times and the lead story on CBS News with Katie Couric for at least the next month. But since Schrieken is serving in the military, even his hometown newspaper, the Columbus Dispatch, has ignored this story.
Predictably, a law enforcement spokesman says that Marren’s suicide notes “were indicative of an individual suffering from mental-health problems”, but that raises the question of how anyone could identify anyone suffering from mental-health problems amidst those devoted to bizarre conspiracy theories and the virulent anti-Americanism of the antiwar movement. If anything, Marren would have fit right in unnoticed.

It is also worth noting that Marren was merely following the logic of the anti-war movement’s standard public rhetoric. Their language is laced with suggestive undertones justifying attacks against our military, calling our armed forces fighting the War on Terror “baby-killers”, constantly invoking the specter of Abu Ghraib, and citing their grossly inflated statistics of civilians accidentally killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Such reckless and unbalanced rhetoric (they’re not quite as adept at keeping statistics on those murdered by terrorists) fuels the hatred that drives someone like Marren to violence against a member of our own military.


Racist “Code Words:” The media is ever eager to read the supposed “subtext” of “racist code words” such as “welfare queens” and the like.

Funny that they completely miss not-at-all-subtextual messages like this:

… and apparently don’t ever worry that such hate speech might actually impel some of the less reality-based members of the Reality-Based Community to commit acts of violence.

If a Republican opposes amnesty, he’s sending messages that it’s okay to beat and kill illegal immigrants. When the left openly calls for murder, the MSM just doesn’t seem capable of reading not the subtext but the actual text of their messages. …

Just so you know: Talk radio (aka “hate radio”, to the left) is directly responsible for wingnuts like the Unabomber and Timothy Macveigh, but the anti-war rhetoric of moonbats is in NO WAY responsible for acts of violence like this. Got it?

July 11, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, Iraq, moonbats | Leave a comment

Left wants withdrawal from Afghanistan

I wonder what took them so long? Anywho, Allahpundit breaks it down:

A.k.a. home of the “real” war on terror, the good fight that the left had been spoilin’ to win before Bush went and distracted them with that “fake” war that’s killed ten times as many troops. “You don’t hear people saying, ‘We need to get out of Afghanistan,’” declares Russ Feingold, followed immediately by a bunch of people saying we need to get out of Afghanistan.

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii), a senior defense authorizer, wants the U.S. out of Afghanistan immediately, calling operations there “futile” in trying to effect political change in a country with a tangled history…

“There is no useful purpose for our troops there,” Abercrombie stated in a recent interview. “The military should withdraw now,” he said, though he stressed that the U.S. could keep “isolated pockets” of special operators.

Instead of using the military to effect political change, the U.S. should have a complete diplomatic re-engagement in the region, “with an understanding that our role there should change,” Abercrombie added…

Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and a staunch opponent of the war in Iraq, said that it is time for the U.S. military to start leaving Afghanistan and the Middle East altogether.

“We are not securing America by being there,” she pressed. “The longer we are there, the more plots start growing in our country.”…

Meanwhile, several anti-war members, including Reps. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), stress that any troop withdrawal from Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the military’s first leaving Iraq.

“I’d like to get out of Iraq first and look at Afghanistan and if it does not work … we should be impatient,” Woolsey said, adding that she is not prepared to give a timeline for withdrawal. “There was a reason [for being] there, but now we really need to reassess what we are accomplishing. It depends on what our mission is in Afghanistan; if our mission is to find Osama bin Laden, that is one thing.”

It’ll be darkly amusing watching the Democratic leadership try to be Afghan hawks and Iraq doves simultaneously, on the one hand demanding a troop presence in Kabul to prop up the fledgling Afghan government while on the other demanding withdrawal from Baghdad so that we don’t have to prop up the fledgling Iraqi government. The difference, you see, is that Iraq’s in a hopeless civil war whereas the suicide bombs and guerrilla raids in Afghanistan by Taliban Afghans and Pakistanis is…a minor rebellion? Let’s call it an insurgency. Actually, the real difference is that Al Qaeda’s leadership is in Afghanistan, not in Iraq … although it’s actually not in Afghanistan at all, but in Pakistan, and of course top AQ leaders have been seen, and even caught, in Iraq. Maybe the difference is that Iraq has become a magnet for jihadis from around the region whereas Afghanistan is still basically a closed theater. Or maybe not.

It seems there’s still quite a lot of nuance to be parsed here. They’ll figure it out.

Murtha says he’s not ready to throw in the towel yet because we still have “a chance” of winning but he’s going to revisit the issue in September when they take up the next war supplemental. A sneak preview from the mind that brought us the Okinawa redeployment plan: “We should have never gone to Iraq, because we would have been out of Afghanistan [by now].” QED.

“The longer we are there, the more plots start growing in our country.” Because, you know, no such plots existed before we went in there or anything, right?

June 26, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, defeatism, Iraq | Leave a comment

Confirmed: Iran assisting Taliban

From ABC News:

NATO officials say they have caught Iran red-handed, shipping heavy arms, C4 explosives and advanced roadside bombs to the Taliban for use against NATO forces, in what the officials say is a dramatic escalation of Iran’s proxy war against the United States and Great Britain.

“It is inconceivable that it is anyone other than the Iranian government that’s doing it,” said former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stopped short earlier this week of blaming Iran, saying the U.S. did not have evidence “of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban.”

But an analysis by a senior coalition official, obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com, concludes there is clear evidence of Iran’s involvement.

“This is part of a considered policy,” says the analysis, “rather than the result of low-level corruption and weapons smuggling.”

Iran and the Taliban had been fierce enemies when the Taliban was in power in Afghanistan, and their apparent collaboration came as a surprise to some in the intelligence community.

“I think their goal is to make it very clear that Iran has the capability to make life worse for the United States on a variety of fronts,” said Seth Jones of the Rand Institute, “even if they have to do some business with a group that has historically been their enemy.”

The coalition analysis says munitions recovered in two Iranian convoys, on April 11 and May 3, had “clear indications that they originated in Iran. Some were identical to Iranian supplied goods previously discovered in Iraq.”

The April convoy was tracked from Iran into Helmand province and led a fierce firefight that destroyed one vehicle, according to the official analysis. A second vehicle was reportedly found to contain small arms ammunition, mortar rounds and more than 650 pounds of C4 demolition charges.

A second convoy of two vehicles was spotted on May 3 and led to the capture of five occupants and the seizure of RPG-7mm rockets and more than 1,000 pounds of C4, the analysis says.

Also among the munitions are components for the lethal EFPs, or explosive formed projectiles, the roadside bombs that U.S. officials say Iran has provided to Iraqi insurgents with deadly results.

“These clearly have the hallmarks of the Iranian Revolution Guards’ Quds force,” said Jones.

The coalition diplomatic message says the demolition charges “contained the same fake U.S. markings found on explosives recovered from insurgents operating in the Baghdad area.”

“We believe these intercepted munitions are part of a much bigger flow of support from Iran to the Taliban,” the message says.

The Taliban receives larger supplies of weapons through profits from opium dealing, officials say, but the Iranian presence could be significant.

“It means the insurgency in Afghanistan is likely to be prolonged,” said Jones. “It would be a much more potent force.”

If Iran’s not careful, they’re going to find themselves in a world of hurt by…dare I say it?…being on the business end of a…gasp!…a sternly worded UN Resolution! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

June 7, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, Iran | Leave a comment

Canuck moonbats attack Canadian soldier

But…but…they support the troops! From the (not so) Great White North:

A soldier honoured for his military valour in Afghanistan is wondering why strangers beat him up in his hometown bar this past weekend.

“This wasn’t two guys on the ice dropping gloves and going, ‘OK, let’s go’,” Master Cpl. Collin Fitzgerald told CTV Ottawa on Tuesday.

“This was an attack — a sneak attack. To blindside a guy … and hit him with an object, there’s something wrong.”

Fitzgerald is well known in Morrisburg, Ont., a small town about an hour’s drive south of Ottawa.

He says he’d been in the bar only about 20 minutes late Friday, visiting with a childhood friend who introduced him to people as a war hero, when he was suddenly struck from behind with some type of object. Four men jumped him and began beating on him.

“They were saying ‘What kind of hero are you now?’,” Fitzgerald’s mother Arlene told CTV News.

The weapons instructor at CFB Trenton had his foot broken in three places and needed 10 stitches to close a cut above his right eye. Fitzgerald, 27, also suffered a broken nose and two black eyes in the Friday night attack.

Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean recognized Fitzgerald in a Feb. 19 ceremony for braving enemy fire in Afghanistan.

He served eight months there. He was one of the first recipients of the Canadian Medal of Military Valour, “for outstanding selfless and valiant actions” carried out on May 24, 2006, during an enemy ambush “involving intense, accurate enemy fire.”

According to the military, Fitzgerald “repeatedly exposed himself to enemy fire by entering and re-entering a burning platoon vehicle and successfully driving it off the roadway, permitting the remaining vehicles trapped in the enemy zone to break free.”

“Collin was safer fighting the Taliban. At least he saw the enemy coming, or knew the enemy was there,” said his mother. “They are just total cowards, nothing but snakes,” said Gerald, Collin’s father.

Fortunately, they did arrest one of the p#ssies who did this. Man…why are “peace” activists so damned violent?

March 15, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, Canucks, hypocrisy, moonbats | 5 Comments

UPDATE: Taliban assassination attempt on Cheney

UPDATES AT BOTTOM OF THIS POST.

The left’s bogeyman (VP Cheney) was almost done in by a bloodthirsty camelhumper from the “religion of peace” last night. Neal Boortz has great commentary:

The Taliban tried to blow up Dick Cheney today during a visit to a U.S. Military base in Afghanistan. Depending on whom you ask, either 3 or 24 people were killed by the suicide bomber. The war on Islamic terrorism continues. Cheney is in the region to meet with he president of Pakistan…and tell him to crack down a bit harder on terrorists.

Cheney is on the warpath lately…and it’s quite refreshing. He’s been taking on the media and the Democrats and not holding back. He rightly called out Nancy Pelosi for her policies, which support Al-Qaeda’s agenda. When a controversy ensued…he didn’t hold back. He’s been taking on the media, appearing on TV shows…complete unapologetic for the war in Iraq. The question remains: where has the administration been for the last two years?

Instead of letting the Left and the mainstream media define Iraq as a failure, which its not, they should have been out there swinging the bat…calling out Democrats for their pro-appeasement policies. But, as the saying goes, better late than never. Besides, it’s not like Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid are ever going to come up with a better plan for Iraq anyway.

I imagine that had Cheney gotten killed, the Kostards and DU dumb#sses (you know, the “compassionate” and “tolerant” left?) would have been giddier than a blind lesbian at a seafood market.

UPDATE (2/27/07 – 11:55 A.M.): Boy, I didn’t go out on a limb with my predictions of the moonbats getting disappointed, did I? The HuffPosties, Kostards, and DUmbasses all publicly display their vile elements who lament the Taliban failure, for the world to see. The HuffPost admins have closed commenting down. Michelle Malkin has the screen caps, though.

February 27, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, Cheney, religion of peace | Leave a comment