the True Nature of Reality

We made it through the holidays!

I haven't seen any discussion of the fact that we made it through the recent high holy days of Easter and Passover as well as the anniversary of the fall of Baghdad, all without any successful major terrorist attacks here, or with our allies.

All Praise to the security and armed forces of the Free World! Thank you all! Salute!

JFK today - how the Democrats have fallen

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."--John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1961

"I have always said from day one that the goal here . . . is a stable Iraq, not whether or not that's a full democracy. I can't tell you what it's going to be, but a stable Iraq. And that stability can take several different forms."--John F. Kerry, April 14, 2004

That's sad.

(via James Taranto, hat tip Roger Simon.

Join the Liberty Alliance! Help win the war!

Do you have a blog?

Then you need to go here right now and join the Liberty Alliance. It's the best thing you'll do all day.

Don't have a blog? Well go start one!

THEN go here right now and join the Liberty Alliance. It'll be the second-best thing you do all day.

Neither one of them links me, but I have to go with Dean and Rosemary

Iraq needs independent TV. And the blogosphere is going to help them get some.

I've been complaining about us falling behind in the psy-ops war for some time. Well, now we can directly help do something about it.

The Marines need some help:

US Marines seek to equip seven (7) television stations serving local communities within Al Anbar Province, Iraq. The Province includes the cities of Fallujah and Ramadi. These stations will offer information that is more accurate and balanced than existing alternatives. The goal is to improve understanding between Americans and Iraqis, build trust and reduce tensions.

Current TV news in Iraq often carries negative, highly-biased accounts of the U.S. presence. Unanswered, its effect is to stoke resentment and encourage conflict. The Marines seek to ensure the Iraqi people have access to better, more balanced information. By equipping local television stations and providing the ability to generate news and programming, the Marines will create a viable news alternative - one owned and operated by local Iraqi citizens.

There's a lot more. This is a great, great project, and a way we can really help. Go here, read it all, then get out the checkbook.

Now the REALLY IMPORTANT PART!

THERE'S A WAR ON!

And no, I don't mean the war in Iraq, or the War On Terror, or World War 4 (or 5). I mean the Blog War between Dean's World and A Small Victory to see who can raise the most money for this project.

NEITHER ONE OF THEM LINKS ME, but I'm going to have to throw down for Dean and Rosemary. Go Now and read how you can help us to Victory in this most important battle!

UPDATE

My subtle appeal led to a link! See, blackmail works.

Wait a sec, I'm the guy that sent money...

[goes off to ponder things]

The Great Educator?

I think the President has been leading us along, slowly and deliberately, throughout this whole effort. Educating us, if you will, bringing us slowly to a truth that we would have rejected had it been baldly stated as soon as he understood it.

I believe that not too long after 9/11, the President decided on the Big Strategy of reforming the entire freakin' Islamic world as the only possible alternative to impossible defense or nuclear retaliation. But he couldn't very well come right out and SAY that. People would freak, and they'd think he was crazy, even though this is the only humane path.

Two years ago, how many average citizens were convinced that this was a war against Islamofascism, not just "terrorism", por just Bin Laden? Heck, how many had even heard the term? Darn few. And how many today? A lot. Not a majority, maybe, but a whole lot.

How many were convinced that this was a fight to the death for all of Western Civilization? Almost none. Again, the very idea would be seen as risible. Osama bin Laden, take down Western Civilization? It is to laugh.

Today that's not a crazy idea at all, and thoughtful people all over the world are talking about how to stop it.

It's all been part of our education. As I've listened to the President's speeches since being "Den Beste'd", I've noted that a bit more is injected each time. New threats are brought forward, threats that were there all the time but left unmentioned. New countries and players are brought into the light of our attention. He has led the American people a long way down the road, so slowly and carefully that the vast majority of our professional pundits seem to be unaware the process is even taking place. But I've been watching both the campaign and its effects on my fellow citizens, and I think it's been effective and brilliant.

We see yet another example in the portion of the President's remarks last night that baldilocks highlights:

The violence we are seeing in Iraq is familiar. The terrorist who takes hostages, or plants a roadside bomb near Baghdad is serving the same ideology of murder that kills innocent people on trains in Madrid, and murders children on buses in Jerusalem, and blows up a nightclub in Bali, and cuts the throat of a young reporter for being a Jew.

We've seen the same ideology of murder in the killing of 241 Marines in Beirut, the first attack on the World Trade Center, in the destruction of two embassies in Africa, in the attack on the USS Cole, and in the merciless horror inflicted upon thousands of innocent men and women and children on September the 11th, 2001.

None of these acts is the work of a religion; all are the work of a fanatical, political ideology. The servants of this ideology seek tyranny in the Middle East and beyond. They seek to oppress and persecute women. They seek the death of Jews and Christians, and every Muslim who desires peace over theocratic terror.

Then baldilocks adds:

This is what it’s all about. The rest of the dance with a hostile press was fun, but trivial.

Exactly. Clearly she gets it.

But how many of us were saying that two years ago? Specifically, how many of us were saying that Palestinian terrorism is part and parcel of the enemy that attacked us on 9/11? It wouldn't surprise me a bit if baldilocks was, but I don't think too many others were. I sure wasn't, and for SURE my co-workers weren't.

You could argue that there was nothing particularly new in this snippet, save perhaps the tighter link to Israel and the Jews. baldilocks even titled her post "Re-Cap". And it was. But each time the message is quietly repeated, each time it's emphasized, each time it's pointed out, each time it's worded a little different, some more people "get it". All good teachers repeat the lesson.

This time the particular emphasis was bringing forward the linkage to Israel and Palestinian terrorism. To say clearly that Palestinian terrorists are our enemy just as much as Bin Laden is.

There will be more lessons to come. More of our enemies will be confronted.

We've come to call Reagan "The Great Communicator". Will Bush come to be called "The Great Educator"?

I doubt it like heck, as who could ever admit to learning something from this "dumb Texan"? But I think he just might deserve it.

If he actually succeeds in getting the Islamic world to look at themselves more honestly and start towards reform, he'll really be The Great Educator.

The Leftist Media, could we get an "I'm Sorry" out of you?

It just occurred to me as the media was so intent on playing this stupid game with Bush, trying to pull an "I'm sorry" out of him.

Let me ask the media, when are we going to get an "I'm Sorry" from YOU?

You were apologists for Communism. You railed against McCarthy, but now that the truth has come out of Soviet files...McCarthy was mostly right. We really WERE infiltrated by Soviet agents in Hollywood and other media. We still are, even though the Soviet Union is thankfully dead.

You lost us Vietnam. No one else. You did. 50,000 American troops dead. Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese. Later millions of Cambodians.

Giap and others have published their diaries now. Now we can see what really happened at Tet and other places. You deliberately propagandized against your own country, and turned our victory into defeat. And you were gleeful ghouls as you did it, just as you are gleeful ghouls now as you "report" on Iraq.

All those deaths, millions, caused in no small measure by the ignorance, partisanship, small-mindedness, vindictiveness, defeatism, and pure lies of the Leftist media.

The Media Lied. People Died.

Some millions, so far as I can tell.

Could we have an apology? Please? After a full freaking century of mainstream Leftist media and "intellectual" apology for socialism and totalitarianism in all its forms, up to and including the present day, could we please get an "I'm Sorry"?

Well?

I thought not.

The Leftist media: it's all about "feelings"

I'm writing this during the President's press conference.

The Leftist media keeps picking at Bush, asking him right out to apologize, and does he feel any "personal responsibility".

It's ridiculous. It's sickening. And what it says about our culture is worrying.

It's really all about "feelings" for the Left, isn't it? It doesn't matter what you did, or what happened - what matters is how you feel about it.

Typical post-modernist drivel. The Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves.

Now he's being accused of letting the threat of 9-11 ripen too far, and that of Iraq ripen too little.

Spousal Unit says "Can't please some people!"

I agree! :)

UPDATE

Here we go again, asking him what he thinks his biggest mistake is. How freakin rude! Who the heck do you think you are, asking a question like that of the President? What is this OBSESSION with this?

Do all you journalists have small weenie syndrome, and you can only feel better about yourself by tearing someone else down? Is that where you get your validation?

Faugh!

UPDATE the second

It's over now. Even the last reporter (from NPR, surprise) wanted to ask The Mistake Question.

If Bush said I'm Sorry, would they love him then?

Partisan finger-pointing, and are we badly understaffed in Iraq?

Jane Galt brings up both issues (thoughtfully, as always) in this post.

I did a long analysis in the comments, so I thought I'd reproduce it here. It's in two posts:

I should note that the initial comment below is directed at the comment thread that ensued, not Jane's post, and in a broader sense is directed at all of us, myself included sometimes.

----------------------------------

And once again, when we try and discuss our problem, or if we even HAVE a problem, out come the knives and the backstabbing begins.

No discussion of what to do now (barring dc, who gets props even if he's wrong G). No discussion of whether the initial premise is correct. Just blame-games

We've got problems to solve. At least the Republicans are trying to solve them, however imperfectly. In the meantime, much of the Democratic Party seems to have aligned itself with America's enemies. Nice going.

Even granting that criticisms from either side, or both, are valid, so what? What were our alternatives?

1) Lie back and try to enjoy it as the Islamists continue their plan of world domination
2) Go nuclear
3) Fight back conventionally, even though we're not really staffed up for it

So far as I am concerned, #1 is right out, #2 is to be avoided if at all possible, and that leaves #3.

I'd take the criticism from the Left better if they would either show us another VIABLE option, come right out and tell us they prefer 1 or 2, or get off their butts and start trying to HELP on 3 instead of just complaining.

Posted by DSmith at April 13, 2004 11:26 AM

---------------------------------

To answer the original question, I'm not convinced that we're woefully understaffed. What is it that we can't do that we should be able to do? Certainly there is no enemy force that can stand against us. They die at 10-1 when they try. When we decide to use force in Iraq, our problem is normally trying to apply as *little* force as possible. We don't have too little force, but "too much".

But, I can hear the cries now, what about all those ambushes? How come we're losing people every day to IEDs and snipers and such?

That goes with the territory when you're an occupying power. Even if we had 500,000 troops, how would that change things? Is that enough to have a trooper every 5 feet? No. More importantly, would more troops change our willingness to use violence? I doubt it. So we'd just have more troops who can't act pro-actively. More targets.

We know who and where the bad guys are for the most part already, and have since we got there. Problem is, we're not willing to bomb their towns to take them out. We're not willing to send out hit squads on the Al Sadrs. And before anyone squeals, I'm not necessarily advocating we should do any of those things. But the point is, we already have the force structure to inflict far more damage than we are willing to inflict.

The other objection, as I see it, would be that we need those 500K troops essentially as policemen. Just to patrol the streets. Show the flag lots of places and all that. And yes, I agree that in this particular situation that would likely be helpful. But that means, essentially, that we should have a huge army of MPs. Are we going to staff up for that? Does it even make sense? Would we ever need that force structure again? I don't know, but I think it's far from obvious that if we, for example, still had the Army of 1990, that the additional manpower would make all that much difference in practice.

Policing Iraq has to be done by Iraqis. There's no way we can have an army that's big enough to *police* a state with a population of 25 million. And yes, this is somewhat of an Achilles' heel in our efforts in Iraq. It's an area that has gone particularly badly, to all our misfortunes, and hence it's an area that needs a lot of focus going forward. Does this failure mean that Bush "didn't have a plan" or that the war shouldn't have been fought? Not at all. Remember that we're there trying to avoid Options 1 and 2 I mentioned in a previous comment.

We will continue to take regular low level losses until the Iraqi police and defense forces are *well* up to speed, and that's going to take a couple of years. Even at that, it may not work. We may fail there. I pray we do not, because if we do, I think Option 2 is inevitable, which would be a tragedy for all concerned.

Let's try and remember what's at stake.

Posted by DSmith at April 13, 2004 11:56 AM

St. Petersburg Democratic Club wants to kill Rumsfeld?

Matt Drudge reports today: CAMPAIGN RAGE: FLORIDA DEMOCRATS PLACE NEWSPAPER AD CALLING FOR RUMSFELD HIT; FUNDRAISING FOR KERRY

Wow, something bloggable happens in my town and I have to get it from Drudge. I guess that shows the power of the blogosphere. :)

Rosemary, Q.O.A.E., wonders if it's legit.

Yup, it's legit, I'm very sorry to say. I have several copies in-hand. It's a full-page display ad. Here is the most outrageous line:

And then there's Rumsfeld who said of Iraq "We have our good days and our bad days". We should put this S.O.B. up against the wall and say "This is one of our bad days," and pull the trigger.

(emphasis added)

Well, well, isn't that nice? The St. Petersburg Democratic Club shows its true colors and suggests, whether as "political protest" or not, that the Secretary of Defense should be put up against the wall and shot. In time of war.

I might suggest that the FBI should visit Ken and Edna, the president and vice-president of the club, and perhaps put them up against the wall and......talk to them about things.

A while back the President said you're either with us, or against us. I think we can safely say that the St. Petersburg Democratic Club is against America. Which is a terrible and pathetic thing to have to say, but there it is. We have met the enemy, and he is us.

Keep this little story, just one of many, in mind when you're getting ready to vote in November.

----------------------------------------------------------

Here are more details, for anyone who wants the rest of the story.

Matt has a scan of the ad. I have taken the liberty of mirroring a cleaned-up copy on this site.

This was published in The Gabber (Gulfport, Florida), April 8-April 14, 2004 issue, number 1,841, on page 39, as a full page display ad.

Here's the full text, transcribed by me:

St. Petersburg Democratic Club

Senator Edward Kennedy is absolutely right when he called Iraq "Bush's Vietnam". But it's not only Bush, it's his whole damn Bunch- Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, Rice, Rove and Ridge.

They've tried to blame the Iraq war on bad intelligence, on Al Qaida, on terrorists, on foreigners from Iran and Syria. Bush doesn't even know who in the hell we're fighting. The Bush Bunch calls the Iraqis insurgents. Did you know that Britain called the American revolutionaries insurgents and traitors? The Iraqis aren't insurgents. They're Iraqi patriates [sic] who want us the hell out of their country, and we should get the hell out of their country now!

We have Marines and soldiers being killed by the dozens with many more wounded. How many have to be killed before the Bush Bunch is satisfied? How many burial services of our Iraq dead has Bush attended? Any? How many military hospitals has Bush visited to talk to our wounded who have lost arms, or legs, or their eye sight [sic], or combinations of these - how many?

And then there's Rumsfeld who said of Iraq "We have our good days and our bad days". We should put this S.O.B. up against a wall and say "This is one of our bad days," and pull the trigger. Do you want to salvage our country? Be a savior of our country? Then vote for John Kerry and get rid of the whole Bush Bunch!

Please make a donation of ANY amount of money you can afford and send it to John Kerry for President, Inc. 901 15h Street, N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20005. Do it NOW. Thank you.

Iraq
Killed Wounded
623 4927

For Club Information
343-7921 Ken, President
525-4586 Edna, Vice-President

Wonder who the St. Petersburg Democratic Club is? Well, their website is here: StPeteDems

Wondering if they're legit? Well, they're listed on the website of the Pinellas County Democratic Party on the "Officially Chartered Democratic Clubs Page" They seem like Official Democrats to me..

About the Gabber, the newspaper that published the ad.

The Gabber is a quaint little small-town paper for Gulfport, Florida, which is a town southwest of downtown St. Petersburg, but included in the St. Pete metroplex. The paper is magazine format, printed on newsprint. The issue in question is 76 pages long. It's free, but it's not just an "ad paper", as it has quite a bit of editorial content; news of the City of Gulfport, local club news, art fairs, police blotter, etc., as well as some columnists and such. It's actually rather nice for a free paper.

Matt mentions a comment from the paper:

The publisher of the GABBER says running the ad with the passage "pull the trigger" was a mistake that "slipped through" during the editing of this week's edition.

Looking at the ad, it may well have been submitted as camera-ready artwork, so that is at least plausible.

However, I should note that Gulfport is a combination retiree and artist's colony. Leftist sentiments are common. For example, when I was there today looking for copies of the paper, I noted flyers in several local shop windows urging folks to "Make Gulfport a Hate-Free Zone" (may not be an exact quote, but close). This was in regard to some "hate speech" ordinance that is being urged. The flyers were to urge folks to attend a meeting. Not exactly Berkeley East, but not GOP Country either.

I also note that the StPeteDems hold their monthly meetings at Piccadilly Cafeteria. I wonder if the restaurant knows what sort of folks these are? And what they are plotting at these meetings? Maybe I should swing by and ask the manager...

UPDATE

This little news item was just mentioned on FOX News, Brit Hume's show.

I hope my bandwidth doesn't get killed.

UPDATE the second

This looks like it's spreading fast. I clicked on BlogsForBush to see if I was on the blogroll yet, and what was the top story?

UPDATE the third

Zing! I hafta pass along this comment from the BlogsForBush post. This was from "Researcher"

Well, Kerry attended a VVAW meeting where killing senators was discussed ...Why shouldn't his party stick to his message?

I hadn't thought of that. The man definitely has a point!

UPDATE the fourth

The spousal unit objects to the use of the flag on that ad, and wants it removed immediately!

I agree!

That's how you stay married 30 years. :)

UPDATE the fifth

I took a better picture of the ad. You can view it here (100k).

Yeah, we're good at hi-tech, but what about psy-ops?

I'm a believer in giving the Devil his due, and I've never seen anything more devilish than Iraq.

Wretchard reports on three separate but eerily similar incidents of journalists being "captured" by Fallujah insurgents.

The journalists are taken to a picturesque location where they are first greeted with hostility, then granted surprising liberty. A sense of shared danger bonds them with their captors. Scenes are provided to lend color. Due to a surprising coincidence, the captured journalists stumble on information every Western intelligence agency wants to know. The preparations to defend the Golden Mosque, the fate of the missing German counterterrorism agents. Then, as quickly as they were captured, they are released. Not for them is the long and slow incarceration of Terry Waite, but a hearty goodbye, encumbered only by the promise that they will tell the world the truth, on their word as Americans or Englishmen.

This sounds like a disinformation operation targeting journalists. Maybe their captors went to the same school.

That is smart. That is NOT the sort of thing that gets put together by some insurgents on the fly. It's the result of trained folks in psy-ops, and plenty of planning and training. As Wretchard says, it's Special Forces, but whose Special Forces?

Our traditions of fair play in politics (don't laugh, it's relative) leave us squeamish about propaganda. Just as we don't do torture. It's Just Not Done. The problem is that this leaves us at a severe disadvantage in a struggle that is as much or more psychological as physical.

Yeah, we're killing terrorists and insurgents whenever they stick their heads up. And they're kicking our ass in the propaganda war.

Kicking. Our. Ass.

In the big picture, that's a more important battle than any given few square miles of stinking desert.

We need to get serious about this. We need to train Arabic speakers. We need multiple TV channels. We need TV crews controlled by the military to tell our side of the story. Ok, so it's not "fair & balanced", so what? I'm interested in winning, because that saves lives. The other side is fighting dirty in the propaganda war and we shouldn't be squeamish about telling the truth in a way that favors us. We owe it to our people, and our soldiers.

Yo, Rummy, while you're re-inventing the military, how about getting us at least up to parity with the Islamists in propaganda capability?

Kerry picks up another endorsement from a "foreign leader"

If anyone dares to suggest that the anti-Bush hate speech that comes from the Left, and yes by that I mean the Democrats and John Kerry, among others, is so extreme as to actually be harming the country and hence is unpatriotic, O! the screams and cries you will hear. Soon will come the rejoinders to the effect that it's just vigorous political discourse. Just insults between friends. Part of the strength of the Republic, etc., etc.

Yeah, well maybe. Or maybe it actively harms the country. Maybe, when we're at war, it puts American lives at risk, or even costs American lives. Maybe in result, if not in intent, it's disloyal.

Think I go too far? Well, here's a quote from one of the rebel fighters at Fallujah (hat tip: LGF):

When asked why he fought, Abu Freedom is clear.

"Because I hate the Americans and hate the invaders," he says. "I don't want to see Americans in charge of my country."

In the other house on Monday, Ahmed is more eloquent on how the fighting can end and peace can come to Iraq.

"God willing Bush will fall down by the hands of Fallujah," he says, combining military and political rhetoric. "If John Kerry wins the election and withdraws the Americans troops from Iraq, and maybe just leaves a few in bases, then we will not fight. But Bush we will always fight."

(emphasis added)

I can understand a young Iraqi being enraged about foreign invaders. But why should he care who the President is? Why should he like John Kerry? Why does he think that Bush, particularly, rather than the Coalition or even the American people, is the cause of his woe?

Maybe because that's what gets chanted all day, every day. Not just by our declared enemies and their mouthpieces, but by John Kerry and the Democratic leadership. By the overwhelmingly Democratic American media. By an awful lot of people in America.

Bush=Hitler!

Bush is the enemy!

Hey guys, I think it's working, I think your message is getting out. You've convinced Abu the ex-Ba'athist to see Bush, particularly, as his enemy. And that you are Bush's enemy. So now he wants to be your friend. It's nice to have friends. Aren't you glad?

On the other hand, it is said that you can judge people by their friends. So I hope everyone will think about who John Kerry's friends are, and why. And then think about what sort of friends the President of the United States of America should have.

After Eason Jordan, why should we ever believe CNN ever again?

Well?