Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    February 2026
    S M T W T F S
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘war’

He lived just long enough

Posted by Richard on June 9, 2006

As I made pretty clear in an earlier post, I don’t share Michael Berg’s sadness at the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. I’m delighted by it. Richard Miniter provided some further justification — as if any were needed — for feeling that way:

If you are looking for the legacy of Abu Musab al Zarqawi, do not look in the concrete rubble of so-called safe house in Baqubah that became his final resting place. Instead, look less than 10 miles to the west, on the side of the road in the desert town of Hadid, for a pile of cardboard banana boxes.

Inside those boxes were nine human heads.

Some of the heads still had their blindfolds on. Iraqi police are still attempting to identify the murdered men.

Days earlier, in Baquba, Iraqi police found another eight severed heads. One of those heads belonged to a prominent Sunni Muslim imam, who preached peace and tolerance.

Clumsy, brutal decapitations with dull knives, screaming victims, and spurting blood were al-Zarqawi’s specialty and signature — something he truly enjoyed and promoted. That imam who preached peace and tolerance? That would have been you, Mr. Berg, had you actually pursued your "reconciliation" with al-Zarqawi.

Mac Johnson captured my own thoughts and feelings about al-Zarqawi perfectly in a must-read column entitled An Evil Man’s Death Replenishes Me. He began by setting himself apart from other analysts in the media:

I do not believe that it is the job of the chattering class to divorce itself from the society that has given it the right to chatter. I do not believe it makes a journalist or a commentator moral and righteous to coldly report on a war involving his own people as if he were filing scientific reports on the inconsequential battles between two different sorts of ants.

I believe in America. Occasionally, I even believe in right and wrong, and good and evil. And I believe in taking sides between them.

Bravo!

Johnson went on to ask if this wasn’t a cause for celebration, not somberness:

Suppose, in a worst case scenario, that Zarqawi’s death did not shorten or lengthen the war by one minute. Suppose it did not result in even one fewer suicide-bombing or beheading, or death, or did not affect one popularity poll or bill before Congress.

Wouldn’t it still be a good thing? Don’t some people just need killing?

Perhaps I am callous or impolite or just simple-minded, but aren’t there some people so loathsome and onerous that their death need not have a single consequence beyond their introduction to decomposition for that death to be a happy moment for the rest of us?

Yes, there are such people — and al-Zarqawi more than qualified! Johnson outlined why at some length — read the whole thing.

In describing what he thought al-Zarqawi deserved, Johnson became prescient (emphasis added):

Not only do I hope he eternally rots, burns, re-corporealizes and then rots and burns again well within the lowest levels of Hell, I hope he did not die instantly. I hope there was a brief moment in which he realized he was dying, and that it was an American who had killed him, and an Iraqi that turned him in.

Damned if that isn’t exactly what happened!

BAGHDAD, Iraq Jun 9, 2006 (AP)— A mortally wounded Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was still alive and mumbling after American airstrikes on his hideout and tried to get off a stretcher when he became aware of U.S. troops at the scene, a top military official said Friday.

"He was conscious initially, according to the U.S. forces that physically saw him," Caldwell told Fox. "He obviously had some kind of visual recognition of who they were because he attempted to roll off the stretcher, as I am told, and get away, realizing it was U.S. military."

Yesss! He saw and recognized the American special forces! The son of a bitch lived just long enough!

That just delights me no end — maybe there is a God, after all — or something to this notion of karma. 🙂
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Mourning al-Zarqawi

Posted by Richard on June 9, 2006

I can’t even begin to understand the wretched and debased moral sense of the late Nicholas Berg’s father, Michael (who has been an anti-war activist for 40 years, and is currently the Green Party candidate for Congress in Delaware). According to ABC News:

Michael Berg, whose son Nick the CIA believes was beheaded by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2004, told ABC News’ Aaron Katersky on Thursday that he abhors that the U.S. military has killed al-Zarqawi.

"I will not take joy in the death of a fellow human, even the human being who killed my son," said Berg, who blamed President Bush, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales — and not al-Zarqawi — for the death of his son because of what Berg said is their role in authorizing the torture of Iraqis at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad.

Berg, who said he begged the United States government not to kill al-Zarqawi so that Berg could reconcile with him, worries that only more death will come out of his killing. 

In the AP story at Fox News, Berg described what he believes should have been done with al-Zarqawi — and why:

Berg said "restorative justice," — such as being forced to work in a hospital where maimed children are treated — could have made Zarqawi "a decent human being."

Simply breathtaking…

Mr. Berg, if any of those maimed children, or their nurses or doctors, were "Jewish pigs" — or any kind of infidel, including Shiite — al-Zarqawi would gleefully saw off their heads with the same combination of enthusiasm and lack of skill that he exhibited in the barbaric murders of Nick Berg and Eugene Armstrong. Your insane fantasy of "restorative justice" making him into a "decent human being" would simply enable him to keep killing — and recruiting and directing others to kill. In other words, Mr. Berg, more death comes out of letting people like al-Zarqawi live.

A lot of people view folks like Berg as idealists — misguided and unrealistic, but well-intentioned and somehow noble or admirable. That’s a load of crap. Check out the campaign website and articles linked above, or this interview in which he compares Bush unfavorably to Saddam Hussein — compare how Berg speaks of al-Zarqawi and the terrorists ("what we call the insurgency, and what I call the resistance") with how he speaks of Bush and Rumsfeld. Does Berg sound like he’s prepared to "reconcile" with Bush and Rumsfeld and forgive them their "sins"? Do you think Berg believes a little community service will make W. into a "decent human being"?

Michael Berg is forgiving, tolerant, and non-judgmental toward some of the most brutal and barbaric people on the planet, but he loathes those of us who argue that the values of the U.S. and Western Civilization are superior to the values of Islamofascism. I think it’s disgusting and contemptible.

There are plenty more like him on the moonbat left. On-line, you’ll find them at places like DailyKos and Democratic Underground (sorry, I can’t be bothered to provide links). They greeted the death of al-Zarqawi with the same mix of disappointment, anger, paranoid skepticism, and resentment that they displayed when Saddam was captured.

Berg and his allies exhibit a venomous hatred for Bush, Blair, capitalism — everything Western, really — but they display a studied "neutrality" toward those who want to destroy us. Sorry, that’s not pacifism or neutrality — that’s being on the other side.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Hillary: still zigging and zagging

Posted by Richard on June 1, 2006

Back in December, I commented on Dick Morris’ contention that Hillary Clinton faced the "insoluble dilemma" of trying to appear strong and hawkish on national security without alienating the increasingly anti-war Democratic base. I revised my earlier opinion (that she’d move decisively leftward) and concluded that she’d have to tilt toward the mainstream, not toward the moonbats in her party:

The more I think about it, the more I believe I was wrong, at least in the long run. Hillary may have briefly flirted with moving left on the war, but I think she’s going to decide to remain hawkish, while desperately trying to figure out how to get the nomination without pandering to the anti-war crowd.

New York Democrats just had their convention, and it’s clear that Hillary still faces the same dilemma and is still trying to be on both sides of the war issue:

New York State Democrats who nominated Hillary Clinton to run for a second Senate term on Wednesday closed out their convention by passing a resolution calling the war in Iraq "illegal."

Though media reports insist that Mrs. Clinton remains supportive of the war, Democrats gathered in Buffalo this week were seething with anti-war fever. …

During her acceptance speech, however, the former first lady felt compelled to insert the line: "Stand with me as we put pressure on both the administration and the new Iraqi government to get behind a real plan for the Iraqis to assume a growing responsibility for their own security and safety so that we can begin to bring our troops home."

And what a godawful line it is! How rabid a fan of Hillary would you have to be to cheer such an awkward and mind-numbing call to arms?

The Clinton team managed to prevent Jonathan Tasini, her anti-war challenger, from gettting enough delegate votes to make the primary ballot. But he’s vowed to petition his way onto the ballot, and could still give her heartburn (emphasis added):

A Zogby poll released on Tuesday may explain why Mrs. Clinton is suddenly running away from the war. While 38 percent of New Yorkers in both parties said they’d back Clinton, 32 percent said they’d prefer an openly anti-war candidate like Tasini. 

So I guess she’ll continue to zig and zag — and to utter leaden, soporific, practically content-free statements about the war. Algore is probably loving it.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Our hero dead

Posted by Richard on May 29, 2006

Please take a moment today to remember those who died "that liberty shall live."
 

"Flags In" for Memorial Day, Arlington National Cemetary. Photo from Isaac Wankerl (www.iwankerl.com).
The grave of his father, Maj. Max W. Wankerl, is in the foreground.

Memorial Day

by Edgar A. Guest (1881-1959)

The finest tribute we can pay
Unto our hero dead to-day,
Is not a rose wreath, white and red,
In memory of the blood they shed;
It is to stand beside each mound,
Each couch of consecrated ground,
And pledge ourselves as warriors true
Unto the work they died to do.

Into God’s valleys where they lie
At rest, beneath the open sky,
Triumphant now o’er every foe,
As living tributes let us go.
No wreath of rose or immortelles
Or spoken word or tolling bells
Will do to-day, unless we give
Our pledge that liberty shall live.

Our hearts must be the roses red
We place above our hero dead;
To-day beside their graves we must
Renew allegiance to their trust;
Must bare our heads and humbly say
We hold the Flag as dear as they,
And stand, as once they stood, to die
To keep the Stars and Stripes on high.

The finest tribute we can pay
Unto our hero dead to-day
Is not of speech or roses red,
But living, throbbing hearts instead,
That shall renew the pledge they sealed
With death upon the battlefield:
That freedom’s flag shall bear no stain
And free men wear no tyrant’s chain.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Agenda journalism

Posted by Richard on May 19, 2006

For those of you who still doubt that the mainstream media’s war reporting consists largely of agenda-driven, biased, anti-American propaganda, today’s front page of The Washington Post presented what I’d like the bailiff to tag as Exhibit #17,693. The story in question (log in with BugMeNot), by Pamela Constable of the "Washington Post Foreign Service," has the following headline and subhead:

Afghanistan Rocked As 105 Die in Violence

Toll Is Among Worst Since 2001 Invasion

If you just glanced at the paper (or one of the hundreds of other papers and web pages that picked up the WaPo story), you no doubt concluded that we’re in deep trouble in Afghanistan now, too — just like Iraq. If you began reading the story, the first paragraph confirmed the grim news conveyed by the headlines:

ASADABAD, Afghanistan, May 18 — Afghanistan has been rocked over the past two days by some of the deadliest violence since the Taliban was driven from power in late 2001. As many as 105 people were reported killed in four provinces as insurgents torched a district government compound, set off suicide bombs and clashed fiercely with Afghan and foreign troops.

If you stopped there (as many casual newspaper readers do), you probably thought that it’s all going to hell, that this incompetent administration has screwed up another country, and that maybe we should just withdraw from Afghanistan, too.

If you kept reading, however, you discovered that the overwhelming majority of the deaths were among the enemy, and that some of them were killed by U.S. air strikes:

Between 80 and 90 Taliban fighters were killed in Kandahar and Helmand provinces, according to Afghan, U.S. and NATO officials. Two sites in Kandahar were struck by U.S. warplanes, including a long-range B-1 bomber, which U.S. military officials said destroyed a compound that Taliban guerrillas were using to stage an attack.

So, "as many as" 90 of 105 were enemy combatants. That’s almost a 9-1 ratio, which means the phrase "Toll Is Among Worst" is accurate only from the perspective of the Taliban.

From the perspective of those of us who are on the side of the United States and Western Civilization, and who cheer the death, destruction, and defeat of the Islamofascists, these two days of fighting represent not a terrible toll, but a tremendous success. If we keep killing 9 of them for every Afghan and allied soldier we lose, things will go very well indeed!

Pamela Constable, Leonard Downie, Jr., Ben Bradlee, et al., are apparently cheering for the other side.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

These men are animals

Posted by Richard on May 8, 2006

On February 24, I blogged about the killings of Al Arabiya television correspondent Atwar Bahjat and two members of her crew. That post, The position of a neutral civilian, quoted a news story which said they’d been shot, and it went on to discuss the issue of journalists arming themselves. I quoted a fellow named Rodney Pinder on the subject of armed journalists and offered a rejoinder to his remarks:

“A journalist with a gun says ‘some people in the situation I’m covering are my enemies and I am prepared to kill them if necessary’. That is not the position of a neutral civilian.”

I’ve got news for you, Mr. Pinder — there’s nothing you can do to disabuse "certain elements" of this "misguided belief." If you go to Iraq as a "neutral observer," the jihadist terrorists are your enemies, whether you like it or not and whether you’re armed or not, because they define a "neutral observer" as the enemy; they define everyone who isn’t actively on their side as the enemy. You only have three options: stay the hell away, prepare to kill them if necessary, or prepare to die at their whim.

To the followers of al Zarqawi, the proper position of a neutral civilian is on his knees with a dull knife at his throat.

I didn’t know at the time how precisely accurate that last remark was. You see, Ms. Bahjat wasn’t just shot. Details of her murder, including a cell-phone video, have surfaced.

Apparently, she was first tortured with an electric drill, which left holes in her arms, legs, navel, and one eye. Then:

By the time filming begins, the condemned woman has been blindfolded with a white bandage.

It is stained with blood that trickles from a wound on the left side of her head. She is moaning, although whether from the pain of what has already been done to her or from the fear of what is about to be inflicted is unclear.
. . .

A large man dressed in military fatigues, boots and cap approaches from behind and covers her mouth with his left hand. In his right hand, he clutches a large knife with a black handle and an 8in blade. He proceeds to cut her throat from the middle, slicing from side to side.

Her cries — “Ah, ah, ah” — can be heard above the “Allahu akbar” (God is greatest) intoned by the holder of the mobile phone.

Even then, there is no quick release for Bahjat. Her executioner suddenly stands up, his job only half done. A second man in a dark T-shirt and camouflage trousers places his right khaki boot on her abdomen and pushes down hard eight times, forcing a rush of blood from her wounds as she moves her head from right to left.

Only now does the executioner return to finish the task. He hacks off her head and drops it to the ground, then picks it up again and perches it on her bare chest so that it faces the film-maker in a grotesque parody of one of her pieces to camera.

The voice of one of the Arab world’s most highly regarded and outspoken journalists has been silenced. She was 30.

Monsters. Depraved, subhuman monsters. Such men cannot be permitted to exist.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Bush calls war war, left goes berserk

Posted by Richard on May 8, 2006

While I wasn’t paying attention, Bush used the term "World War III" to describe the global conflict with Islamofascism, and the people suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome somehow managed to become even more deranged. Bush used the term in an interview with CNBC (that explains why so many of us failed to notice it), speaking of the film United 93:

Bush said he had yet to see the recently released film of the uprising, a dramatic portrayal of events on the United Airlines plane before it crashed in a Pennsylvania field.

But he said he agreed with the description of David Beamer, whose son Todd died in the crash, who in a Wall Street Journal commentary last month called it "our first successful counter-attack in our homeland in this new global war — World War III".

Bush said: "I believe that. I believe that it was the first counter-attack to World War III.

"It was, it was unbelievably heroic of those folks on the airplane to recognize the danger and save lives," he said.

Gerard Van der Leun bravely plumbed the depths of moonbattery in order to present some examples of what he calls "loss of blogger control." Apparently, some BDS sufferers believe that the uttering of those magic words means now we’re all going to die. Others are openly hoping for — even calling for — Bush’s assassination.

Van der Leun was amazed:

You have to wonder what morally-relativistic, rainbow colored, secular fundament these folks have been wearing for a hat for years. What part of "airplanes into sky-scrapers followed by endless sermons of Hate America and various video tapes shrieking Death to Americans" do they not understand? Have they not gotten the memos from Iran for the last 27 years? Maybe we should set up a fund to buy them all tickets to "United 93" complete with those lidlock devices from "Clockwork Orange." But then again, it has been established that for many, seeing is not believing.

In point of fact, this isn’t even the first time that the President has agreed with someone else’s characterization of the current conflict as World War 3. Last June, Bush spoke about the war at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and he cited a rather different source:

Some wonder whether Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. Among the terrorists, there is no debate. Hear the words of Osama Bin Laden: "This Third World War is raging" in Iraq. "The whole world is watching this war." He says it will end in "victory and glory, or misery and humiliation."

So almost a year ago, Bush agreed with Osama, the man who formally declared war on us, that this is World War 3. His statement on CNBC merely reiterated that. Why did Oliver Willis and friends go so berserk upon hearing it this time? Is it because this time he was agreeing with someone named Beamer instead of someone named bin Laden?
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

GOP impotence

Posted by Richard on May 4, 2006

Cal Thomas is disgusted with today’s GOP:

GOP impotence in the midst of fuel price hikes may be the final proof that this is a party that has run out of gas. Democrats aren’t any better and should they regain a congressional majority this fall, it won’t be long before they again indulge in the same pandering, unethical behavior and content-free politics that has exposed Republican ineptness.
. . .

How could a party go from a visionary like Ronald Reagan who changed the world, not to mention restoring American optimism, to the tunnel vision of his illegitimate offspring who seem to care less about change than perpetuating themselves in office? They aren’t even doing a good job of that as the fall election results may show, unless somebody or something quickly lights a fire under them. Never has the derogatory phrase, "Republican in name only," applied to so many who have done so little for so few.

Who can blame him for sounding bitter? The President seems completely distracted by foreign matters, and the contemptible pipsqueak Republicans in Congress seem totally bereft of principles, ideas, and integrity. They score the Ozian trifecta: they have no heart, no brain, and no courage.

If it weren’t for this damned war against Islamofascism, I’d take great pleasure in seeing the GOP get the thrashing at the polls that it so richly deserves.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »

Proud to be a chicken hawk

Posted by Richard on May 2, 2006

Certain elements of the anti-war left — the 98% who can’t or won’t use rational argument and thus give the rest of them a bad name — like to sneer at people like me as "chicken hawks" and "fighting keyboardists."

Their point, apparently, is that the military, not elected civilians, should determine U.S. foreign policy.

Or maybe their point is that if you oppose crime, you’re morally obligated to join the police force.

Or maybe it’s just that calling people names is much easier and way more fun than critical thinking.

That’s a chicken hawk on the right. Pretty cool bird, actually. Not really much of an insult. [Yeah, I’ve heard of the urban slang term "chickenhawk" (one word); but that’s not this chicken hawk (two words). So there.]

Anyway, rather than object, complain, or argue against all the "chicken hawk" and "fighting keyboardist" nonsense, Frank J of IMAO, Derek Brigham of Freedom Dogs, and Captain Ed of Captain’s Quarters decided to have some fun with it. So, they created the 101st Fighting Keyboardists and adopted the chicken hawk as their mascot. Derek created the spiffy logo below.

In his inimitable, unmedicated fashion, Frank J answered every conceivable question (and some inconceivable ones) about chicken hawks and the 101st Fighting Keyboardists in his FAQ. Here’s a taste:

Q. So why do supporters of the war get called "chicken hawks" like its an insult?
A. Well, the short answer is some people are morons.

Q. What’s the long answer?
A. Back when man first started to learn to use tools, certain spears were made using…

Q. What’s the medium-length answer?
A. Many liberals, in their diminished mental capacities, like to have a word or phrase to shout over and over in lieu of the mental preparedness needed for an actual debate of issues. Fighting tyranny is a complicated issue, and, rather than admit they’re on the side of tyranny, many liberals will try to avoid debate altogether in any way possible.

Q. Liberals seem to use the phrase "chicken hawk" against people who aren’t in the military? Do liberals want a government where decisions are only made by those in the military?
A. No, they hate the military.

Q. But they say they support the troops!
A. And you can train a parrot to say the same thing. That doesn’t mean anything.

I’ve enlisted in the 101st Fighting Keyboardists and added their blogroll in the right sidebar. To keep the page from getting absurdly long, I "borrowed" some CSS from The Anti-PC League (tweaked it a bit) to put the blogrolls on the right into scroll boxes. What do you think?

Derek of Freedom Dogs is considering making this logo available on a T-shirt. If you’re interested, drop by this post and let him know.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

United 93

Posted by Richard on April 19, 2006

Universal’s United 93 is premiering next Tuesday, April 25th, at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York City. You’ve probably read or heard that some people aren’t happy that a film about the heroes of United Flight 93 has been made. When the trailer was first shown, people in a Hollywood theater audience reportedly shouted "too soon!" I wonder if those people thought Michael Moore’s Farenheit 9/11 was "too soon"? No, I suspect they lined up eagerly to see it.

We’ve been at war with Islamofascism for almost five years (consciously and explicitly, that is; they’ve been waging war on us for longer than that, but we didn’t recognize it as such). I think it’s high time that we had a major theatrical film about this war, and it’s only appropriate that it be about what is probably the most courageous action by a group of American civilians in our nation’s history.

Back in January, I saw A&E’s low-budget TV movie, Flight 93, and I was moved by it and spoke highly of it:

It’s a story we’re all familiar with, and we all know how it ended. But I found it compelling and moving and riveting. This is no hagiography to larger-than-life heroes — it’s presentation of the events is straightforward and relatively low-key — and it’s all the more powerful for it. I’m an atheist, but when Todd Beamer and Verizon call center supervisor Lisa Jefferson spoke the Lord’s Prayer together just before Todd and the others attacked the cockpit, I wept.

"Let’s roll" was spoken firmly, but without bravado, and I didn’t cheer — but I set my jaw and unconsciously tensed in anticipation, as if hoping and wishing for success. I suppose, in a sense, success is what we got.
… 
… I strongly recommend it. I wish every American would see it.

My reaction and recommendation were driven, of course, more by the story itself than by some great achievement of the A&E production (nevertheless, it’s a decent and worthwhile depiction; it’s being rebroadcast this month, and I still recommend it). What actually happened on that flight is so compelling and inspiring that any serviceable, well-intentioned, and reasonably accurate portrayal of the events would have to be moving and riveting.

By all accounts, United 93 director Paul Greengrass has produced a film that’s far more than just serviceable, and it has the unanimous endorsement of the families of the 40 passengers and crew of Flight 93.

Dennis Prager attended a preview screening of United 93 recently, and he was impressed. He, too, thought it was about time rather than "too soon":

Five years after the most devastating attack on American soil, people are asking if Americans are ready to see a film — not some fictional, politically driven, reality-distorting film by Oliver Stone, but a film based on the phone conversations of the passengers and flight attendants, on the flight recorder tape, and approved by the families of all 40 passengers — one of the most terrible and heroic events in American history.

Did anyone ask in 1946, five years after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, whether Americans were prepared to see a film about the Japanese attack?

Hollywood’s lack of interest was especially odd, Prager noted, considering the values and goals of our Islamofascist enemies:

… For five years, America has been battling people who are dedicated to destroying every value that Hollywood claims to care most about — freedom, tolerance, women’s rights, secular government, equality for gays — and Hollywood has yet to make a film depicting, let alone honoring, this war.

Prager objected to a post-film bow to political correctness that Universal assured him would be removed, but otherwise strongly recommended this film:

I believe it is just about every American’s duty to see this film. There is no gratuitous violence — if anything, Universal went out of its way to prevent us from seeing the reality of the throat-slashing of passengers and crew — but there is unremitting tension and sadness, since we all know what will happen to these unsuspecting people, and we know this is real, not fiction.

There is also American heroism. People completely unprepared for an airplane flight to become their last hour alive rise to the occasion and save fellow Americans from death and from the humiliation of having their nation’s capitol building destroyed.

The only people likely to object to this film are those who don’t want Americans to become aware of just how conscienceless, cruel and depraved our enemy is, or those who think that our enemies can always be negotiated with and therefore object to depicting Americans actually fighting back.

Teenage and older children in particular should see this film. If the younger teens have nightmares, comfort them. But young Americans need to know the nature of whom we are fighting. If they are attending a typical American high school or college, they probably don’t know.

Congratulations to Universal Studios on making this film (presuming that, as assured to me, they removed the post-film politically inspired message). And shame on Hollywood for only making one such film in five years. 

United 93 opens around the country on Friday, April 28. I probably won’t see it right away because of some other things going on — personal and family matters. But I certainly intend to see it, probably more than once, as soon as I can. I fervently hope that many millions of Americans watch this film.

We need to remember what happened on September 11, 2001 — not just the tragedies, but also the triumph. We need to remember that on that day, a group of forty Americans thrown together by chance became the first to be fully aware of the nature of our enemy, and they chose to fight.

And they won. With no weapons, training, or special knowledge, and only the briefest period of time to fathom what was happening and determine what to do about it, they defeated our enemy’s best men carrying out their most sophisticated plan.

We need to let their courage and commitment inspire us and serve as an example of how free people act. Please make plans now to go see United 93

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Patriotism

Posted by Richard on April 5, 2006

I attended the Advocates for Self-Government 10th anniversary conference in Atlanta — was it really 10 years ago? — and thoroughly enjoyed it. Great crowd, great speakers, organized and presented well by Sharon Harris and her staff and volunteers. I’m sure they do a nice job every year, but it’s not cheap flying from Denver to Atlanta, staying at the hotel, etc., so I’m not a candidate to attend just any old year.

I was, however, a prime candidate to attend the recent 20th anniversary conference. I didn’t go, though, and it wasn’t just that I was pretty busy. I also wasn’t as enthusiastic about spending a weekend in the company of a whole bunch of libertarians as I had been ten years ago.

I suppose I was afraid that I’d meet people who were proud that they attended the Badnarik2004 September 11 Meetup, wearing black to mourn the victims of the U.S. government. Or people whose rhetoric on the war is indistinguishable from that of the leftist rabble, with talk of "U.S. occupation," "imperialist war-mongers," "the U.S. armed Saddam, the CIA created al Qaeda," and so on. If that happened, I’d either start screaming at them, "How can you be so stupid?" or I’d just walk away shaking my head and go get another drink.

So, I didn’t try very hard to find the time or the money to attend. According to David Aitken, a lot of other people didn’t try very hard, either. I’m sure most of the other non-attendees had reasons other than mine, but there’s no question that a lot of the air has gone out of the libertarian movement’s tire in the past two or three years, and I’m convinced that the prevailing libertarian views on the war and foreign policy — and patriotism — have something to do with it.

I know I’m not the only libertarian bothered by those prevailing views. I’m not even the most bothered — heck, I’m still a registered Libertarian. I spoke with a former Denver LP chair this past Saturday — in fact, the most successful chair the Denver LP ever had, who regularly drew 50 or more people to our monthly meetings. She’d just come from the Arapahoe County GOP convention. She was a delegate, and will be a delegate to the GOP state convention, too. She left the LP in disgust over what she perceived as its greater animosity toward the Bush administration than toward Islamofascism.

Aitken observed that "most libertarians are libertarians first and Americans second," and that that’s a problem:

I’ve been a member of the Libertarian Party for about 20 years and I don’t ever recall seeing any public displays of patriotism or love of country at any official function of the party, either state or national. None of our candidates express that; they all talk about what needs changing or what’s wrong, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard a candidate say "This is the best country in the world", or something to that effect (I’ve been a candidate and I’m guilty). I am not saying "my country right or wrong" and I’m not a nativist, but we hear NOTHING except bitch, bitch, bitch, and that doesn’t attract voters.

He then linked to a beautifully written Peggy Noonan column (I think Noonan’s columns are always beautifully written, even when I disagree with them) that starts out talking about some of our living Medal of Honor recipients and ends up talking about immigration, and somehow it relates importantly to Aitken’s point. Noonan thinks we’re assimilating immigrants culturally and economically, but that’s not enough:

But we are not communicating love of country. We are not giving them the great legend of our country. We are losing that great legend.

What is the legend, the myth? That God made this a special place. That they’re joining something special. That the streets are paved with more than gold–they’re paved with the greatest thoughts man ever had, the greatest decisions he ever made, about how to live. We have free thought, free speech, freedom of worship. Look at the literature of the Republic: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist papers. Look at the great rich history, the courage and sacrifice, the house-raisings, the stubbornness. The Puritans, the Indians, the City on a Hill.

(God, that woman can write.)

Do we teach our immigrants that this is what they’re joining? That this is the tradition they will now continue, and uphold?

Do we, today, act as if this is such a special place? No, not always, not even often. American exceptionalism is so yesterday. We don’t want to be impolite. We don’t want to offend. We don’t want to seem narrow. In the age of globalism, honest patriotism seems like a faux pas.

And yet what is true of people is probably true of nations: if you don’t have a well-grounded respect for yourself, you won’t long sustain a well-grounded respect for others.

I don’t think it’s just the immigrants — after Viet Nam, Watergate, and the triumph of post-modernism in academia, we largely stopped teaching our own children the legend, the great thoughts, the traditions — the love of country not out of some blind, irrational "nationalism," but out of deep admiration and respect for the people and ideas and values that brought it about and that still set it apart from all others. People and ideas and values that are unique, powerful, and soul-stirring.

Aitken and Noonan are right — America always has been and still is an exceptional place. If you don’t believe that, you need to get out more — learn more about the rest of the world and about history. Libertarians of all people should recognize that.

Instead, too many libertarians just bitch, as Aitken said. Even if they still admire America’s founders and history, they see only negatives in their own lifetime — taxes are higher, regulations more onerous, the police state is creeping closer, we’re losing our liberties all the time, yada, yada, yada. Well, granted, the Federal Register is a depressing document for a libertarian.

But in my lifetime, liberty has made more gains than retreats — people no longer fear jail (or worse) for drinking from the wrong water fountain or sitting in the wrong bus seat. The Lenny Bruces and Al Goldsteins of today aren’t being hauled off to jail. Yes, McCain-Feingold is an abomination, but on the whole, no people on earth are or ever have been more free to express themselves. Significant strides have been made in restoring some of the economic freedoms given up in the first half of the 20th century. Thirty-nine states (up from half a dozen) now recognize that our inherent right to self-defense, if not absolute, at least puts a significant burden on the state to demonstrate why we should not be able to go about armed.

I could go on. And we could argue endlessly about which pluses balance out which minuses and what the net score for liberty is from year to year. But that’s not the point. The point is that there are always things to criticize and things to praise, but at the end of the day, America as an idea and an institution and a heritage is worthy of our love and affection. Libertarians of all people should recognize that.

Just as we admire and love people who personify and concretize virtues and traits of character that we think are noble and worthy, it’s appropriate for us to admire and love institutions that embody and concretize ideals and principles that we think are noble and worthy.

Libertarians of all people should get choked up when they hear the Star Spangled Banner, when the fireworks go off on Independence Day, when an immigrant weeps at a naturalization ceremony, or when a Medal of Honor recipient, asked why he performed his great act of heroism, struggles to express himself clearly:

He couldn’t answer for a few seconds. You could tell he was searching for the right words, the right sentence. Then he said, "I get emotional about it. But we’re a free country." He said it with a kind of wonder, and gratitude.

Instead, too many libertarians have lost all sense of perspective and have adopted their own version of the sick moral equivalence game played by the left, which says that we’re no better than the people who attack us. Witness the libertarian who left this comment on one of my posts about Jay Bennish, the geography teacher  who indulged in the "Bush is like Hitler" classroom rant:

Actually, I think Bush is somewhat like Hitler – but what president in recent history hasn’t been? They are all after more power and more police-statism, and a bunch of nanny-statism to boot.

I responded:

Dick: Thanks for dropping by, but your first paragraph exemplifies what’s wrong with far too many libertarians.

George W. Bush is "somewhat like" Adolf Hitler in the same sense that a shoplifter at Target is "somewhat like" Genghis Khan because both took things that didn’t belong to them.

Well, that was Dick’s second paragraph, but I think I otherwise nailed it with my rejoinder.

To a lot of my fellow libertarians, I want to shout, "What the hell has happened to your sense of perspective? You rant about the Patriot Act — have you been to Britain or France or any of a 150 places far worse? You rail against Kelo (as did I) — did you know that in Egypt, according to Hernando De Soto, about 90% of all property owners don’t have a legal title and could lose their home or business at the whim of an unbribed bureaucrat? You carp about regulations and bureaucracies — did you know that starting a small business, which takes at worst a few days here, can take years in many countries? When was the last time you took a break from complaining and criticizing, and said, ‘I’m so grateful that I live here and not there, I’m so glad to be an American’?"

If you can’t see the huge gulf that separates "America isn’t perfect" from "America is no better than any other statist hell-hole," you need to seriously re-examine yourself and your values.

Linked to: TMH’s Bacon Bits, Blue Star Chronicles, third world county, Adam’s Blog, Conservative Cat

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

Their grievance

Posted by Richard on March 29, 2006

A friend emailed a FrontPageMag.com article from about a month ago that I hadn’t seen. It’s excerpts from Brigitte Gabriel’s February 18 speech at the Intelligence Summit in Washington. Brigitte Gabriel grew up as a Lebanese Christian, living in a bomb shelter from age 10 to 17, fearing for her life every day, watching most of her friends killed by Muslims for being infidels.

A journalist who has lived in the U.S. since 1989, Gabriel founded American Congress for Truth in 2002 to bring together "Jews, Arabs and Christians from all background both secular and religious" in order to wake people up to the fact that radical Islam is waging war on all infidels. In her speech, she warned that many Americans have been too slow to understand the nature of our enemy:

We are fighting a powerful ideology that is capable of altering basic human instincts. An ideology that can turn a mother into a launching pad of death. A perfect example is a recently elected Hamas official in the Palestinian Territories who raves in heavenly joy about sending her three sons to death and offering the ones who are still alive for the cause. It is an ideology that is capable of offering highly educated individuals such as doctors and lawyers far more joy in attaining death than any respect and stature, life in society is ever capable of giving them.

America cannot effectively defend itself in this war unless and until the American people understand the nature of the enemy that we face. Even after 9/11 there are those who say that we must “engage” our terrorist enemies, that we must “address their grievances”. Their grievance is our freedom of religion. Their grievance is our freedom of speech. Their grievance is our democratic process where the rule of law comes from the voices of many not that of just one prophet. It is the respect we instill in our children towards all religions. It is the equality we grant each other as human beings sharing a planet and striving to make the world a better place for all humanity. Their grievance is the kindness and respect a man shows a woman, the justice we practice as equals under the law, and the mercy we grant our enemy. Their grievance cannot be answered by an apology for who or what we are.

Well said. Read the whole thing. Then, go sign her petition against Islamic religious hatred and intolerance.

"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." — Thomas Mann

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Non-news: suicide bombers not Iraqis

Posted by Richard on July 1, 2005

LGF posted an AP story earlier today announcing breathlessly that the vast majority of suicide bombers in Iraq have been foreigners. Yawn. The only people who might be surprised by this probably dismiss it as a Rove trick.

Readers of the Grand Junction, CO, Daily Sentinel heard this straight from the horse’s mouth a couple of weeks ago. Shortly after, so did readers of Chrenkoff and my blog. In the Daily Sentinel story about Grand Junction’s Col. Jim West, he not only reported that most suicide bombers were non-Iraqis, he said that not all of them went willingly to their fate:

"He was trying to drive into a busy checkpoint and the Marine guards wounded him and disabled his car before he could reach the intersection and activate the bomb," West wrote. "When they opened the door to remove him, they found him chained to the seat with his hands taped to the steering wheel. He had an activation switch on his body that he could use but they also found a remote-control activation device under the front seat. It was hidden in the floor of the car so he probably didn’t know it was there… He was going to die whether he wanted to or not."

A guard activated a radio-jamming device immediately so the bomb couldn’t be detonated, West wrote.

The driver was "yelling and very agitated and had a glazed look," West said in a telephone interview. It turned out he also was heavily drugged, West said.

The AP story does add breadth and detail to the story of foreign suicide bombers. Of course, some of the details aren’t presented as accurately as one might wish:

There have been a few exceptions.

On election day Jan. 30, a mentally handicapped Iraqi boy, wearing a suicide vest, attacked a polling station.

The poor kid didn’t "attack" a polling station. The jihadists strapped explosives on him and made him start walking toward the polling station. The kid didn’t know what was happening, but he became confused or scared and turned around. Started walking back where he came from.

They remotely detonated him.

Attacked a polling station, my ass.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

One Coloradan’s experiences in Iraq

Posted by Richard on June 20, 2005

Stories about local men and women serving in Iraq are probably fairly common in small cities and towns throughout the country. They’re almost unheard of in big-city papers, where they might interfere with the "Vietnam/quagmire" meme. The MSM don’t much care what our men and women on the ground in Iraq think. They prefer the relentless flood of negative dispatches from reporters esconced in their hotels and fed information and images by "stringers" with ties to the terrorists.

The Daily Sentinel of Grand Junction, CO, just across the state from me, published one Coloradan’s story on Sunday — a fascinating article about Col. Jim West, a 58-year-old Grand Junction business owner who volunteered for duty in Iraq and is now on his second tour. It’s based on his letters home and a phone interview with him.

I didn’t find this article myself; I didn’t even know the Grand Junction paper’s name, much less its website. Arthur Chrenkoff, writing on the other side of the world from me, pointed to it. An amazing thing, this Internet.

What seized Chrenkoff’s attention, and with good reason, is Col. West’s information about suicide car bombers. Most of them are non-Iraqis — mainly Palestinians, Syrians, and Saudis. Apparently, not all of them are eagerly embracing their opportunity to meet those 72 virgins (emphasis added):

"He was trying to drive into a busy checkpoint and the Marine guards wounded him and disabled his car before he could reach the intersection and activate the bomb," West wrote. "When they opened the door to remove him, they found him chained to the seat with his hands taped to the steering wheel. He had an activation switch on his body that he could use but they also found a remote-control activation device under the front seat. It was hidden in the floor of the car so he probably didn’t know it was there… He was going to die whether he wanted to or not."

A guard activated a radio-jamming device immediately so the bomb couldn’t be detonated, West wrote.

The driver was "yelling and very agitated and had a glazed look," West said in a telephone interview. It turned out he also was heavily drugged, West said.

The driver, a Palestinian, was treated for gunshot wounds to the legs suffered when the guards fired to stop his car. West said he didn’t know what happened to him afterwards.

He did, however, follow some as they recovered in the hospital from wounds suffered in battle.

"Some of them are very sullen," but one he remembered, was completely different.

"He was just so happy to be alive" while he was being treated for bullet wounds to the stomach and shoulder.

"He couldn’t believe our people were doing that."

But there’s much more to West’s story, and it’s well worth reading. He describes himself as "the top oil person for the reconstruction." Among other things, he’s supervising the building of a pipeline under the Tigris River that will carry 2 million barrels of oil a day to Turkey. He’s impressed by the Iraqis and optimistic about the future:

Cast against the threats against him and his team is the exhilaration he witnessed when millions of Iraqis purpled their fingers in January to show they had cast ballots in a free election.

“The people of Iraq continue to amaze me,” West wrote home. “Following the election and its overwhelming success, the people seem to have developed a new vision. Maybe it’s the fact that they, as a people, have stood up to the insurgents and made their statement for freedom, or maybe they have finally realized that this election was a first step in becoming a free and independent nation. Whatever it is, they have a zeal about themselves that I don’t think will ever be extinguished. They have tasted freedom and no one can take that from them.”

Indiscriminate killing of women and children is the work of outsiders, he said.

“There’s no plan to it, other than to terrorize the populace,” he said.

“To me, the key is to get the government up and running,” he said. “We’re doing that. Eventually the tide’s going to turn.”

But West is a realist, not a Pollyanna:

“… It’s a huge task to rebuild this nation because Saddam Hussein allowed it to degrade so badly during the last few years of his reign. Much of the equipment and technology that is currently being used to produce and refine the oil is over 20 years old. … This alone would make the rebuilding difficult but now you introduce the insurgents and the terrorist groups that are trying to destabilize the country and we are faced with an almost impossible feat.”

When he started work in Iraq, he said it seemed as though the Americans were welcomed by about 90 percent of the Iraqis.

“That’s probably lowered some now,” he said, to about 75 percent of Iraqis supporting the American presence and 5 percent who would “kill you if they could.”

Very interesting article. RTWT.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

UN estimates Iraq death toll

Posted by Richard on May 14, 2005

Tim Blair contrasted last year’s pre-election Lancet study of Iraq deaths with the newly-released UN study:

Researchers surveyed 808 households for a study published last year by The Lancet which concluded that as many as 100,000 “excess deaths” had occurred in Iraq since liberation.

The UN has now released a survey of more than 21,600 households:

The invasion of Iraq and its aftermath caused the deaths of 24,000 Iraqis, including many children, according to the most detailed survey yet of postwar life in the country.

… 

The 370-page report said that it was 95 per cent confident that the toll during the war and the first year of occupation was 24,000, but could have been between 18,000 and 29,000.

According to CNN, the UN survey was conducted throughout all of Iraq’s 18 provinces (the Lancet study examined 11).

The Lancet study was garbage, which should be obvious from its 95% CI of 8,000 to 194,000. But even the methodologically much better UN study has a rather wide CI. And the commenters to Tim’s post made some good points that put even the 24,000 number into perspective. TimShell noted:

It would be nice if we knew how many of the 24,000 dead were Baathists and terrorists who were killed fighting coalition troops.

zeppenwolf had a similar thought:

How many of those were from “insurgents” blowing themselves up in a car-bomb?

Honestly, are we morally responsible for those deaths?  The guys who blow up one car, then blow up another nearby as soon as people come running up to help?

kipwatson made some quick top-of-the-head guesstimates of combatant deaths and innocents killed by combatants:

I would be very surprised if the forces of good haven’t destroyed at least 15-20 thousand terrorists and fascists. Probably many many more, although a large component were non-Iraqis who might not show up in the figures.

The terrorists and fascists themselves must have murdered at least 10,000 of their countrymen. But the blame for that rests entirely with them and not a bit with the Coalition. Besides, from all accounts this is still a far lower figure than the number of innocents murdered during an equivalent period of Baathist rule.

He concluded that coalition forces killed very few innocents. I suspect his estimates of dead combatants and victims of same are too high. But those two categories must account for a significant chunk of the UN’s 24,000.

My favorite comment, though, was richard mcenroe’s observation about the unemployment data in the report:

Lemme get this straight: 30 years of brutal oppression, chewed on in two major wars, invaded, defeated, wracked by internal conflict from their holdout fascists and their imported buddies… and their unemployment rate is still no worse than Europe’s?  No wonder the Europeans don’t want them to get on their feet…

Ouch.  

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »