Confederate Yankee
June 07, 2010
Bigot Retired
I must admit I like Drudge's take on this news, as he writes "Helen Sent to Poland."
She was a
nasty bit of work, accepted by equally nasty peers for a half century. She simply made the mistake of getting caught.
Now that she has the free time, perhaps she'll join the next terrorist ship to Gaza. Hopefully she'll try out for the position of anchor.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:49 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Clang! A steel bar is thrown at her feet. Pick it up. Go on! Pick it up!
Never ever forget who these people are. Never forget their associates.
Posted by: Odins Acolyte at June 07, 2010 01:30 PM (brIiu)
2
I still say she is Arafat's sister. They look way too much alike and have the same political beliefs.
Posted by: 1sttofight at June 07, 2010 01:33 PM (HD36d)
3
Send her back where she came from, I'll buy the burqua.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at June 07, 2010 02:32 PM (OmeRL)
4
She was ugly when young, ugly to the bone; just look at her early hate of the US military and total whitewashing of all things Communist. Best pro-burqa argument around. Her status is more a comment on our media than herself. Note both she and Kos drool the same hateful narrative, even though Koz is greek and she is lebanese and both know better.
Posted by: EdGi at June 07, 2010 03:37 PM (eBjgL)
5
Agreed. She has long passed a point where she matters. Here is my post on this.
http://truthandcommonsense.com/2010/06/07/talking-about-helen-thomas-talking-through-her-ass/
I'll bet money she is suffering from not only a liberal mindset that has been slowly metastasizing into a cancerous body within her soul, but she is also in the stages of Alzheimer's. I saw my grandmother do the same thing; making comments out of step, thinking things are in a different time. Several of the recent questions she made were so "out there" it was like she was living in a different era.
I wish I could sympathize with her situation, but I cannot. Somebody should have taken her aside and told her it was time to take up gardening about twenty years ago.
PC prevented it, PC finally caused her demise. Somehow fitting...
Posted by: archer52 at June 07, 2010 04:14 PM (vI1s4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Reuters: On the side of Terrorists, Once Again
This time, they've been caught cropping a photo so that while you see the Israeli soldier lying wounded on the deck of the Gaza blockade runner Mavi Marmara , you don't see the Turkish mercenary standing over his body with a combat knife.
Reuters employees
have a history of supporting terrorism via propaganda. We should not be surprised that they are up to their old tricks.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:02 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
A large group of Helen's associates. Mark them.
Y'all want to pick up a steel bar too? Rueter's (I had a friend with tht name. She pronounced it Reader...like the navigator's journal.) has choosen it's side. Aligned against Israel. Aligned with The Darkness.
Posted by: Odins Acolyte at June 07, 2010 01:34 PM (brIiu)
2
In the picture, the guy has a large amount of venous blood at this waist. That did not come from a pipe. More like a gun shot wound. What is wrong with Israel anyway? The US does not try and board ships at sea in a peaceful manner. All guns are trained on the offending ship until the troops return. There would definitely have been covering fire for troops boarding. Israel is trying to hard to comply. That makes me concerned for the war that will eventually occur. They don't seem to be the country they were in 1960's.
Posted by: David at June 07, 2010 02:21 PM (coY4Z)
3
Perhaps this is why the White House wants to control the bloggers via the FTC. So little things such as this will pass for the truth.
Just saying.
But yes, not shocked that Reuters is siding with radical muslim sheep humping murders once again.
Posted by: Michael at June 08, 2010 11:40 AM (PU7e+)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Brad Manning, I Hope They Hang You High
A disgruntled Army specialist by the name of Brad Manning has been placed under arrest after a former hacker turned him in for bragging about breaching national security, having turned over hundreds of thousands of documents to Wikileaks:
SPC Bradley Manning, 22, of Potomac, Maryland, was stationed at Forward Operating Base Hammer, 40 miles east of Baghdad, where he was arrested nearly two weeks ago by the Army's Criminal Investigation Division. A family member says he's being held in custody in Kuwait, and has not been formally charged.
Manning was turned in late last month by a former computer hacker with whom he spoke online. In the course of their chats, Manning took credit for leaking a headline-making video of a helicopter attack that Wikileaks posted online in April. The video showed a deadly 2007 U.S. helicopter air strike in Baghdad that claimed the lives of several innocent civilians.
He said he also leaked three other items to Wikileaks: a separate video showing the notorious 2009 Garani air strike in Afghanistan that Wikileaks has previously acknowledged is in its possession; a classified Army document evaluating Wikileaks as a security threat, which the site posted in March; and a previously unreported breach consisting of 260,000 classified U.S. diplomatic cables that Manning described as exposing "almost criminal political back dealings."
"Hillary Clinton, and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public," Manning wrote.
In every instance cited above by Manning there are avenues to blow the whistle on corruption and illegality through channels that would bring wrongdoers to justice.
Instead, Manning decided to declare himself arbiter of his own brand of justice, leaking hundreds of thousand of classified documents and and two videos that leftist Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has used to smear the U.s. military. The more famous of these, July 12, 2007 gun camera footage from an Apache attack helicopter firing upon armed Medhi Army militants, has been
thoroughly discredited.
I'm not a lawyer, and don't claim to be, but Manning's distribution of classified military and State Department information during an on-going conflict would seem to be the very definition of treason.
I don't know if they still hang spies from treason, but they should. If Brad Manning is guilty of the crimes of which he is accused, he should be executed as soon as his appeals are exhausted.
"He was in a war zone and basically trying to vacuum up as much classified information as he could, and just throwing it up into the air," said the hacker who turned him in, Adrian Lamo. Even worse than committing treason for a cause or for money, Manning apparent did it for kicks.
The
Wired article also notes that Manning had "a keen interest in global politics."
Too bad he chose the wrong side.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:50 AM
| Comments (24)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Doing it for money is far worse than doing it for kicks. He's less of a rat than scum like Pollard.
Posted by: chumpstyle at June 07, 2010 09:30 AM (vkZdM)
2
Someone murders inncoent people and this hero reports them. Then some snitch turns him in... adrian is the worst kind of filth. Of course DOD tweaked the story, I doubt he leaked diplomatic comms and that this is just lies and more evil. If you don't see anything you know it was a lie.
Posted by: na at June 07, 2010 09:52 AM (HUKED)
3
Manning probably will end up with a job at NYT--they support this kind of treason.
As for murdering innocent people, the real killers were those who chose to hide amongst innocents while waging war. And all our internal and external enemies know this.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 07, 2010 10:49 AM (MZd0C)
4
"Then some decent American turns him in... Manning is the worst kind of filth."
There, fixed it for you.
Posted by: Johnv2 at June 07, 2010 12:18 PM (ZaGhG)
5
To paraphrase: "Executing a soldier is the poorest use of soldier."
If guilty, SPC Bradley Manning is a traitor and should be court martialed and punished as such. Twenty-five years in Ft. Leavenworth is the most likely sentence.
That's in my backyard, so I might baked him a cow pie and toss it in his general direction.
This guy here says that Manning is a homosexual and frustration about DADT is the motive for his (alleged) traitorous acts.
Perversely enough, the author is not disturbed that Manning might have committed treason, endangered his fellow soldiers and compromised the mission, but the author is more upset that repeal of DADT is in jeopardy!
Morally repugnant dipstick...
Posted by: locomotivebreath1901 at June 07, 2010 12:37 PM (/vLYT)
6
Brad Manning is a hero.
Posted by: Maria at June 08, 2010 08:35 AM (ZZFhA)
7
You people who savage Manning would make Good Germans in the 1930's. Real patriots criticize their government when it is wrong, and expose its atrocities when it commits them.
Posted by: JdL at June 08, 2010 08:46 AM (41sgq)
8
hey sysop, is that how you´re dealing with critics? erasing comments? i repeat, when you´re blaming manning for publishing this horrible video just "for fun", then you´ve to hear those sarcastic comments made by the helicopter pilots as well. manning did something very courageous, no matter what you hardliner might say about it. the world lacks of people like him. never saw more firestarter than on this page. cheers
Posted by: user778 at June 08, 2010 08:47 AM (RRSy6)
9
I want one of you lefties to explain, using complete sentences, why what Brad Manning did was honorable instead of treason.
According to the best information available, he never even attempted to use or investigate whisteblower statutes. He never approached his chain of command, the CID, or the Inspector General.
Instead he took it upon himself to release videos that he did not understand the context of, so it could be exploited by a radical left wing activists. Read the links I provided in the article... if you dare. The Iraqi Medhi Army militants gunned down in the video were armed with AK-47 rifles and rocket-propelled grenades. The van that came to pick up the wounded cameraman (which the pilots had every reason to believe was a terrorist, since he traveled with them) had been buzzing around the battlefield, and is shown in the beginning of the long video. The driver seems to be ferrying militants and weapons from a nearby mosque to fighting positions, and he clearly knew the rules of engagement, and that stopping to assist a combatant renders him a combatant as well... just like the other two militants that were smoked with the driver that no one seems to want to admit exists.
War is messy, and the fog of war makes it inevitable that civilians sometimes get killed or injured, like those two poor kids that the father cynically used as human shields. When combatants cravenly hide among civilians, more civilians will die.
Listen closely to the various communications between air and ground units. I doubt you'll understand the details, but you should be able to easily understand that the pilots of the gunship were eager to destroy enemy combatants, while every bit as concerned about limiting civilian casualties. They used the smallest weapon at their disposal, the 30mm cannon, when they could have used Hellfire missiles (as they did on a later target), because they sought to minimize collateral damage.
Brad Manning is a REMF (I'll let you look that up) who understands real combat only slightly better than you do. In his arrogance, ignorance, and malevolence he decided to disclose hundreds of thousands of top secret documents, that he obviously didn't even read.
You call him a hero.
To what cause?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at June 08, 2010 09:52 AM (gAi9Z)
10
come on, the footage shows exactly what it was: young cowboys in their helicopter firing at people while having a lot of fun and laughing at their victims. they just did NOT have enough background information about the situation.
//The Medhi Army militants gunned down in the video were armed with AK-47 rifles and rocket-propelled grenades// that´s what the helicopter crew thought, but didn´t clarified!
i read your "article". it´s full of resentments against the reuters journalists you´d like to push in the islamic corner. as far as i know its still not clear who was on the streets except the journalists. the army tought that, supposed that... (like all the w.m.d.? remember?)
...to keep the collateral damage as small as possible... don´t make me laugh. what more can happen when you fire at civilians (yes) and children?
lucky me i´m an european tax payer and didn´t had to come up for this marvellous "hit".
here´s another link to light you up a bit (if you dare):
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/US-Army-Intelligence-Analyst-Bradley-Manning-Arrested/Article/201006215645769?lpos=World_News_First_World_News_Article_Teaser_Region_2&lid=ARTICLE_15645769_US_Army_Intelligence_Analyst_Bradley_Manning_Arrested_
Posted by: user778 at June 08, 2010 11:55 AM (RRSy6)
11
Hang him! he is the worst kind of rat he betrayed his comrades
Posted by: R, Lemon at June 09, 2010 02:14 PM (14yLE)
12
Confederate Yankee? Isn't that an oxymoron?
Would the video have been released had Manning taken advantage of "whistleblower statutes" or his chain of command? Or might it have been classified as confidential, Manning hushed and the public never made aware of the actions being undertaken in their names? Perhaps Manning did not trust that the truth would come out or that he wouldn't face reprisal. Can the government and military be trusted to prosecute inappropriate behavior among their own ranks? Will honorable soldiers be corrupted by those guilty of war crimes who remain enlisted or in command?
If what the soldiers in the helicopter did was acceptable under the rules of engagement, what harm was there in releasing it to the public? Why should something like this be confidential? Shouldn't we be open about our actions if we believe them justified?
Posted by: pfft at June 10, 2010 08:04 PM (4YAgp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 05, 2010
Turkish Terrorist Autopsies Suggest They Were Shot By Their Own Men
First the spin, then the facts:
Nine Turkish men on board the Mavi Marmara were shot a total of 30 times and five were killed by gunshot wounds to the head, according to the vice-chairman of the Turkish council of forensic medicine, which carried out the autopsies for the Turkish ministry of justice today.
The results revealed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back. A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has US citizenship, was shot five times from less that 45cm, in the face, in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back. Two other men were shot four times, and five of the victims were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, said Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the council of forensic medicine.
The findings emerged as more survivors gave their accounts of the raids. Ismail Patel, the chairman of Leicester-based pro-Palestinian group Friends of al-Aqsa, who returned to Britain today, told how he witnessed some of the fatal shootings and claimed that Israel had operated a "shoot to kill policy".
He calculated that during the bloodiest part of the assault, Israeli commandos shot one person every minute. One man was fatally shot in the back of the head just two feet in front him and another was shot once between the eyes. He added that as well as the fatally wounded, 48 others were suffering from gunshot wounds and six activists remained missing, suggesting the death toll may increase.
The new information about the manner and intensity of the killings undermines Israel's insistence that its soldiers opened fire only in self defence and in response to attacks by the activists.
Nice try, but no cigar.
Let's get some facts straight, shall we?
Less than a dozen Israeli soldiers armed with paintball guns and sidearms fast-roped to the deck of the Mavi
Marmara, where they ran into a buzzsaw of Turkish mercenaries wearing ceramic body armor and armed with metal rods, knives, and yes,
firearms. That the lynch mob was armed with guns was confirmed by the ships own captain, who saw them throw overboard as Israeli reinforcements arrived.
Each soldier in the initial boarding party was surrounded upon touch-down, and tackled by groups of Turkish zealots. All told, estimates are that between 60-100 thugs pounced upon the handful of soldiers. Three of the soldiers were severely injured before the last soldier on the helo even hit the deck; two had been shot by the terrorists, and a third soldier had had his head smashed open with a metal rod. Three other soldiers had ben knocked unconscious and dragged below decks in hopes of making them hostages.
A maximum of four soldiers fired killing shots into the lynch mob. We know this because the Israeli Staff Sergeant that was the last soldier on deck killed six of the nine with his sidearm, a Glock pistol. Because of their position, all shots were straight on at close range, into the heads and chests of their charging targets.
But that does not match what we see the Turkish corner's forensics tells us, Indeed he adds quite a bit of new and useful information to the story, that the media can't spin its way out of, no matter how hard they try.
The corner speaks of his mercenary countrymen being shot from behind, in the back and back of the head. Since the Israeli soldiers at this time had been forced back into a single small defensive position as the lynch mob continued to advance with weapons in a frontal rush,
this strongly suggests that at least half the rounds that hit Ibrahim Bilgen and Fulkan Dogan were fired by their fellow mercenaries behind them.
The other dead bore similar wounds, with shots to the head from the front (fired by the Israelis) and shots to the back from behind, most likely fired by other terrorists.
We know well from previous encounters in Gaza and Lebanon that Israel's enemies think nothing of killing their own in order to blame the Jews for their deaths.
This is simply the first time that an unwitting coroner on their side has given us medical evidence that those killed died at their countrymen's hands.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:07 PM
| Comments (20)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
>; two had been shot by the terrorists,
I've read nothing about any IDF soldier being shot, can you please provide the link to that information? The link you provided says nothing about them being shot.
Posted by: Fred at June 06, 2010 10:16 AM (wIznQ)
2
I haven't heard about any IDF members shot. Of course, our sources of information, by the mainstream media, is limited. If IDF member(s) were shot, I doubt if it will be declassified.
Posted by: OhioRiver at June 06, 2010 10:26 AM (/vbVz)
3
The terrorist-loving leftist media didn't bother to mention that IDF soldiers were shot by the turkish lynch mob, nor that they had guns that the captain saw thrown over the side? Why am I not surprised?
When St.-Sgt. S. fast-roped down from an air force Black Hawk helicopter onto the Mavi Marmara Turkish passenger ship on Monday morning, he did not expect to be landing in what he called “a battlefield” and facing off against a group of “murderous mercenaries.”
The 15th and last naval commando from Flotilla 13 (the Shayetet) to rappel down onto the ship from the helicopter, S. said on Thursday that he was immediately attacked by what the IDF has called “the mob of mercenaries” aboard the vessel, just like the soldiers who had boarded just before him.
Looking to his side, he saw three of his commanders lying wounded – one with a gunshot wound to the stomach and another with a gunshot wound to the knee. A third was lying unconscious; his skull was fractured by a devastating blow with a metal bar.
As the next in the chain of command, S., who has been in the Shayetet for three and a half years, immediately took charge.
He pushed the wounded soldiers up against the wall of the upper deck and created a perimeter of soldiers around them to begin treating their wounds, he said. He then arranged his men to form a second perimeter, and pulled out his 9 mm. Glock pistol to stave off the charging attackers and to protect his wounded comrades.
Of course, you will no doubt find the terrorists more credible than the soldiers, but that says far more about you than it does anyone else.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at June 06, 2010 10:34 AM (CwGYU)
4
Bob:
This is off topic, but...
I know you're not blogging much on the Gulf Oil Spill, but here's a timeline of events I've been maintaining since early May. Deepwater Horizon Incident Timeline.
I'm hoping to maintain a resource so folks can know what happened and when.
Posted by: David at June 06, 2010 11:50 AM (6W+ql)
5
In one important way, whether or not the Hamas/Turkish/jihadist fighters had firearms is unimportant. Knives and clubs in the hands of a violent and prepared gang are just as dangerous. Shooting people attacking you with deadly weapons of any sort is a reasonable response.
It is just a pity more were not shot.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 06, 2010 01:52 PM (23sZE)
6
Israel has so far suppressed most of the evidence and has only selectively released video footage that paints the flotilla activists in the worst light possible without providing any real context.
It is entirely possible that it was the IDF that fired first and the flotilla activists who were defending themselves.
Posted by: AJB at June 06, 2010 02:31 PM (Qvrf2)
7
It's also entirely possible that Iran is just a peace loving country, AJB, but I suspect the odds are about the same for that as they are for the IDF having shot those poor, innocent, re-bar/pipe-welding/linch-minded/gun-toting peace ativists in cold blood, real small.
Posted by: emdfl at June 06, 2010 03:06 PM (vwRFo)
8
It is entirely possible that it was the IDF that fired first and the flotilla activists who were defending themselves.
Posted by AJB at June 6, 2010 02:31 PM
By not stopping and diverting to the Israeli port, the ship and its passengers exposed themselves to attack. Watching the video of the IDF commandos be swarmed and beaten as they rappelled down to the ship is more than sufficient evidence to any rational mind that the IDF failed to use sufficient force.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 06, 2010 06:04 PM (23sZE)
9
actually its not possible. its in fact impossible.
the turks wanted a fight.
the other ships were boarded without incident.
the moment the israelis touched the deck of the turk ship they were violently set upon.
the muslims on that boat were violent barbarian goblins who got what they asked for and started the violence.
go ahead give the benefit of the doubt to goblins, but that is like trying to pretend a goblin isnt a goblin, a snake isnt a snake, a hyena isnt a hyena.....
Posted by: rumcrook¾ at June 06, 2010 06:41 PM (60WiD)
10
AJB's just upset that there weren't more dead Jews.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at June 06, 2010 08:45 PM (0onAO)
11
That figures. After watching some of the video I think the Isralis were justified in using deadly force if they indeed did.
Posted by: ron at June 07, 2010 12:41 AM (GpGZ2)
12
I'm not going to defend this piece but it shows where the other side's head is ...Mr Elshayyal, a reporter for the Arab channel al-Jazeera, was standing to one side of the ship and had a view of the front and back of the vessel when the fighting started. By his account, soldiers fired down on the protesters from the helicopters before an Israeli soldier had even set foot on the ship. A man next to him was shot through the top of his head, dying instantly.
"What I saw were shots being fired from the helicopter above and moments later from below – from the ships," Mr Elshayyal said. "As far as I am concerned, it's a lie to say they only started shooting on deck."
At least two other eyewitnesses saw soldiers firing from above the ships before they landed on the Marmara's deck. It is possible that this is what prompted the fierce resistance to the soldiers when they dropped down. Several passengers recount how organisers urged their peers to stop hitting the soldiers, aware of how it would harm their claim to be peaceful protesters.
Posted by: Neo at June 07, 2010 10:39 AM (tE8FB)
13
The fact of this matter and every other matter dealing with muslims is that they lie. They lie even when it isn't needed. They lie like a kid caught with his hand in the candy jar. It is a fine art with muslims as is the type of confrontation that they put on for us here. They are well used to their friends in the mfm watching their backs. Don't forget the Ap photo that cropped out the knife that one muslim was holding.
Posted by: TimothyJ at June 07, 2010 11:11 AM (IKKIf)
14
Posted by Neo at June 7, 2010 10:39 AM
oh my, if you cannot believe al-jazeera who can you believe.
Posted by: iconoclastq at June 07, 2010 05:26 PM (Srqoz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Baby Killer Kagan
I don't think any rational person was ever under the delusion that a President as radical as Barack Obama would nominate a moderate for the Supreme Court, so it is no surprise at all that documents have come out proving that Elena Kagan is a flaming liberal.
I just didn't expect Obama to be so out of touch that he would nominate an advocate of
fetal murder:
A newly-produced document today from the Clinton archives is the second to show Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan defending ex-President Bill Clinton's veto of a bill to ban partial-birth abortions. The memo, and others, may increase Republican opposition to her nomination.
In one of the documents that comprises the 46,000 pages of material the William J. Clinton Presidential Library released today, Kagan opined on the ban for Clinton as an attorney with the administration's Office of Domestic Policy.
In a February 27, 1997 memo to top White House staff, Kagan referred to the startling admission from Ron Fitzsimmons, at the time the executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers.
The debate then had been on whether the partial-birth abortion procedure was done for health reasons for the mother or essentially on healthy unborn children for elective reasons only.
Leading pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL made claims that flew in the face of medical practice by saying the three-day-long abortion procedure would somehow be able to save a woman's life in a life-threatening medical circumstance.
Fitzsimmons signed on to that mantra but eventually relented, saying he "lied through my teeth" about the statistics and supposed reasons for the abortion procedure.
According to CNN, the new memo showed Kagan advising Clinton, saying it "it would be a great mistake to challenge" Fitzsimmons' statements given how embarrassing they were for abortion advocates...
[snip]
Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee eventually told LifeNews.com the Kagan memo likely helped keep partial-birth abortions legal longer.
While it is a purely personal belief, I hold that partial birth abortion,
in most cases, amounts to murder.
You cannot tell me
this procedure is merely the removal of a mass of cells. It is the murder of an infant, performed by zealots as an act of political defiance and individual selfishness instead of medical necessity
in most instances.
I feel a deep and abiding sorrow for the few women each year that must legitimately chose between their lives and the lives of their baby. But this bill was never really about them.
Elena Kagan embraces infanticide as a political statement. No one this radical should ever see the inside of the Supreme Court.
Except, perhaps, as a defendant.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
06:52 AM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
It's done WHEN THE WOMAN'S LIFE IS IN DANGER.
Do you really think a woman goes like 8 months pregnant thinking "Oh, I'll just get the abortion done at the last minute, it's kinda fun being pregnant with a kid I don't want!"
Oh and "While it is a purely personal belief, " doesn't make for law.
Posted by: Fred at June 05, 2010 09:38 AM (wIznQ)
2
>Except, perhaps, as a defendant.
Yeah, you really understand how the SC works.
Posted by: Fred at June 05, 2010 09:39 AM (wIznQ)
3
The AMA has issued a position statement on partial-birth abortion, and also on third-trimester abortion. Even the AMA says that there is never a reason to invoke either of these to save the mother's life; that the infants are viable by that point and a simple C section will suffice and be less detrimental to the mother than inducing birth to essentially tear the infant limb from limb. The position statement can be found at the AMA web site. It's time to speak the truth about this and stop hiding behind the "woman's right to choose." By the third trimester, it ought to be the infant's rights, because those can be upheld without affecting the mother's health at all.
Posted by: KSterling at June 05, 2010 11:38 AM (XE19V)
4
When facts interfere with the flagrantly biased narrative of the left...the facts just have to change!
The ghost of Lysenko is smiling on these nuts.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 05, 2010 11:57 AM (MZd0C)
5
No, the AMA supported the bill because:
http://www.gargaro.com/ama.html
"the bill would allow a legitimate exception where the life of the mother was endangered"
and that's the only time they do it.
So the bill? It doesn't change a thing.
Are you really so thick as to think a woman who doesn't want to have the kid is going to wait till the last possible moment?
All they have to do is say "abortion" and you morons start howling and gibbering. What? You think Kagan is going to make abortion super-legal?
Bush could find the political will to launch a war (that you "pro-lifers" cheered on) but not to do anything about abortion. In fact can you name one single politician you have voted for that has stopped one abortion?
They talk about it because it gets you twits to vote for them but they never actually do anything because anyone with any sense knows it has to be legal.
Or have you noticed that making things people do with their bodies illegal doesn't stop them from doing it?
Posted by: Fred at June 05, 2010 05:05 PM (wIznQ)
6
Obviously, a liberal President will produce a liberal supreme court judge. Seems like things get more and more liberal every year, though. Even some of the conservatives are liberal compared to 20 years ago.
Elections matter. Have to make sure we all vote in November to take back the Congress so at least there is a shot at a more moderate appointee next time.
Posted by: Muck at June 05, 2010 05:44 PM (yzRtI)
7
Fred's got pretty good control. It took him three posts to get to the "Bush-evil" mantra of the dncmsm.
Posted by: emdfl at June 05, 2010 07:59 PM (vwRFo)
8
Are you really so thick as to think a woman who doesn't want to have the kid is going to wait till the last possible moment?
Of course all women are the same and none, according to you, would ever want something as vile as a partial birth abortion just to free themselves from giving birth to a baby. No more than any mother would killer her own children.
Your offensiveness is only exceeded by your obstinate ignorance.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 05, 2010 08:24 PM (MZd0C)
9
Fred,
There is NO situation that I am aware of where killing a live full, or almost full term baby is necessary to save the life of the mother.
Think about it. The baby is almost ALL the way out of the mother ALREADY when its birth is stopped in order to kill it, before pulling its head out. Physically, the process is the same. The infant being killed at the last possible moment could not possibly do anything to "save" the mother.
I'm sorry, Fred, but you lose this one.
Posted by: Bill Smith at June 05, 2010 08:26 PM (ENO4d)
10
All abortions are murder, the late-term abortion is horrible murder, if mom is at risk why not a c-section? Why induce labor, then turn baby around in a breech position, them stop the birth so baby can be killed with head in poor sick moms vagina??? Murder. My 1st daughter was born at 6 months, I was in a coma and yet she was saved and lives today, given the choice my life/her life I would chose her life, she wieghed just under 2 lbs and the docs and nurses fought for her and for me too, so do not tell me that murder is ever an option. And my daughter was born in the early 70s , I chose life as I know abortion is murder.
Posted by: duncan at June 05, 2010 09:54 PM (lGcPs)
11
Fred, you are dead wrong. There is no situation where a mother's life could be in danger and a C section could not be performed more safely than an abortion. You don't understand how a partial-birth abortion works vs. a C section if you can't see that. A partial-birth abortion is much harder on the mother than a C section - ergo, it would never be performed if the mother's life were in danger; a simple C section would suffice and the baby would be viable. And yes, I mean "baby." Partial-birth abortions are not performed except during the third trimester, and by that time the infant is viable. THEREFORE, if you are able to think critically, you can see that an abortion during the third trimester is tantamount to murder, b/c if the baby were simply born during that time (as I was, I was a 7-month baby way back in the Stone Age of 1957), it would live on its own.
Also, Fred, please see this article from the NY Times, where the head of the National Coalition for Abortion Providers admitted that he lied on numerous occasions about partial-birth abortions and that the procedure is most often performed ON A HEALTHY MOTHER. http://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/26/us/an-abortion-rights-advocate-says-he-lied-about-procedure.html
Posted by: KSterling at June 06, 2010 09:15 AM (XE19V)
12
Wow. Did you not read this:
"the bill would allow a legitimate exception where the life of the mother was endangered"
That's the AMA, ya think they know a wee bit more about it than you do?
Women die in childbirth you idiots, it used to happen more often than not before medical science came along with options and one of those options is abortion.
You're ignorant morons who fortunately are a minority.
Abortion is legal and no one in power has made any serious effort to change that, not even your Dear Leader Bush. They use abortion to get you tards to drag your knuckles to the ballot box and vote for them. They use abortion to get you idiots to screech about stuff like SC and other appointments. In fact banning abortion would be a mistake they'll never make, otherwise how would they get you twats to do what they want?
Posted by: Fred at June 06, 2010 10:09 AM (wIznQ)
13
Fred, ha ha, can you not connect the dots? "women die in childbirth" ... yeah, so THAT is why the AMA recommends, in their position statement, that a woman who is in distress in her third trimester undergo a C section. Because in order to have a partial-birth abortion, you must induce birth. Which is dangerous for the mother. If her life is in danger, the quickest fix is to cut open her stomach and take the baby. Unless, of course, she doesn't want the baby - in which case she would opt for a partial-birth abortion. Read the NYT article (link above) where the leading abortion doc admitted this procedure was done on healthy women. Do you think women don't get "cold feet" late in a pregnancy, that perhaps their circumstances don't change and they get scared and just want to end it, w/o any further responsibility? If you don't think this is possible, you really don't understand women at all, or much of anything else.
And yes, the AMA supported the partial-birth abortion ban b/c of the change in the language in the bill; their worry was that the ban would be extended to other abortion situations. Their concern was not partial-birth abortions, which the AMA does not support.
Stop screaming about abortions being practiced on women whose health is in danger. A very minor fraction of abortions are performed for that reason. Most of them are performed as a measure of birth control. And that is the honest, despicable truth.
Posted by: KSterling at June 06, 2010 03:42 PM (XE19V)
14
Elana Kagan is a left wing extremist. Would Barrack Obama appoint anyone else? Any Republican who votes to confirm anybody appointed by Mr Obama is failing the country.
Posted by: Ken Hahn at June 06, 2010 05:40 PM (XkX2h)
15
Women die in childbirth you idiots, it used to happen more often than not before medical science came along with options and one of those options is abortion.
That's one of the dumbest things I've ever read, Fred. What's that you were saying about ignorant morons?
Posted by: Pablo at June 06, 2010 06:38 PM (yTndK)
16
Registered Labor and Delivery nurse, weighing in; you'd be surprised, Fred, and probably thrilled, at how many women come in well in to their 8 month for abortions. Because all of the nurses that I work with refuse to assist in such a ghastly procedure, most of these cases are sent out to clinics who are more than happpy to provide this service.
Posted by: JolieFleurs at June 07, 2010 08:31 PM (GXLjK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 04, 2010
Carradine's Widow Files Wrongful Death Lawsuit
She claims the French company handling the actor's last film ( the perfectly titled Stretch) "failed to provide proper services to protect him."
Which is what... bungie cord instead of rope?
I suspect the trial will end in a hung jury.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
02:09 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Posted by: Mary in LA at June 04, 2010 03:52 PM (JYxmy)
2
Will the award take a large bight out of the company's budget?
(Seriously, though, I was very sorry when Mr. Carradine died. And what a sad and undignified way to go!)
Posted by: Mary in LA at June 04, 2010 03:55 PM (JYxmy)
3
If she wins, will she then go out, celebrate and tie one on?
Posted by: arb at June 04, 2010 04:57 PM (iIMao)
4
I wonder if the lawyers for the defense will give her enough rope to hang herself or at least let her tie herself in knots before the judge gives her the long drop and dismisses the case.
Tarheel Repub Out!
Posted by: Tarheel Repub at June 05, 2010 11:44 AM (OQEcO)
5
No noose is good noose.
Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at June 06, 2010 08:23 PM (HIXUa)
6
I knew a woman who died in the same embarassing way. Carradine's wife needs to let that go.
Posted by: Odins Acolyte at June 07, 2010 01:37 PM (brIiu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
SEIU Thugs Target Red Cross, Threaten Blood Supply
In any sort of threat-focused reality, SEIU bosses would be tracked by Predator drones and union membership lists simply rolled over into terrorist watch lists.
This is just the latest example why.
Is there any low to which the SEIU won't stoop? Now it's interrupting blood donations in a strike against the American Red Cross. The Boy Scouts and Baptist churches are also on unions' enemies list.
Demanding higher wages and better benefits, the Service Employees International Union on Wednesday launched a three-day strike against the Red Cross' blood donation operations. The job action comes as the nonprofit, in a realistic response to the weak economy, is cutting salaries, ending bonuses and reducing pensions.
SEIU thinks its members should not only be exempt from the Red Cross' efforts to live within its means, but actually get a raise.
But it's not about the money, you see. It's really about safety. "Cutting jobs, slashing wages and benefits of employees and cutting corners are affecting the safety of the blood supply," the union's Frank Hornick told the Parkersburg (W.Va.) News & Sentinel.
So SEIU's way to get a safe supply is to pay higher union wages? It's hardly compassion for consumers to hold 40% of the nation's blood supply hostage.
Threatening the blood supply is a threat to this nation's infrastructure, and the ringleaders of this plot should be thrown in jail. People's lives are quite literally at risk.
It's good to know that in such a time of crisis, our nation's leadership will respond to the challenge by focusing all their energy on doing that which is most important...
yeah, I'm kidding.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:53 PM
| Comments (35)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Where have the Pinkertons gone? Our nation turns their lonely eyes to them...
Posted by: Mick Kraut at June 04, 2010 01:26 PM (5ap+X)
2
I like the idea about Predator drones, when can we get started?
Before November right?
Posted by: Mike H. at June 04, 2010 01:27 PM (f80iQ)
3
In a perfect world, every SEIU member would henceforth no longer be eligible to receive Red-Cross processed blood products.
But that's not going to happen.
Posted by: looking closely at June 04, 2010 01:29 PM (6Q9g2)
4
I used to be a journalist on Long Island ... covered a strike by SEIU's local 1099 union of a local hospital in a country town on the east end. The hospital lies far back from the main road, and the amblulance entrance is at the end of a driveway maybe 100 yeards long. The union thugs lined the driveway (the hospital's private property) with roofing nails ... many of them, basically strewed all over the ambulance driveway. They were hoping someone would die there in that driveway to put a little more pressure on the management for a raise. Talk about greed destroying the country.
Posted by: Fritz at June 04, 2010 01:46 PM (u0Xn6)
5
"Where have the Pinkertons gone? Our nation turns their lonely eyes to them..."
Acquired by Securitas AB. I do take pleasure in representing the current incarnation of the guys with the pick handles....
Posted by: Thomas at June 04, 2010 01:56 PM (r6BQc)
6
Working as one of the security guards at the Huntington, WV strike location, I have witnessed the workers verbally assault couriers picking up blood for hospitals, verbally assault a postal worker and had Mr. Hornick expose his buttocks to me--a truly disgusting sight. Real class acts. The City of Huntington has gone out of its way to encourage this by refusing to enforce trespass laws, allowing the workers to camp out on the lawn in front of the Red Cross office building
Posted by: J. B. at June 04, 2010 01:59 PM (3sP8J)
7
That's why I call them what they really are - labor mafias. Their actions by any other gang would clearly be criminal with the g-men in hot pursuit. Instead, the government grants them amnesty. Never confuse the "labor movement" with improving lot of workers. The labor mafia's only goal is power.
Posted by: J in StL at June 04, 2010 02:09 PM (6vwCf)
8
Public employee unions, UGH! What are they good for? UGH!
Posted by: Redman at June 04, 2010 02:14 PM (l2bCF)
9
Instead of EFCA, why isn't some conservative group of politicians sponsoring a national right-to-work act? I think it is wee past time for one.
Posted by: RRRoark at June 04, 2010 02:48 PM (EYXy9)
10
Fortunately, there's no need to go through the Red Cross. In Pennsylvania, there's a regional blood bank I donate to. Sometimes, I was told my donation was slated for an operation later that day at the nearby major hospital
Posted by: Pay Attention at June 04, 2010 02:55 PM (r4nDp)
11
How is that "fortunate?" The SEIU are the bad guys here (and everywhere), not the ARC.
It would be "fortunate" if SEIU thugs uniformly did jail time every time they assaulted an opponent, and paid every time they destroyed private property.
Posted by: Jonathan at June 04, 2010 03:02 PM (/vPgr)
12
"Cutting jobs, slashing wages and benefits of employees and cutting corners are affecting the safety of the blood supply," the union's Frank Hornick told the Parkersburg (W.Va.) News & Sentinel.
Sounds like a threat to me.
Posted by: cheeflo at June 04, 2010 03:13 PM (O+Xp5)
13
These are Obama's Storm Troopers.
Posted by: Dotar Sojat at June 04, 2010 03:31 PM (Qmpah)
14
The SEIU thugs should be handled like all varmints. They should be shot and disposed of. Keep your ammo dry!
chicopanther
Posted by: chicopanther at June 04, 2010 03:37 PM (/0wma)
15
So... instead of complaining that the Int'l Red Cross is healing Taliban, etc., the SEIU is complaining the locals aren't getting a raise...
Just like a "Union"...
Posted by: setnaffa at June 04, 2010 03:40 PM (CZgD+)
16
"...cutting corners are affecting the safety of the blood supply..."
Be a shame if one of your tanks got broke, colonel...
Posted by: Ross MacLochness at June 04, 2010 03:51 PM (jvG2F)
17
It's interesting that the serial thuggery of these goons has become so frequent and so open. One can predict a giant comeuppance ahead. It can't come fast enough.
Posted by: Wintoon at June 04, 2010 04:07 PM (q8Jt/)
18
Why is the illegal behavior of these SEIU thugs not prosecuted? Apparently, union members are given a free pass to break the law with impunity in this country at this time. Rest assured that if any other citizen(read here conservative) were to behave this way, the authorities would throw the book at them. Where can I join so that I too, may commit illegal acts without fear of reprisal? When are the good people of this country going to rise up and say "enough" and demand that those who break the law, whoever they are, including Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Soon I hope.
Posted by: Victoria at June 04, 2010 05:30 PM (OZq/D)
19
Anytime you're near an SEIU protest or picket, keep video camera ready, even if it's just the one in your cell phone.
Posted by: Dean at June 04, 2010 05:35 PM (Lqn18)
20
I hate to tell you this, but once Obamacare gets really going, doctors will likely be members of this union. That means that your doctor will be striking in a similar manner to what you are seeing here. As far as I am concerned America deserves just such an action for insisting on having socialized medicine.
Posted by: David at June 04, 2010 05:53 PM (coY4Z)
21
What will these unions do next, Have the ALPA fly passenger jets into skyscrapers?
Posted by: forrest at June 04, 2010 07:26 PM (xHdXh)
22
"doctors will likely be members of this union"
Doctors already have their own union, and it is extremely effective in holding up the costs of their services by limiting competition. They have no need of joining a half-assed operation like the SEIU.
-jcr
Posted by: John C. Randolph at June 04, 2010 08:57 PM (P9Pll)
23
"Why is the illegal behavior of these SEIU thugs not prosecuted? "
Because unions were extremely useful to FDR when he wanted to become a dictator. It's extremely difficult to get a prosecutor to take on any union, no matter how blatant their crimes.
-jcr
Posted by: John C. Randolph at June 04, 2010 09:00 PM (P9Pll)
24
Interrupting blood drives? Sounds like the very definition of the old TX defense, "He needed killin'" Justifiable homicide any way you slice it.
Posted by: SDN at June 04, 2010 10:29 PM (MFDDF)
25
This is far more serious than it's getting credit for here people! SEIU is THE union for POLICE, FIRE FIGHTERS, whole BUREAUS of BUREAUCRATS who have Life & Death powers over all of us, and or can prevent & impede our Liberty & Pursuit of Happiness as well.
If the SEIU is not stopped and disbanded VERY SOON their Thugs will we virtually unstopable, when supported by all the SERVICE employees mentioned above.
It's already bad enough, with cops escorting their thugs to private homes and refusing to enforce trespass and other crimminal acts. Next they'll be "absent" when someone is beaten and killed. Where do we go for Justice & Safety when SEIU bosses control the Cops & The Courthouse?
Public Employee Unions must be first - they must be made illegal. Schools next, then private charities. SEIU is an organized crime syndicate, nothing more or less.
Get serious folks, before it's too late!
Posted by: mike reed at June 04, 2010 10:52 PM (QyRI1)
26
Randolph,
Doctors do not have a union, yet. If you are referring to the AMA as most people do then you don't know that only about 15% of doctors are members of the AMA and most think it a joke. The price of medical care is and has been dictated by Washington for about 20 years or more. For instance, are you aware that it is aganist the law for a doctor to dispence free care? That is called medicare fraud. As to the high medical cost let me show you a recent bill that I had. I was in the hospital for one week with extensive gallbladder surgery (not the usual). The bill from the surgeon was $1700, that is down from 10 years ago when it ran about $2500. Now the bill from the hospital was $75000, which is up from $20000 that was in effect 10 years ago. So you can see who is making the money. By the way, the Hospital Association is a big contributer to politicians and the recent Obamacare did nothing to rein in these cost.
Posted by: David at June 05, 2010 12:22 PM (coY4Z)
27
There is only one way to stop the SEIU terror organization, and that is to torment them wherever you see them. Fight fire with fire. They are not always present in large groups and do not live on some base somewhere. They have homes and loved ones and vehicles and property that can be legally targeted for exactly the ssame kind of protest the seiu applies to everyone else. Enough is enough.
Posted by: TomSaxon at June 05, 2010 02:28 PM (yutDW)
28
Purple is the new Brown.
Posted by: Dandapani at June 05, 2010 08:24 PM (FSZdD)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Who Paid the Turkish Terrorists on the Mavi Marmara?
The Jerusalem Post ran an interview today with one of the Israeli soldiers that attempted to search the blockade runner Mavi Marmara as it attempted to breach the join Israeli-Egyptian blockade of the Gaza strip.
The soldier in question was the senior-most noncom on the mission, and the last soldier to fast-rope down to the ship from the helicopter hovering overhead. By the time he hit the deck, two more senior officers had already been shot by Turkish "peace activists" wearing heavy ceramic body armor, and a third officer was severely injured after having his skull crushed with the heavy rods some of the terrorists were using as weapons.
The soldier has the other commandos form a defensive perimeter around their wounded comrades, and when the terrorists pressed their attack, they opened fire to keep from being overrun. The soldier in question killed six of the nine Turkish terrorists killed in the attempted blockade running with his handgun at point-blank range.
When the ship was finally captured and brought into port, the attackers were found to have large sums of money upon them; apparent payment for the pre-planned assault. According to the captain of the
Mavi Marmara, the Turks were armed as well, and fired shots at the Israelis. He apparently watched the terrorists throw their weapons over the side of the ship, and forensic teams located shell casings that did not match Israeli weapons.
Turkish terrorists/mercenaries (chose the terminology you like best, as both would seem to apply) were paid substantial amounts of money by
someone to stage an international incident, attacking soldiers simply attempting to enforce a blockade of an enemy port where ships loaded with hundreds of tons Iranian weapons had previously attempted to dock.
The question I have is whether or not turkey's increasingly Islamic government had a hand in staging this incident, and if they did, whether they are the kind of "ally" the United States or NATO really needs.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:37 AM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
The soldier in question killed six of the nine Turkish terrorists killed in the attempted blockade running with his handgun at point-blank range.
A pity the IDF didn't start out that way instead of end up that way.
As for the firearms used by the attacking Turks, it appears that the plan always was to have a few killed and hide the evidence in the sea. Otherwise even a few weapons would be recovered.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 04, 2010 02:51 PM (Srqoz)
2
Turkey smells the stink of weakness coming off this administration like a cloud.
Posted by: Michael at June 04, 2010 03:43 PM (SXJvr)
3
I'll believe the Israeli account when they release all of the camera and unedited video footage they confiscated from these activists. Until they do that none of us can really have a clue what happened, maybe not even then.
Posted by: Will Butler at June 04, 2010 06:29 PM (LgpMF)
4
The Turks may be a member of NATO but they haven't been an American friend or ally since they refused to allow USA use of Incerlik Air Base in Adana Turkey to support our troops going into Iraq.
The IslamoNazis have taken over in Turkey and the military can no longer enforce a secular government. The Turkish military is going to have to once again intervene in Turkish politics or Turkey will turn totally into an IslamoFascist/Nazi Thugocracy like Iran.
I hope the Israelis destroy any Turkish Navy vessels that attempt to break the legal Israel blockage of the Gaza Strip.
Posted by: jgreene at June 04, 2010 10:38 PM (qm1vA)
5
Erdogan seems to want to re-establish Khalifate of the Ottoman Empire. Ahmenijad wants to re-establish the Persian Empire. They will have alot of competition as Cairo, Damascus, Bagdad and Mecca have all been the seats of Moslem power in the Middle East at one time or another...
Posted by: Mike Simon at June 06, 2010 03:50 AM (YIN3Q)
6
"I'll believe the Israeli account..."
Never. Because if it gives you more reason to hate Jews, you'll reject the color of the sky and the warmth of the sun.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at June 06, 2010 08:47 PM (0onAO)
7
Terrorists get paid? Who knew?
Posted by: Odins Acolyte at June 07, 2010 01:38 PM (brIiu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Where are they NOW?
Debrahlee Lorenzana claims that she was harassed almost daily by her managers at Citibank, who apparently thought she was "too hot" and dressed in a manner they found sexually distracting.
A
photoshoot arranged by Lorenzana's lawyer claims to show her in some of the apparel she wore to work.
She is certainly an attractive woman who choses to accentuate instead of hide her femininity with her choice of apparel, but her clothes did not seem to be outside the bounds of professional dress for that environment, and her outfits (at least those shown) were certainly more tasteful than some.
My question is simple: where are the feminists?
You might think that groups such as the National Organization for Women (NOW) and similar feminist groups would criticize Citibank for their apparent bias against Lorenzana. After all, equal rights should apply to all people if they are truly equal, and that includes women that are attractive... does it not?
Instead of ridicule of Citibank from so-called feminist blogs, I find
mostly silence. The blogs writing about Lorenzana
seem to be gossip blogs and business blogs.
Feminist outrage is apparently reserved to protest for the rights of the ugly and unattractive.
Pretty ladies... it seems you are on your own.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:20 AM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
In one of the pics, she is clearly NOT wearing a bra. This woman knows what she is doing at work. But yes, the feminists are nowhere to be found.
Posted by: EC at June 04, 2010 08:30 AM (mAhn3)
2
Ms. Lorenzana did not come by her job by affirmative action but was apparently hired for her skills and abilities nor does this involve lesbians, abortion or domestic violence; NOW could care less.
Posted by: Jerry in Detroit at June 04, 2010 08:59 AM (vxNsQ)
3
I would pay hard cash to work under her.
Posted by: 1sttofight at June 04, 2010 01:16 PM (lBSM+)
4
The feminists are not going to do anything. They are terrified of a smart beautiful woman. Feminists generally are hatefull, rude, arrogant and ugly.
Posted by: gDavid at June 04, 2010 03:01 PM (zZmmd)
5
Yes, the failure of 2 blogs to comment on one particular sexual harassment story is significant. Incredibly so.
Posted by: libarbarian at June 04, 2010 05:57 PM (vkZdM)
6
Yes, "libarbarian", their silence is significant. These are blogs that will work themselves into a lather if they find something to object to on Jeff Goldstein's blog -- so why do they ignore this story?
Posted by: Rob Crawford at June 06, 2010 08:49 PM (0onAO)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 03, 2010
Turk Born in America Was One of the Aggressors In Blockade Runner Assault; More Ships Coming
Furkan Dogan was born to Turkish parents and left our country at the age of two, apparently never to return. While technically holding citizenship, he is a birthright American only, an accident of geography and in no obvious way attached our nation's culture. To call him an American is something of a joke.
Dogan was one of the nine Muslim terrorist sympathizers killed as they tried to lynch Israeli soldiers carrying out an inspection of their ship, a ship attempting to run a blockade of Gaza. News accounts claim that Dogan was shot in the head four times and once in the chest. The shot placement and other known conditions of the raid suggests Dogan was attacking Israeli soldiers at point-blank range when he was killed.
Israel and Egypt have maintained a joint sea blockade of Gaza because of legitimate concerns that Iran is attempting to provide the terrorist group Hamas with long-range rockets to destabilize the region and target Israeli civilian population centers. Late last year the
MV Francop was intercepted carrying small arms ammunition, rockets, grenades and artillery shells from Iran to Gaza.
The
MV Rachel Corrie, a decrepit one-time beer hauler, is part of the next group of ships attempting to run the blockade. Named after a leftist radical and pro-terrorist sympathizer killed by a bulldozer attempting to protect Hamas weapons-smuggling tunnels, the
Corrie is thought to be carrying cement, one of the materials that Israel and Egypt do not allow to be imported into Gaza because of concerns that Hamas will use the building material to construct hardened bunkers.
Other materials being carried by the vessel are already in abundance in Gaza, supplied over far more practical land routes.
The Irish-flagged
Corrie, like its namesake, isn't providing anything of value to the people of Gaza, and merely provides a small degree of political cover to a genocidal terrorist group.
Update: The
Corrie turns around... for now.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:58 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
"While technically holding citizenship, he is a birthright American only, an accident of geography and in no obvious way attached our nation's culture."
The cur would probably have failed a literacy test, also, until the four bullets in his head removed all doubt, too.
Even if you discount his undeniable American citizenship and insist he was a Turk, he merely joins the other fatalities incurred by a NATO ally. The US is happy to use NATO members to fight and suffer hundreds of casualties on its behalf in Afghanistan as a response to 9/11. It is clearly content for NATO citizens to be killed by its proxy. Israel thinks nothing of stealing the identities of NATO citizens and calling the British 'anti-semitic dogs' when a diplomatic punishment is exacted.
I wonder just what will earn Israel the slightest rebuke from the US?
Posted by: dirk at June 03, 2010 01:45 PM (wwA4D)
2
I wonder just what will earn Israel the slightest rebuke from the US?
when they start coddling terrorist sympathizers and anti-Semites... you know, like most Europeans.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at June 03, 2010 01:50 PM (gAi9Z)
3
dirk -
The family of the jihadist have publicly stated "we were not sorry to hear that he fell like a martyr."
If it's good enough for those that loved him most, it's good enough for me...
But exactly, how is it that you feel free to insult the Turkish school system with your claim they graduate illiterates? Any data to back up your claim that Furkan Dogan couldn't read and write?
Posted by: Adriane at June 03, 2010 02:04 PM (mXBw3)
4
Not expecting an answer but will probably be amused by the response: Aren't you embarrassed by the American dependence on NATO military force to quell Afghanistan, and the utter inability of the United States to control its one true ally?
Posted by: dirk at June 03, 2010 02:06 PM (wwA4D)
5
Is that what allies should be in your world, Dirk? Submissive second-rate puppets under your control?
No wonder you don't have any allies. You don't even know what the word means.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at June 03, 2010 02:11 PM (gAi9Z)
6
News accounts claim that Dogan was shot in the head four times and once in the chest.
Now that is gun control. And definitely an improvement on the gene pool.
As for dirk's supercilious query--any rational and unbiased observer would be surprised if the USA required Israel to commit suicide by allowing uncontrolled arms shipments to enemies of both Israel and the USA. What that fact has to do with Afghanistan is a relationship that only exists in your rather disturbed mind.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 03, 2010 02:14 PM (Srqoz)
7
"If it's good enough for those that loved him most, it's good enough for me..."
Better than facts. Facts plus. Quick, empty the prisons!
"you feel free to insult the Turkish school system"
Over your head. Clearly, Texasization came early in your case. It was a reference to previous citizenship stratification in the US, concerted and pernicious measures over centuries to ensure 'no obvious attachment to our culture'.
"Submissive second-rate puppets under your control?"
Yes, that and carte blanche to insult, abuse and kill the citizens of US allies are the only two options. Jeebus.
As I predicted, no answer and an amusing response.
Posted by: dirk at June 03, 2010 02:20 PM (wwA4D)
8
dirk -
... It was a reference to previous citizenship stratification in the US, ...
Now you're claiming the US Constitution basis citizenship on literacy?
mmm'kay, Please point to the Article and Paragraph.
Many thanks in advance ...
Posted by: Adriane at June 03, 2010 03:13 PM (mXBw3)
9
well, 4 shots to the cabezza, that is exellent shot placement. I would like to buy that israeli a beer.
im going to add, good, couldnt happen to a more deserving barbarian.
Posted by: rumcrook¾ at June 03, 2010 03:52 PM (60WiD)
10
CY
The quality of trolls has gone downhill in the past 6 months. Can't you even dredge up ones able to write coherent responses? I am so disappointed....
Posted by: iconoclast at June 03, 2010 04:54 PM (Srqoz)
11
Sink 'em. Davey Jones Locker has room for Turks.
Posted by: OdinsAcolyte at June 04, 2010 10:40 AM (brIiu)
12
"birthright citizen"? Wow.
I knew you thought that the "anchor babies" of illegals who should be denied citizenship, but are you saying you oppose citizenship for the American-born children of legal immigrants as well?
How far, exactly, do you want to go with this?
Should we deny citizenship only to the children of temporary visitors or do we do it to the children of honest "immigrants" who came here to stay? What children born to immigrants who are in the process of becoming citizens?
What about the children of 1 citizen and 1 non-citizen? Do you want to require that both parents be citizens at the time of the birth?
Do you want to just change the law from here on out or do you want to retroactively strip the citizenship of those you consider to be "birthright citizens" only?
Posted by: libarbarian at June 04, 2010 06:21 PM (vkZdM)
13
libtardbarian stop babeling like an idiot.
Posted by: rumcrook¾ at June 04, 2010 07:49 PM (60WiD)
14
Pretty much what I expected.
Posted by: libarbarian at June 04, 2010 08:54 PM (lXegb)
15
"Libarbarian" -- are you really this stupid or are you just putting on an act?
If it's an act, you should go professional. It's a stunning performance.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at June 06, 2010 08:52 PM (0onAO)
16
The Irish should hang their heads in shame. If they support this it is small wonder my ancestors left the place. How is it a religious people persecute the people of their Savior? It makes no sense.
Posted by: Odins Acolyte at June 07, 2010 01:46 PM (brIiu)
17
Dirk don't piss off the Texans. I am educated and a Texan and we'uns will never see eye to eye. Hope to see y'all on the field of Honor if y'all have any. The sides are picked and the battle lines are forming. Don't be a party pooper and sit it out! Texas shall remain long after the USA is a sad memory.
Posted by: Odins Acolyte at June 07, 2010 01:49 PM (brIiu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Lets Send That Bombing Run to the Replay Official...
The Pentagon's cribbing a play from Monday Night Football, adopting the same instant replay technology used during games to improve analysis of war zone video feeds.
Harris Corporation, the company behind instant replay for professional football and baseball games, has teamed up with the military on an analysis system that’s already been deployed to several bases, reports Live Science.
The system, called Full-Motion Video Asset Management Engine (FAME) uses "metadata" tags to encode important details — time, date, camera location — into each video frame. In a football game, those tags would help broadcasters pick the best clip to re-air, then explain, a play. In a war-zone, they'd help analysts watch video in a richer, easier-to-grasp context. And additional tags could link a video clip to photographs, cell phone calls, databases or documents.
Source.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:10 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Congressional Black Caucus Members Try To Quash Ethics Office
It seems as if the corrupt don't want to be found out:
Stung by a series of inquiries, nearly half the members of the Congressional Black Caucus want to scale back the aggressive ethics procedures that Democrats trumpeted after gaining control of Congress.
Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, and 19 fellow black lawmakers in the all-Democratic caucus quietly introduced a resolution last week that would restrict the powers of the new independent Office of Congressional Ethics. The office, formed by Congress in 2008, is run by a panel of private citizens.
If I were a prosecutor, the list of co-sponsors for this bill would get more than their fair share of attention. Could they proclaim any louder that they have something to hide?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:32 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Stunning that the lefties ignored this story. Apparently they have no problem with corruption -- when the corrupt vote their way.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at June 06, 2010 08:54 PM (0onAO)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Shock: Muslim Claims Israel Faked Weapons Recovered During Blockade Runner Raid
TIP: If you are going to accuse a government of faking photos of weapons and military material captured during a legal search of the vessel carrying the contraband, you should probably make sure they don't also have video of the ship and the weapons as well.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:07 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Why bother to worry about videos, independent photos, captured materials, and dozens of captured fighters (complete with body armor, gas masks, and weapons)? It isn't as if the muslims will believe any of that. The only proof they need resides inside of their heads.
As for who are our friends--who exactly was cheering on 9/11? Not Israelis.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 03, 2010 09:41 AM (MZd0C)
2
"The only proof they need resides inside of their heads."
They are probably most concerned with what, or rather who, now resides in the ground. Including this American.
Posted by: dirk at June 03, 2010 10:33 AM (wwA4D)
3
dirk -
The family of the Turkish boy who left America when he was 2 years old and resided in Turkey, thereafter, said, "we were not sorry to hear that he fell like a martyr."
I respect the family wishes, and am not sorry he fell either.
Posted by: Adriane at June 03, 2010 12:08 PM (mXBw3)
4
Clearly the wrong kind of American, a distinction with a long and shameful history.
Posted by: dirk at June 03, 2010 12:15 PM (wwA4D)
5
Clearly the wrong kind of American, a distinction with a long and shameful history.
Posted by dirk at June 3, 2010 12:15 PM
A citizen is free to attack any foreign military. We are not responsible for their poor judgment or adherence to a barbarous religious sect. That he was killed attacking IDF fighters enforcing a reasonable blockade deserves no more sympathy than Rachel Corrie helping to protect tunnels used for smuggling arms for aggression.
Good riddance.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 03, 2010 05:03 PM (Srqoz)
6
They are probably most concerned with what, or rather who, now resides in the ground. Including this American.
Posted by dirk at June 3, 2010 10:33 AM
Thus proving my point. Thank you for pointing out that the apologists and propagandists for the Arabs do not care what this young fighter had done--just that he was killed. He could have been killing Israeli women and children in a shopping mall--something that the Gazans really enjoy doing--and the useful idiots would still just say that the IDF was not justified in killing him.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 03, 2010 05:06 PM (Srqoz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 02, 2010
It Isn't The Gun, But The Cartridge
Granted, the gun itself is in need of at least a piston upper receiver, but the biggest problem with the M4 carbine and M16 rifle seems to be the anemic ballistics of the 5.56 cartridge, which should be replaced.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:47 AM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
It is both. The M-16 family of weapons, including the first carbine version, used in Vietnam were minimally acceptable, and with the first model, the M-16, marginal at best. It was, however, an improvement on the M-14 which was uncontrollable in full automatic fire. At close range the AK family of weapons is superior due to its heavier bullet. It is more reliable and simpler to maintain. The 7.62 NATO round is a modernized version of the .30-06 round. That was designed for a bolt action rifle, with strong recoil. No modern rifle has yet to fully control it in automatic fire nor control recoil. It is yesterday's solution to yesterday's problem of the limited magazine capacity of the M-1 Garand. An intermediate cartridge is the superior choice.
The M-16 family, including the variations of the M-4 carbine, is highly susceptible to malfunction from fouling, debris and heat, especially after firing 400+ rounds. Its is a weapon system that needs constant cleaning even in combat. The M-4 weapon system failed completely at the recent battles in outposts in Afghanistan.
It is also an obsolete design. The direct gas impingment system is inferior to other systems, including piston systems.
A more modern design, incorporating a bullpup pattern where the magazine or feeding mechanism are either above or behind the trigger mechanism should be the goal of the new weapon system. The new system should also be that, a system, which means quick change barrels so the receiver system should be able to be changed from CBQ length barrel to carbine length, to rifle lenght, to a heavy automatic rifle barrel.
Obviously the 5.56 cartridge was sufficient at close range, but hardly ideal. However the 6.8 SPC is inferior to the 6.5 Grendel. A new cartridge should be based on that.
Also, trying to stuff a new cartridge in the M-16 system is foolish, as magazine capacity is inferior to a new weapon system that could have 30 or more rounds of ammunition while using a M-16 magazine with a new cartridge restricts the number of rounds to less than 30.
Posted by: Federale at June 02, 2010 10:34 AM (UQeEa)
2
Not at all related to this post, but i thought y'all would get a bang out of this story.
http://www.wral.com/news/strange/story/7709858/
Tarheel Repub Out!
Posted by: Tarheel Repub at June 03, 2010 08:19 AM (+LRPE)
3
In terms of accuracy and ergonomics, the AR-15 family is exceptional. It is lightweight and has so little recoil and muzzle flip as to make it a weapon system adaptable to virtually any soldier. And while the 5.56 cartridge is less than optimal as a man stopper, soldiers can carry a great many of them, far more than any 7.62 cartridge.
However, it does suffer from several primary design flaws: the direct gas impingement system does indeed lead to rapid fowling and requires almost constant cleaning and maintenance. The weapon, particularly in a light barrel configuration, can rapidly overheat in the thick of battle, rending it useless. The largest problem is the 5.56 (or .223) cartridge itself. It can be an effective manstopper, but it can reasonably be argued that it is less effective in that role than the various .30 caliber-ish intermediate cartridges being bandied about as a replacement, most of which can also be shoehorned into 30 round magazines and the AR-15 frame. The ultimate problem with the standard cartridge is that it is range limited and very likely to be adversely affected by wind drift as the range lengthens.
Thus the M-4 works very well in urban combat, and at ranges of up to 200 yards, but not so well in other circumstances, such as the longer range combat of Afghanistan. But the ultimate problem here is that for those ranges, we're talking about needing a full sized battle rifle (as opposed to intermediate assault rifle) cartridge like the .308, which requires a much larger and heavier rifle--a full sized battle rifle like the M-14 or FN-FAL or H&K G3 with a longer barrel--than the M-4.
The solution might well be not the complete replacement of the M-4 system (certainly it can be improved), but the adoption of an improved .308 weapons system for longer range combat.
Posted by: mikemcdaniel at June 03, 2010 09:14 AM (dXJzV)
4
The solution is pretty simple. Instead of issuing M4s for Afghan deployments issue M16 A4s, that gives you an additional hundred or hundred and fifty meters of lethality. Additionally, instead of issuing SAM-Rs to the DMs Issue MK 11 MOD0s. Then pull the M60E3s out of mothballs and issue them to SAW gunners. Two DMs per squad, three medium machine guns that do not need to be crew served, and you are good.
Posted by: Matt at June 03, 2010 10:28 AM (OBDWE)
5
This 6.8 makes sense. My father who was trained as sniper in Vietnam said that the .264 Win Mag was the most efficient cartridge he ever shot, and most agree that its BC is one of the best. So the 6.8's .277 diameter is about the same, and the short action should maximize capacity.
One advantage of smaller rounds is that you have higher capacity in the weapon and on the person. Maybe you can carry 30%-50% more .223 ammo than 7.62.
Also, a platoon or patrol should carry a mix of weapons just like previous soldiers carried the M1, a .30 cal saw, and a BAR for different needs. If I'm holed up in a house surrounded, then I want the .223 capacity. If I'm shooting long range then I want the higher energy bigger caliber regardless of recoil.
Posted by: Jim at June 03, 2010 02:16 PM (Un7SJ)
6
Silly people. According to the ATF, a much less expensive alternative for our military would be to simply buy Airsoft plastic pellet guns, and inexpensively convert them into fully-automatic weapons of death.
/sarc
Any change in ammo or weaponry during this administration will be to the detriment of our military. Looks like we're stuck with the M4 for another 2 years...
Posted by: Georg Felis at June 04, 2010 05:16 PM (i5bRG)
7
[url=http://statsstats2.110mb.com/stats-b.php?r=confederateyankee.mu.nu]sldjfgljdg[/url]
sljdhghdfg
http://statsstats2.110mb.com/stats-l.php?r=confederateyankee.mu.nu
Posted by: lifdlibdlfvblahfdvlhb at June 07, 2010 10:31 AM (6Efpf)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Back in the Saddle
Sorry for not mentioning I was leaving for a four-day weekend. Was a (more or less) technology-free family weekend at Disney's Magic Kingdom in Orlando, followed by all-too-brief stops at Neptune Beach, FL to visit family and a scouting trip of Jekyll Island, GA.
It seems that during my break a Turkish-flagged group of Islamic terrorist sympathizers tried to murder an Israeli boarding party with edged and blunt weapons and received their just rewards. Frankly, I think the Israelis are screwed when it comes to typically pro-terrorist media coverage of such staged events, but it is better to kill a few terrorists now than have more weaponry added to growing terrorist stockpiles.
It also seems that the top-kill of the
Deepwater Horizon spill didn't work. Damn.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:12 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Wow, what a misleading post, do you just make this stuff up? No one, not even the Israelis, claims they were transporting weapons.
I wish CY had been around in 1967 to explain to us why all those murdered American servicemen on the USS Liberty "had it coming" for spying on Israeli radio transmissions in international waters.
Posted by: DeLancey at June 03, 2010 06:47 AM (LgpMF)
2
Your al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist friends were trying to smuggle in body armor and night vision gear, on this ship, DeLancey.
Previously, Hamas had attempted to smuggle in hundreds of grenades, more than a half-million rounds of small arms ammunition, 20,000 grenades and more than 2,700 rockets that I helped the Israelis identify on the MV Francop.
And those are just the shipments that were interdicted.
You want to eradicate the Jews. We get that.
Just try to be honest about who and what you are.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at June 03, 2010 08:26 AM (gAi9Z)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 28, 2010
400 Temps Swarm Beach for Obama Oil Spill Photo Op, Then Disappear
Pathetic.
Even more pathetic? Knowing that the White House will cite every one of these temps as jobs created in their next round of fantasy employment statistics.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:52 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
surfed into Anderson Cooper and even on CNN, they were slamming this.
Shark jump?
Posted by: JP at May 28, 2010 09:42 PM (Tae/a)
2
Hey Yankee. Its been awhile. Nice start on the article. Lets go with 400 temp workers bussed in for a photo op. Then go to the People bussed in for healthcare and given white lab coats. Then go back to Clinton's impeachment hearings where they bussed in 100 lawyers, put graduation gowns on them and called them "legal scholars". I think the Libs are still wagging the dog, so to speak. Clinton seems to be involved in the Sestak matter. Do you think he could be using his old Hollywood pals for Obama? O is messing up so bad, Hillary will never get a chance.
Posted by: The Dude at May 29, 2010 08:56 AM (+jN4X)
Posted by: Neo at May 29, 2010 10:50 PM (tE8FB)
4
Photo ops are what is left after lunch has been eatin. Liberalis don't get that people are immune to photo ops.
If they really wanted to impress people they would pay for 10,000 temps to show up on the beach, put paper towels in thier hands, and make them bend over to sop up the oil, tee he.
Damn I 'shore' hope some of them got cute butts.
Sorry, just dreamin.
Posted by: ron at May 30, 2010 09:31 AM (2Qqgf)
5
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar:
http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/05/31/bp-busing-scam-photo-ops-the-scandal-that-wasnt/
Posted by: arb at May 31, 2010 07:22 PM (KE5Ct)
6
I was bothered by President Obama lookin all happy at the lack of oil on the beach, I had hoped he would visit the marsh the wetland but he took the easy tour. He does not care, oh and i also read that the workers were promised $16 per hour but were paid much less and not provided with water (really hot day) or restrooms. I guess they should have joined a union on those buses.
Posted by: duncan at May 31, 2010 10:27 PM (lGcPs)
7
I don't get the tough talk from Obama and the left. BP did not intentionally sink there well. They may be faulted over the blow out preventer but at 5000 feet there are not guarantees on anything. Instead of running around like a fool trying to put people in jail or sue them or take over their company (which is already nationalized by the Brits), why not offer to help? I keep thinking that if my neighbor's house was burning would it be appropriate for me to be in his yard threatening to sue him?
We need oil. Our whole economy and everything we use is associated with oil. Yet we fight the people who are trying to get the substance and put as many roadblocks in place to obstruct them, not help them.
Posted by: David at June 01, 2010 05:23 PM (ZgM5r)
8
Because it's this president, I hate this, and believe it as a trick.
However, I would give clinton, and even Carter a bit of a pass, because it plays as a prelude of what is to come.
So far, my oppinions about this president are well founded, though, I still think that I would give a little room to others.
I've worked in a lot of places, and in all of those places when the dook hit the rotary machine, people focused on those area's the boss was looking at, and then made sure that the other area's were corrected before the boss could get there.
But This guy?
THIS GUY!?
Posted by: Douglas at June 02, 2010 04:05 AM (uU+Ss)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
But Invading His Privacy Is a Bad Thing
Joe McGinniss, the deranged/obsessed left wing author who rented the home next door to Sarah Palin while writing about her, has now threatened to call the police on a reporter that wanted to talk to him.
The charge?
Trespassing.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
01:09 PM
| Comments (25)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
You mean to say he accused the film crew of trespassing as they were standing in his yard filming the Palin's fence. It is.
Palin, and apparently you, think it's an invasion of privacy for neighbors to look at each others homes from their own yards/decks. It's not.
It's pretty simple, if you don't want a neighbor 15 ft from your window, don't build an addition to your house that extends to within 15 feet of the property line.
Posted by: Jim at May 28, 2010 01:42 PM (YPeWM)
2
...and if you don't want borderline-crazy obsessed stalkers (working under the label "reporter"), don't be a female Republican who runs for national office. It's all your own fault if you do.
Posted by: cirby at May 28, 2010 01:54 PM (47tHT)
3
Exactly because Democratic candidates never get followed by reporters. Just ask John Edwards or Gary Hart.
Posted by: Jim at May 28, 2010 02:02 PM (YPeWM)
4
Ya' know Jim, your right. She earned a stalker by accepting McCains offer.
But Hart should have been left alone for some "Monkey Business" and Pretty Pony had a right to make sex tapes and knock up his PR chick without all that Media hassle. I mean they were just campaigning that's all.
Posted by: Gus Bailey at May 28, 2010 02:35 PM (B5Wgp)
5
No, they all "earned" attention from reporters. They're public figures.
The guy rented a house. All the stalking/peeping nonsense comes from a facebook smear by Palin - because the guy was on his deck and that deck is visible from the Palin house. That's all we know actually happened. No peeping into Willows room -- if you look at the two houses the Palin's 2nd story is a lot higher than the rental, assuming Willow sleeps upstairs I have no idea how anyone could see into her bedroom but now we're getting into details and Sarah isn't big on details she just wanted to take a swipe at the guy and her fans went into the requisite faux outrage mode.
So again, film crew in my yard without premission, trespassing. My neighbor looking at my yard, not trespassing. Not stalking, not peeping, not...anything. There's no there, there.
Posted by: Jim at May 28, 2010 02:56 PM (YPeWM)
6
Fair enough.
He's still creepy and his motives don't pass my smell test.
Then again, perception is reality and Palin's motives may fail your smell test.
Have a nice weekend.
And let us all remember those who gave all for our country.
Posted by: Gus Bailey at May 28, 2010 03:16 PM (B5Wgp)
7
Thanks Gus, have a great one too, and as you say let's remember why we have Monday off.
Posted by: Jim at May 28, 2010 03:17 PM (YPeWM)
8
So Jim - the lib that you are - we assume you are as equally indignant toward the bus loads of union thugs that stormed the porch of a Bank of America executive - and scared the hell out of a 14 year old child. I wonder - did you rail against them some where in the blogosphere as you are the reporter, film crew & Sarah Palin????? Hmmmmmmmmmm???
Posted by: mixitup at May 28, 2010 05:11 PM (Z21cb)
9
I didn't see anyone defending the union thugs, so no, I didn't feel the need to go on record and agree with everyone else that they were acting like jerks. If it makes you feel any better though I can -- Bad union thugs, bad!
They were at the very least trespassing. The neighbors of the BoA exec who watched what was happening on his lawn from their lawns were not. See how this works?
Posted by: Jim at May 28, 2010 05:27 PM (YPeWM)
10
"Just ask John Edwards"? The Enquirer had to do that because the "media" couldn't be bothered to look at a democrat. Palin isn't having an illicit affair with someone, she is living at her house. How you can even equate the two shows how far gone you are
Posted by: dagny at May 28, 2010 09:30 PM (7LFkU)
11
I wonder how Jim would feel if some man was looking into his young daughter's bedroom window?
Posted by: incognito at May 28, 2010 09:39 PM (u6X4c)
12
Jim would be outraged. Just as any good little democrat with a double standard would be.
There's rules for liberals. And there's rules for the rest of us. Simple.
Posted by: John at May 29, 2010 06:05 AM (bpcpx)
13
Jim, I understand what you are saying and technically you are correct, however there seems to be a clear difference in moving in next to someone with a clear motive of what you are going to do. Do you expect McGinniss to have a fair accounting of what he will see?
The thing we are all worried about is that the left has a much bigger history of the lunatic fringe that will take harmful action toward political figures they hate.
And as far as not seeing anyone defending what the Union Thugs did, you may be right, but I sure haven't seen anyone on the left condemning what they did.
Posted by: Mike at May 29, 2010 11:28 AM (/s24O)
14
Personally, I'd try to see more of McGinnis
1. Purchase a new .243 Remington rifle with 3-9 Leupold scope
2. Purchase a shooting bench and sandbags
3. Purchase a box of .243 ammo
4. Purchase brass polish, Brasso or equivalent
5. Polish the ammo until it glistens, wax to preserve the shine.
6. Arrange shooting bench to face McGinnis' rented house.
7. Arrange 12-15 rounds of ammo standing up on the shooting bench in easy reach
8. Using the .243 rifle, examine every inch of the house McGinnis is renting, and his car, and his haberdashery, under variable powers of magnification.
9. Repeat as necessary.
.
Note that I never said I'd LOAD the rifle. That might be illegal. . . . But I doubt that sitting on one's own property, pointing a perfectly legal firearm in the direction of one's choosing, constitutes ANY sort of illegal action absent any other threats. . .
.
It's one of those things like oh, say, having a stalker move in next door, where the police would say "We can't do anything as long as he has not made any overt threats . . . he's within his rights."
.
I have no doubt McGinnis would be the first to blink, so to speak.
Posted by: outnow at May 29, 2010 04:16 PM (bc9h6)
15
What office is Palin currently running for? Or holding? Hart and Edwards were campaigning; she's not.
GFY, Jim.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at May 29, 2010 07:59 PM (0onAO)
16
OUCH - Jim you are such a snarky guy!! When I grow up I hope I can be half as snarky as you.
By the way, about 10 stories down CY opened up a discussion about the union thugs and their horror show. Funny, there were 21 comments posted, but I didn't see any of your signature snarky comments CONDEMNING the thugs. Guess you missed that one, but obviously had the time to beat up on Palin and some innocent reporter just trying to do his job. Like Mike above said, "sure haven't seen anyone on the left condemning what they did." I guess that applies to you - what a missed opportunity to be un-hypocritical(yea - I know it not a real word - but you get my meaning - I hope!!!!!!!!
Posted by: mixitup at May 29, 2010 08:43 PM (Z21cb)
17
什么是佩林办公室当前正在运行的？或控股？哈特和爱德华兹竞选人，她不是。 以绿植租摆
Posted by: jk at May 30, 2010 04:34 AM (ydIhg)
18
outnow, in any jurisdiction I'm aware of, that's called "brandishing", and it's illegal. Pointing a gun at a house is automatically negligent and stupid.
"Warning shots are BS. Never point a gun at anyone unless you intend to shoot them. Never shoot a gun at anyone unless you intend to kill them."
Posted by: SDN at May 30, 2010 10:45 AM (IeuXV)
19
i just can't imagine being sarah palin. what she and her family have to go through, it's like reading a medieval book, far, far away. like she is the rightful heir to the throne and the enemy in control is doing everything they can to destroy her.
imho, we are living in very historic times, at least in my life time. a president that is at war with the american people, a president that is a racial divider, a class divider, a divider, divider, divider. his foreign policy against Israel, God's chosen land and people, is crazy. the list can go on forever.
one thing i do know, is that GOD is in control and Israel will never go down. don't believe me? read the book of revelation with a commentary if needed. the other thing that i know is, obama will not win against our almighty GOD. it may seem that he is winning for awhile, however, he will not prevail.
Posted by: southernsue at June 01, 2010 08:57 PM (LHG1t)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Why Was This Solider Off Base, In Civvies, with His M4?
The chain of command is going to rip someone a new one over this bit of idiocy:
The soldier had been in Atlanta less than a day when when he and his cousin, identified simply as T.J., were sitting in his blue Chevrolet Impala at the Rolling Bends Apartments in northwest Atlanta, the soldier told WSB.
Seven men walked to the car, he said.
"They were coming up to the car,"' the soldier told the television station. "I noticed T.J. hit the unlock button. They came up to the side of the car. They opened the door and grabbed my rifle."
The soldier said he was punched, kicked and hit in the head with a glass bottle when he tried to retrieve his gun.
"I tried to call out to my cousin T.J. but he didn't do anything," the soldier said in a WSB news report.
"A weapon like that being in a neighborhood like that is not a good combination," the soldier said. "I still feel betrayed by my family because T.J., that's my blood. Like, how are you going to value the streets more than your own cousin?"
The soldier was not in uniform at the time. It was not clear why he had his weapon with him.
There is no logical reason that I can think of that a soldier on leave would retain a selective-fire carbine or machine gun as he left base. The weapon should have been secured in the unit's armory. Both the soldier and his immediate superiors have some explaining to do.
Meanwhile, a real, honest-to-God assault rifle is in the hands of criminals.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:20 AM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Commentor Just a Grunt over at This Aint Hell says story pulled after he talked with reporter and editor agreed it sounded fishy.
Posted by: NUCSNIPE at May 28, 2010 10:23 AM (fqvpi)
2
What is fishy is that this sounds like a story conconcted to explain how he lost his weapon. Most likely he stole the rifle, then agreed to sell it. The story of it being stolen by friends of his cousin is just that, a story. Clearly he sold it.
Posted by: Federale at May 28, 2010 10:27 AM (ev309)
3
Maybe the thug will balk at the price of 5.56 ammunition, chamber up some .223 and hurt himself.
Posted by: David L., Lower Alabama at May 28, 2010 10:40 AM (j2O76)
4
I don't see anything in the news article (other than a stock photo) that indicates that this was his issued weapon. Soldiers do have personal weapons. Also I've lived in Atlanta, the Urinal & Constipation is a disgrace unless you consider it as a publicist for Democretin identity politics.
Posted by: RRRoark at May 28, 2010 10:46 AM (EYXy9)
5
I'm betting drugs were involved. For both TJ and the soldier.
Posted by: Kevin at May 28, 2010 11:57 AM (7sYC6)
6
He's home on leave with his duty weapon? Uh, no. Not a chance. Some information is missing here.
Posted by: Pablo at May 28, 2010 01:13 PM (yTndK)
7
One weapon lost; Big deal! Have you followed how many of the things that law enforcement loses? In addition, how many does our government send to trustworthy allies like Mexico?
From all I know of Army policies and procedures, I have never heard of the Army "checking out" weapons for soldiers to take home. This does indeed sound fishy.
Posted by: Jerry in Detroit at May 28, 2010 05:46 PM (PZx5Z)
8
"Meanwhile, a real, honest-to-God assault rifle is in the hands of criminals."
Assault is a verb, not an adjective.
Posted by: lenf at May 28, 2010 07:34 PM (xDuZx)
9
No way that was an issued weapon.
Posted by: ThomasD at May 28, 2010 10:11 PM (21H5U)
10
lenf:
And "snow" isn't an adjective either. But, it is a noun, just as "assault" is.
Snow Plow
Chain Saw
Railroad Train
School Bus
Posted by: Bill Smith at May 29, 2010 10:23 AM (IUYiW)
11
"Maybe the thug will balk at the price of 5.56 ammunition, chamber up some .223 and hurt himself."
You can shoot .223 through a milwep just fine. It's the other way round where you gotta be careful.
Posted by: Bohemond at May 29, 2010 03:18 PM (GznpF)
12
Maybe he was like the Atlanta Police officer who took his patrol car to Alabama, to show his proud parents.
Yeah, this was freaking stupid,and both the arms master and this solider should be facing huge trouble - possible a court martial.
Posted by: Michael at June 01, 2010 07:07 PM (PU7e+)
13
OMG, that's horrible! I'll give you $2K for it
Posted by: Jim at June 03, 2010 02:23 PM (Un7SJ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Don't Claim Success So Soon: BP's "Top Kill" Effort Far From Over
I've been far more quiet (in general) about the Deepwater Horizon oil drilling disaster that I was the disasters of hurricane's Katrina and Rita, precisely because I know so little about drilling, especially drilling that occurs a mile underwater.
My criticisms of the White House response has also been muted as well, as I don't think they have any more answers, legal authority, or capability to respond to this disaster than President Bush did in the aforementioned storms. I find myself, once again, defending the Office of the Presidency because it is not the ultimate authority on everything (even though President's certainly like to think so, and we do too, when it is time to assign blame). If we're going to criticize the White House for anything, it had to be its actions and inactions before the rig exploded, which can no doubt be traced back to earlier administrations as well.
This disaster is a tough problem to fix, and I'm sure the engineers geologists and workers frantically working on this are doing the very best they can to solve the problem of the gushing oil well a mile below the cold dark waters of the Gulf.
But I was a bit shocked yesterday to see so many news sites and blogs so eager to be the first to trumpet the success of BP's "top kill" attempt. The process is simple, in theory. Pump heavy mud in to the well, and the weight of the mud will eventually overcome the pressure of the oil attempting to escape from deep underground. Once equilibrium has been established, the oil will stop flowing and the well can them be capped by a thick layer of concrete.
By early yesterday, officials were attempting to claim success, even though they had no idea if the attempt worked. The process only had a 60%-70% of working, and we
still don't know if it is having the intended effect.
Keep your fingers crossed, folks, but we still don't know of the mud is working, if it is is creating a permanent stoppage, or just forcing the oil to look for another outlet. Even if the mud works, it will be years, perhaps, before we know if the concrete plug has really stopped the column of oil and gas forcing it's way to the surface, or just redirected it.
Hope for the best, but don't assume this is over.
Update: Peggy Noonan, of all people, has a much harsher take on Obama's actions and inactions, and wonders if his
illusion of competence can survive:
I don't see how the president's position and popularity can survive the oil spill. This is his third political disaster in his first 18 months in office. And they were all, as they say, unforced errors, meaning they were shaped by the president's political judgment and instincts.
There was the tearing and unnecessary war over his health-care proposal and its cost. There was his day-to-day indifference to the views and hopes of the majority of voters regarding illegal immigration. And now the past almost 40 days of dodging and dithering in the face of an environmental calamity. I don't see how you politically survive this.
The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen. This is a terrible thing to see in a political figure, and a startling thing in one who won so handily and shrewdly in 2008. But he has not, almost from the day he was inaugurated, been in sync with the center. The heart of the country is thinking each day about A, B and C, and he is thinking about X, Y and Z. They're in one reality, he's in another.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:10 AM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
The dnc propaganda arm HAS to claim success. Otherwise they won't be able to drop it off the front page.
Too long on the front page and even obumble's obots may start wondering why their Lord and Master hasn't done anything except play golf while the Gulf of Mehico fills up with crude.
Posted by: emdfl at May 28, 2010 08:34 AM (vwRFo)
2
Peggy left out another thing, The One has been totally disconnected from the economy. In fact, he seems to be doing everything in his power to assure that a recovery does not happen.
Posted by: David at May 28, 2010 10:19 AM (coY4Z)
3
CY ... We folks here on the front lines {Houston} have been anxiously following the news on the Gulf Oil spill, since it's right on our doorstep, ruining the fishing industry and the lives of the Louisiana fishermen, so to speak. The amount of ignorance and disinformation floating around about the Spill is staggering -- so staggering, as a matter of fact, that the mainstream media seems to be unable to gather facts and put a clear story together. And most of them are too lazy to figure out how to do it.
Speaking as a professional editor and writer, who made her living for more than forty years writing words for money, I can assure you that there is an incredible amount of information available to those who claim to be actual journalists, and who are actually willing to do a little research.
AS someone who has labored in these vineyards before, and who is married to the Public Affairs executive who was the official historian of the Prince William Sound disaster, I'm privy to a lot of accurate information about oil spills, how to prevent them and how to clean up after them.
If I were writing an in-depth article about the Spill, and I were not an oil industry expert, the first thing I would do would be to consult the American Petroleum Institute, the organization which is supported by all, or nearly all, of the oil and gas exploration and production corporations. They are extremely helpful and have masses of documented data which would be extremely helpful in delineating and fleshing out a picture of what is going on down here. Then I would go to an actual library, rather than depending on the Internet, which, while wonderful for quick reference, is kind of an instant hit-and-run resource, good enough to get basic information but not nearly as good as a real book or books to convey nuanced information. Thirdly, I'd talk to the public affairs folks at least one or two of the large oil companies which are based here in Texas, either in Houston or in Dallas, to get still further details.
Then I could sit down and craft an in-depth article which would convey real information which would tell the public just how much trouble we're in and how it will affect the Gulf, our fishing industries and the lives of Americans who live here and enjoy the beauties of this part of the country.
I know, I know. That's a lot of hard work. But it's worth it. This is a real crisis. It affects the lives and futures of a lot of hard-working Americans. It deserves our close attention, and concentrated efforts for a solution. Not just filling out the word count of an article and then forgetting it.
Marianne Matthews
Posted by: Marianne Matthews at May 28, 2010 11:21 AM (Aaj8s)
4
Bob,
You wrote, “I don't think they have any more answers, legal authority, or capability to respond to this disaster than President Bush…”.
He does.
The Feds enacted the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) in 1990 in response to the Valdez incedent. It empowers the Feds to take the lead in response to spills in our waters and off our shores. There is supposed to be a plan. The Feds are supposed to take the lead.
OPA holds that BP will be responsible, but BP has never claimed otherwise. Obama has left them on their own, when he should have been leading the defense of our country’s shores.
He has failed in one of his most fundamental tasks, the protection of our nation from threat.
Click my name for a link to the OPA site, or http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/lawsregs/opaover.htm
Posted by: Gus Bailey at May 28, 2010 12:02 PM (B5Wgp)
5
Reference Ms Noonan, it is not illusion of competency. Nothing in Barack Obama's record suggests any executive competency. Rather Noonan et al are guilty believing the delusion of Dim Won's competency. Because Noonan projected a sense of competency on to Obama, she expected him to have been competent
Posted by: DavidL at May 28, 2010 05:50 PM (EmDLH)
6
CY. When they do get it capped, where do you think the oil will escape? The natural seeps in the caprock? Yeah, the place where it already leaks naturally. Between 16 and 20 million gallons a year in the gulf.
Posted by: Matt at June 01, 2010 08:42 AM (nYlF5)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 27, 2010
Obama Makes Bad Move in Alleged Sestak Job Offer
President Obama said at his press conference today that he "can assure the public that nothing improper took place" in conversations between the White House and Rep. Joe Sestak, who suggested earlier this year he was offered a White House job in exchange for dropping his primary challenge against Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter.
And Nixon said he wasn't a crook, either.
As others have pointed out, there aren't too many scenarios here, and none are good from Democrats. Either Sestak is lying, or someone in the Obama Administration seems to have committed a felony.
But by responding to these charges himself, Obama can no longer pretend to be above the fray, and has involved himself as an actor in any potential scandal that could erupt from the possible crime, or the presumptive cover-up.
It wasn't a very smart move on Obama's part.
But then, so few things in his Administration have been anything resembling smart.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
03:26 PM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I would think that they could simply say that if he didn't have future plans they could use him in the administration. That likely would fly. All of us know he tried to bribe the guy, but proving that will be difficult. I just wonder what Sestak is trying to get out of this.
Posted by: David at May 27, 2010 03:46 PM (coY4Z)
2
Now it is an Impeachable crime. Let's see who is brave enough to go after the Chicago Machine, moved to Washington DC.
Posted by: Marc at May 27, 2010 06:03 PM (20fK0)
3
One of three things happened. Either no one offered a job to Sestak, or an implicit job offer was made, or an explicit job offer was made. If no offer was made, then the administration should say so. All of this "nothing improper took place" talk just makes it look like they are trying to hide something, and the only conclusion is that some kind of offer was made.
Posted by: MikeM at May 27, 2010 09:08 PM (zfcnf)
4
Marc - I so agree with you. CY and others - I have been watching these guys and their cohorts for so many years get away with things that any other person would be tarred and feathered and run out of town. My guess is they are so corrupt and complicit in bribery and political extortion that they will get a free pass from the media and all the other spineless libs and the "Why can't we all get along" republicans. Hell, they couldn't put a dent in a slimeball that had SEX in the Oval office, and lied under oath.
Posted by: mixitup at May 27, 2010 09:08 PM (Z21cb)
5
W.R.T. The One, it just doesn't matter. No congress is going to impeach the first African American President of the United States, even if the offer was illegal and captured on video and witnessed by 100 people.
I think Sestak dropped this little tid-bit in February in order to keep the Whitehouse from campaigning for Specter. "Stay away or I'll start talking...". He's probably wishing now that he hadn't. On the other hand, he might've lost the primary if they'd been more involved because he kept quiet, so maybe not.
In the end, Sestak and the White House will both wind up saying that Sestak really was offered a job, but he misunderstood the conversation and it wasn't offered as a quid pro quo exchange.
Posted by: scp at May 27, 2010 10:21 PM (LNDvM)
6
Oh please, they would no more impeach a quota then they would expect anything from one, good or bad. If he sold cocaine in the lobby and was caught, we would be told it was "not job related", so there is no issue.
What this so called president has already done and gotten away with proves he is outside of law, decorum, moral and civil requirements, etc. I laugh when I hear people suggesting anything would be done no matter what.
Posted by: Doom at May 28, 2010 09:34 AM (HgkpM)
7
Well the good news is that Obama has reached out for "professional help" on the Sestak matter.
It was once said of the Clintons, Bill and Hillary, that they were both liars, and Bill was very very good at it. Since a helpful lie might help in this coverup, they've now involved Clinton who will say that 'twas he that talked to Sestak. You can't get any more professional liar than Bill Clinton. So score this one a "plus" for Obama's competence.
Posted by: Mike Myers at May 29, 2010 08:42 AM (ktYjH)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
<< Page 52 >>
Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.1203 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.0915 seconds, 209 records returned.
Page size 150 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.