The Fairness Doctrine
There are several articles written and published that serious minded people need to read and heed. There are politicos that would like nothing better than to have a free reign at power and control over “We The People”, and the power of our votes and our voices. Most of the proponents of that philosophy, an unconstitutional one at that, are members of the Democratic Party. SO much for the self-proclaimed “heralders” of The People. One may conclude that the squelchers of Freedom of Speech are looking after their own political careers and if they can silence their opposition, the more secure they will be. Naturally, people that agree with them will be allowed to be as vocal as they so desire.
Nothing Fair About Fairness Doctrine
No Need To Bring Back The Fairness
Rigging The Debate
‘Fairness’ Blarney
‘Fairness’ Follies
Pulling The Plug
Senator Thune: Reject Orwellian Calls For Broadcast “Fairness”
From the NRSC: go there and sign the petition
Free speech is under attack.
As Democrats in Congress eagerly line up to legislate what you hear on the radio it begs the question: what’s next? Newspapers? There’s no end in sight to their power grab.
Democrats like Al Franken have tried to compete with the liberal talk radio Air America; yet they failed miserably and the network collapsed into bankruptcy.
And why did they fail? Because people chose not to listen. In this country’s Free Market system radio stations succeed and fail based on their content. If people do not like the content of the program, they turn it off. Our marketplace guarantees your freedom to choose what you want to listen to; and that freedom is what doomed liberal talk radio to collapse.
Realizing that their ideas couldn’t compete in the Free Market, Democrats schemed for ways to crush conservative talk radio’s success.
Their answer? The so-called “Fairness Doctrine.”
Revival of the “Fairness Doctrine” would have the chilling effect of censoring conservative talk radio by requiring radio stations to air liberal content. Air liberal content or your station license will be revoked.
It’s unfortunate that Democrats are willing to trample on our First Amendment rights for political gain.
What part of Congress shall make no law doesn’t Hillary Clinton and Al Franken understand?
At the Fairness Doctrine Watch blog, linked to The Truth Laid Bear, established by NZ Bear, also instrumental in the highly successful Victory Caucus, there is a wealth of information in regards to the Democrat Party’s Unfairness Doctrine…
Monday Morning Roundup
Monday, 09 July 2007 | |
Lee Butler, writing at OpinionEditorials.com:
TownHall.com is chock full o’ Fairness Doctrine opinion this week. First, Russell Shubin:
And be sure to also check out Harry Jackson and Paul Greenberg. |
There is a video at this blog as well and I have placed it in my VODPOD above. It is Mitch McConnell Mitch-Slapping the Democrats again.
Scroll through the tags on my blog and you will find a tag labeled “Fairness Doctrine“. Click, read and learn. Including this post, you will find 17 entries and there are more to come…bank on it.
Over at the Cost Of Democrats, there is another wealth of information made readily available to the serious minded. Trolls go there as well but they haven’t the mental stamina to keep up.
The Captain’s Quarters has “A Colloquy On the Fairness Doctrine“. A CSPAN video can be viewed here in which the smiling Democrats are seen introducing the bill to silence the majority of Americans.
Newsbusters has a take on the socialist democrats as they weasel their way into the everyday lives of “We The People”.
If you had any question concerning how much the left wants the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine in order to kill conservative talk radio, you got your answer on the floor of the Senate Friday.Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minnesota) offered an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill that would prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from reinstituting this archaic edict.
As NewsBusters reported on June 30, such an amendment overwhelmingly passed in the House a few weeks ago by the tally of 309 to 115.
Unfortunately, Senate Democrats didn’t even want to debate this issue, and, instead, lead by Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), objected.
For those interested, an unofficial transcript of Coleman and Durbin’s exchange – which marvelously depicts the differences in how liberals and conservatives view the Fairness Doctrine – follows (video available here):
The Democratic Party is pushing us Patriots closer and closer to another Boston Tea Party. IAW the Constitution, that is our right.
There is another video in my VODPOD Labeled Kennedy to Hillary-Big Business payback that you will want to see and take to your own blogs.
Support The Troops
Vets For Freedom: Call To Action
Vets For Freedom: Call To Action
(Hat Tip to Red State) The bottom of their post, via Vets for Freedom, they ask that this be emailed around as well as put up on blogs to help spread the word…. soooooo here we go.
Last week, Vets for Freedom launched our “10 Weeks to Testimony” campaign and committed to leading the charge to support General Petraeus and stop anti-war radicals and politicians on Capitol Hill from undermining the mission in Iraq.
Unfortunately-despite thousands of phone calls to Capitol Hill this week–even more Republican senators have bowed to political pressure and declared defeat, despite progress being shown by General Petraeus’s new counter-insurgency strategy.
Next week, politicians in Washington, DC are poised to sell out America’s safety because election season is near. As veterans, we cannot allow this to happen. The information battle Vets for Freedom was planning for September is upon us in July, therefore we must adapt, overcome, and do something immediately. Our collective voice must be heard on Capitol Hill, and it must be heard now!
This is a call to action. We are asking every Iraq and Afghanistan veteran who believes in supporting the mission–and defeating America’s enemies–to converge on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC on Tuesday, July 17. It’s time the fighters in this war tell their representatives–face to face-that now is no time to betray the mission.
What You Can Do This Week!
Week #2: Converge on Capitol Hill, July 17 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have already sacrificed blood, sweat, and tears on foreign battlefields. Now America needs one more thing while you’re home — one day of your time. We are the last line of defense.
We’re not going to protest, wave signs, or scream slogans. We are going to make our voices heard, in a professional manner, in keeping with the finest traditions of our great country and military. I have no doubt you will want to join us.
But you say: “It’s an entire Tuesday, and travel is expensive!” We share these legitimate concerns, but answer with this fundamental question: If not you, then who? Who else will tell Congress to give General Petraeus, his strategy, and our comrades time to complete the mission? It has come to this. It must be us.
But you also say: “It’s such short notice, and I have to work.” Again, legitimate concerns, but we have already received commitments from numerous veterans with full-time jobs who have said–no matter the notice–I’ll be there. We need the same from you. Your country needs the same from you.
You might also say, “I’m Active Duty, I can’t do this type of stuff.” There is a common misconception that troops serving on active duty cannot participate in events like this. This is false. As long as you are 1) out of uniform; 2) not speaking on behalf of “the military”; and 3) not protesting, you are absolutely allowed to be involved. The same goes for National Guard and Reserve troops.
We hope to raise enough money–from the supporters of Vets for Freedom who cannot make it to Washington, DC–to ensure that everyone who makes the trip is reimbursed at some level. Every dollar donated to Vets for Freedom between now and July 17 will go directly to covering travel costs of veterans.
So, how do you get involved? Be bold. Take a stand. And join your fellow Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors, and Marines on Capitol Hill. Here’s what you need to do:
Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans
If you are a veteran and are ready to take a stand and join us on Capitol Hill on July 17, please send an email to Adriel at adriel@vetsforfreedom.org as soon as possible. The email should contain the following 6 points of information:
- Name and basic information (phone number, email, and zip code)
- Military background (OIF/OEF experience, unit, current status)
- Home state (and any other states you have lived in)
- Your most probable means of transportation to Washington, DC
- A very brief biography (no more than one paragraph)
- Any questions you might have
When Vets for Freedom receives your email, we will email you the following information as soon as possible:
- Time and place for initial link up in Washington, DC (assume between 8–9am)
- Driving directions, maps, and parking instructions
- Basic timeline/instructions for the day (assume day will finish between 5–6pm)
- Other preparation materials
When you arrive in Washington, DC on Tuesday morning, you will receive an in-brief and Vets for Freedom you provide you with the following:
- Detailed itinerary (including your office visit schedule, media schedule, and event schedule to visit your member of Congress–everything will be done in groups)
- Latest Iraq news and information
- Capitol Hill map
- Vets for Freedom complementary polo shirt; breakfast and lunch provided
Supporters of Our Veterans
You may not be able to make it to Washington, DC, but that doesn’t mean you can’t still support our mission on July 17. You can do the following three things:
1) Donate. As we’ve already mentioned, every dollar donated in the next 4 days will be used to reimburse the travel costs of veterans who will be paying their own way to Capitol Hill.
2) Call your Senator. The response to our Week 1 “call to action” was incredible. Thank you. Thousands of calls were made, and we need to do this again. Reinforce our veterans on Capitol Hill by calling the 2 Senators from your home state on July 17 and telling them to support the troops-and the mission!
3) Forward this Email. Send this email to everyone you know. Post it on your blog. Print it out and hand it out to friends. Get the word out, so we can get as many veterans on Capitol Hill as possible.
This is our mission. This is our moment. Join Vets for Freedom on Capitol Hill and do your part to support our fellow soldiers and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan
See you on the 17th!
Regards,
Pete Hegseth
Iraq War Veteran 2005-2006
Executive Director, Vets for Freedom
Click here for more information on Vets for Freedom’s “10 Weeks to Testimony.”
(NOTE from Spree– I was of two minds about this because our veterans have done so much for us, as a country, that I hate to ask them to do more, but this is also FROM Veterans, requesting OUR help to get this word out and I would never refuse a request that they ask of me. So, hit that Donate button folks and help them in any way you can, if you cannot donate, then spread this around, via email, on your blog, but they are asking US to help them to help our active military,
Our Enemies…Foreign and Domestic
The Enemies Within
And they are many. They call themselves Patriots but I question that which they are Patriotic to. CBS News is one of those questionable groups that have questionable if not outright dubious associations with the socialist influences within our own borders.
Given the atrocities performed daily by U.S. soldiers against innocent Iraqi citizens, as well as the lies upon which the Iraq War was sparked, U.S. troops should be withdrawn from Iraq, says The Nation.
And where are these “daily atrocities”? If it is the “Haditha Massacre”, that whole Murtha wet dream is unraveling and unraveling hard. And what are the lies, exactly, other than the emotional twists and turns of opinions held by pathetic mental patients?
The alleged and highly acclaimed and suspect exhaustive investigation by The Nation, of all entities of the Hate America and Blame America First crowds, is incredulously flawed. Where are the substantiations to the claim of “daily” wrong doings? Last I knew, hearsay was and is to be discounted for what it is…doubtful.
To date, on this New Media Blog, I have 155 CENTCOM releases, each of which average 12 stories. CENTCOM reports everything and leaves not a thing out. If there were “daily atrocities” as alleged by the wanting-of-proven-content of the dead-beat rag called The Nation, I would be joining their efforts.
Along with the CENTCOM releases that I post and publish, I have RSS feeds to CENTCOM, DefenseLink (that I also post and publish) and MilNews. All of them publish everything, the good with the bad. One can also tune into Pentagon TV where all sorts of news is available and everyone (with .01 microns worth of brain matter) knows that the Pentagon isn’t always in favor of the military, strange as that may be.
The Nation, the Rag of Idiots and Morons, is no better than organizations like Code Pinko and A.N.S.W.E.R., that have known associations with communist nations and enemies of the United States.
Unlike organizations such as mentioned above, we in The New Media, of which I am proud to associate with, produce facts and figures and provide substantiations to our allegations and claims. Traitorous and seditious groups such as The Nation and their low-intelligence level followers do not and cannot. They rely solely on the uneducated, the emotional and the easily beguiled.
War News
War News
US CENTCOM Press Releases |
SAFE HAVEN DISRUPTED, IRAQI FORCES DETAIN TEN Posted: 12 Jul 2007 11:23 AM GMT-06:00 SAFE HAVEN DISRUPTED, IRAQI FORCES DETAIN TEN |
ISF, COALITION FORCES CONDUCT OPERATIONS TO BRING SECURITY TO AD DIWANIYAH Posted: 12 Jul 2007 11:13 AM GMT-06:00 ISF, COALITION FORCES CONDUCT OPERATIONS TO BRING SECURITY TO AD DIWANIYAH |
LOL! Don’t Ask Reid Hard Questions
Thou Shalt Not Question Reid!
The below, I received in my email:
Perturbed Reid Scolds ABC’s Tapper for Questioning Withdrawal ABC’s Jake Tapper on Thursday night raised the prediction “genocide” will result after a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, a forecast Tapper put to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at a Capitol Hill news conference: “Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?” Reid didn’t respond to the point, leading Tapper to retort in the exchange played on World News: “You didn’t answer my question.” A perturbed Reid, presumably not used to challenging questions from the Washington press corps, chastised Tapper: “This isn’t a debate. We’re answering questions.” Tapper then repeated his question — “Will the Iraqis be safer?” — but Reid ignored him and moved on: “Anyone else have a question?” Tapper’s story ran a night after Wednesday’s World News featured a report from Terry McCarthy in Iraq on how General David Petraeus, commander of all multi-national forces in Iraq, “is still very optimistic about the military battle, if the politicians give him enough time.”
ABC’s Jake Tapper on Thursday night raised the prediction “genocide” will result after a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, a forecast Tapper put to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at a Capitol Hill news conference: “Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?” Reid didn’t respond to the point, leading Tapper to retort in the exchange played on World News: “You didn’t answer my question.” A perturbed Reid, presumably not used to challenging questions from the Washington press corps, chastised Tapper: “This isn’t a debate. We’re answering questions.” Tapper then repeated his question — “Will the Iraqis be safer?” — but Reid ignored him and moved on: “Anyone else have a question?”
Tapper’s story ran a night after Wednesday’s World News featured a report from Terry McCarthy in Iraq on how General David Petraeus, commander of all multi-national forces in Iraq, “is still very optimistic about the military battle, if the politicians give him enough time.” See the July 11 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org
[This item was posted, with video, Thursday night on the MRC’s blog. The video will be added to the posted version of this CyberAlert, but in the meantime, to watch the Real or Windows Media video, or listen to the MP3 audio, go to: newsbusters.org ]
On his “Political Punch” blog, Tapper posted a transcript of the entire exchange with Reid: blogs.abcnews.com
Tapper’s July 12 World News story was pegged to the House passage of a resolution calling on troop withdrawal from Iraq to begin within four months, a measure to be taken up next week by the Senate. Following a pro and a con soundbite on the resolution, Tapper showed his exchange with Reid:
JAKE TAPPER: Some foreign policy experts predict that such a U.S. withdrawal could unleash genocide against innocent Iraqis. It’s a subject Democrats do not want to discuss.
mb”,”\u003cbr\> \n [Edit jump] \u003cbr\> TAPPER: With all due respect, \nSenator, you didn't answer my question. \u003cbr\> REID: \nThis isn't a debate. We're answering questions. \u003cbr\> \n TAPPER: Will the Iraqis be safer? \u003cbr\> REID: \nAnyone else have a question? \u003cbr\> TAPPER: This \nweek's renewed push to withdraw troops, two months before General Petraeus \nreports to Congress on the progress of the surge strategy, has Republicans \nsaying these votes are more about politics than national security…. \u003c/font\>\u003c/span\>\u003c/p\>\n\u003cp\>\u003cspan\>\u003cfont face\u003d\”Times New Roman\” size\u003d\”3\”\>\u003c/font\>\u003c/span\>\u003c/p\>\n\u003cp\>\u003ccenter\>\u003ca href\u003d\”#113c05094a39b695_top\”\>\u003cimg border\u003d\”0\” src\u003d\”http://www.mrc.org/images/backtop.gif\” align\u003d\”right\”\>\u003c/a\>\u003c/center\>\u003c/p\>\u003cp\> \u003c/p\>\u003cfont face\u003d\”Arial\” size\u003d\”2\”\>\u003cp align\u003d\”center\”\>\u003cimg border\u003d\”0\” src\u003d\”http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/cyberimages/cyberno2.gif\” align\u003d\”left\”\>\u003c/p\>\u003c/font\>\u003ca name\u003d\”113c05094a39b695_2\”\>\u003cfont color\u003d\”#000080\” face\u003d\”Verdana\” size\u003d\”3\”\>\u003cb\>CNN \nHighlights Small Left-Wing 'Stop \u003cbr\>\nRacism' Immigration Protest \n\u003c/b\>\u003c/font\>\u003c/a\>\n\n\u003cp\>\u003cspan\>\u003cfont face\u003d\”Times New Roman\” size\u003d\”3\”\> \n It doesn't seem to matter how small it is, a left-wing protest can always draw \na national network TV camera. On CNN's Newsroom program on Wednesday morning, \nthe network founded by Ted "Call No One Foreign" Turner presented a northern \nVirginia controversy over illegal immigrants through a familiar lens — highlighting \na few hundred protesters charging racism in the supposedly outrageous demand \nthat government officials have the right to inquire into the immigration status \nof potential illegal aliens in police custody. \u003c/font\>\u003c/span\>\u003c/p\>\n\u003cp\>\u003cspan\>\u003cfont face\u003d\”Times New Roman\” size\u003d\”3\”\> \n A Republican proposal before the Prince William County Board, modified and \nsoftened after consulting with county police and legal counsel, was approved \nunanimously on Tuesday night — but mysteriously, the story by Brian Todd \non Wednesday morning was never updated (it also ran late Tuesday). The Washington \nPost story from Nick Miroff on Wednesday is here: “,1] ); //–>TAPPER TO REID AT PRESS CONFERENCE: Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?
REID: It is clear that the Iraqi people don’t want us there. It is clear that there is now a state of chaos in Iraq. And it is up to the Iraqi people to make themselves safe.
[Edit jump]
TAPPER: With all due respect, Senator, you didn’t answer my question.
REID: This isn’t a debate. We’re answering questions.
TAPPER: Will the Iraqis be safer?
REID: Anyone else have a question?
TAPPER: This week’s renewed push to withdraw troops, two months before General Petraeus reports to Congress on the progress of the surge strategy, has Republicans saying these votes are more about politics than national security….
I find it “curious” that Reid said that he was answering questions but refused to answer a few asked of him. Could it be that Reid will only answer questions which point to and support his low ratings…LOWER than GWB’s?
What is Reid hiding and where is his substantiations to his claims when it is clear to the world that the words Reid speaks is contrary to the reports we hear from the Boots On The Ground?
And this is the report Terry McCarthy made from Iraq:
ABC: ‘Petraeus Optimistic’ on Iraq ‘If
Pols Give Him Enough Time’On ABC’s World News on Wednesday night, reporter Terry McCarthy gave time to how moves in Washington, DC to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq will undermine progress against al Qaeda. Reporter Terry McCarthy, who traveled with General David Petraeus in the Sunni Triangle’s al Qaeda stronghold south of Baghdad, highlighted how the commander of all forces in Iraq “is still very optimistic about the military battle, if the politicians give him enough time.” McCarthy asked him: “Are you concerned that the U.S. political clock could start ticking too fast and undermine security here? Undermine confidence here?” Petraeus replied that “obviously, that’s in the back of our minds. And there is not a great deal we can do about it, other than to continue to press forward.” McCarthy concluded: “The fields south of Baghdad are still a major battlefield in the fight against al Qaeda. But increasingly, Petraeus knows the most important battle in the Iraq war is being fought out in Washington.”
[This item was posted Wednesday night on the MRC’s blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
A transcript of McCarthy’s story on the July 11 World News:
REPORTER TERRY MCCARTHY, NARRATING VIDEO FROM A HELICOPTER: Rich farmland along the Tigris River. From the air, it looks peaceful. But this is the so-called triangle of death, the Sunni belt south of Baghdad full of al Qaeda extremists, enemy number one for General David Petraeus.
GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS: The enemy in Iraq that is causing the horrific attacks, that is igniting the sectarian violence, that is causing the mass casualties and damaging the infrastructure, by and large is al Qaeda.
MCCARTHY: This is al Qaeda territory, about 20 miles south of Baghdad and a major production area for car bombs. The primary mission of the U.S. military here is to turn the local population against al Qaeda and stop those car bombs making their way to Baghdad. Turning the local population against al Qaeda takes time. And that is one commodity that General Petraeus is running out of. He knows that Congress wants to draw down U.S. troops because they’re losing faith in the Iraqi government.
PETRAEUS: No one is happy with where they are right now. We all share that frustration, frankly that disappointment.
MCCARTHY: Despite all this, Petraeus is still very optimistic about the military battle, if the politicians give him enough time.
MCCARTHY TO PETRAEUS: Are you concerned that the U.S. political clock could start ticking too fast and undermine security here? Undermine confidence here?
PETRAEUS: Obviously, that’s in the back of our minds. And there is not a great deal we can do about it, other than to continue to press forward.
MCCARTHY: The fields south of Baghdad are still a major battlefield in the fight against al Qaeda. But increasingly, Petraeus knows the most important battle in the Iraq war is being fought out in Washington. Terry McCarthy, ABC News, Patrol Base Murray, central Iraq.
Kurds and Iran
Here We Go….What’s Next?
Iranian forces, Kurdish guerrillas clash on Iraq-Iran border
Iranian artillery shelled near Iraqi Kurd villages Thursday as Iranian troops clashed with Kurdish guerrillas making an incursion across the border, officials in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan said.
It was the third day of shelling in two areas along the border in northern Iraq, said Jabbar Yawer, spokesman for the Kurdistan protection forces, or Peshmerga. Residents of the areas said the bombardment had not caused casualties but had killed farm animals and started a fire on a mountain. (AP)
LSM and DS
Double Standards Runs Wild In the Lame Stream Media
No kidding! LOCK THE DOORS!
Vitter. Did he do bad. Yes he did. Did he “serve his sentence” for it? Yes he did. Fine.
In the media, however, that isn’t good enough. The perpetrator is a Republican and whenever a Democrat does THE SAME THING, it is not reported on most of the time and when it “IS” reported on, it is like it is no big deal. Then, I find this. (partial article)
“…Santora soon reached for the hypocrisy card: “Mr. Vitter, who styled himself as a defender of traditional conservative family values, had been a key advocate of Mr. Giuliani’s in conservative circles both in the Senate and key southern states.”
Last week saw another sex scandal involving another high-level figure in a presidential campaign — that of Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton. One of her national campaign co-chairs, L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, last week admitted to having an affair with Telemundo anchorwoman Mirthala Salinas. Yet the Times July 6 story managed to completely avoid the Clinton connection.
Ironically, Jennifer Steinhauer’s story was headlined “Reporting a Mayor’s Marital Woes, Minus One Significant Detail,” a reference to the anchorwoman who was romantically involved with the mayor even as she read the news of the scandal. But the same headline could be applied to Steinhauer’s own story for leaving off the Clinton campaign connection – and for taking the spotlight off the behavior of a Democratic mayor and Hillary ally…”
The Lame Excuse for Iraqi Benchmarks
The Benchmark Excuse
The ‘Benchmark’ Excuse
Crocker and Petraeus speak some truths, if Senators are listening.
Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
Ryan Crocker, the U.S. Ambassador in Iraq, is a 36-year career diplomat who has served under seven administrations in Iran, Syria, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Pakistan. He’s no partisan gunslinger. So it’s worth listening to his views as Congressional Democrats and a growing number of Republicans press for a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq on the excuse that the Iraqi government hasn’t met a set of political “benchmarks.”
“The longer I’m here, the more I’m persuaded that Iraq cannot be analyzed by these kinds of discrete benchmarks,” Mr. Crocker told the New York Times’s John Burns in an interview on Saturday, referring to pending Iraqi legislation on an oil-sharing agreement and a relaxation of de-Baathification laws. “You could not achieve any of them, and still have a situation where arguably the country is moving in the right direction. And conversely, I think you could achieve them all and still not be heading towards stability, security and overall success in Iraq.”
Mr. Crocker’s comments are a useful reminder of the irrelevance–and disingenuousness–of much Washington commentary on Iraq. For proponents of early withdrawal, the “benchmarking” issue has provided a handy excuse to make the Iraqi government rather than al Qaeda the main culprit in the violence engulfing their country. A forthcoming Administration report indicating lagging political progress is certain to be seized on by Congress as it takes up a defense spending bill and debates an amendment ordering troop withdrawals by the fall. A proposal to mandate extended times between deployments (and thus force withdrawal) failed narrowly in the Senate yesterday, though not before winning the support of seven Republicans.
Nobody claims the Iraqi government is a model of democratic perfection, or that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is the second coming of Lincoln. We advised the White House not to lobby against his predecessor. But Mr. Maliki’s government is democratic and more inclusive than most reporting suggests, and it is fighting for its life against an enemy that uses car bombs and suicide bombers as its policy instruments. In an interview this week in the New York Post, General David Petraeus noted that while the performance of the Iraqi Army has been mixed, “their losses in June were three times ours.” To suggest that Iraqis aren’t willing to fight for their freedom is an insult to their families.
General Petraeus also noted that “the level of sectarian deaths in Baghdad in June was the lowest in about a year,” evidence that in this key battlefield the surge is making progress. As a result, al Qaeda is being forced to pick its targets in more remote areas, as it did last week in the village of Amirli near Kirkuk, where more than 100 civilians were murdered. More U.S. troops and the revolt of Sunni tribal leaders against al Qaeda are the most hopeful indicators in many months that the insurgency can be defeated.
But that isn’t going to happen under the timetable now contemplated by Congress. “I can think of few commanders in history who wouldn’t have wanted more troops, more time or more unity among their partners,” General Petraeus told the Post. “However, if I could only have one at this point in Iraq, it would be more time.”
It’s also not going to happen if Congress insists on using troop withdrawals to punish Iraqis for their supposed political delinquency. The central issue is whether the Iraqis can make those decisions without having to fear assassination as the consequence of political compromise. The more insistent Congress becomes about troop withdrawals, the more unlikely political reconciliation in Iraq becomes.
That said, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the issue of reconciliation has become a smokescreen for American politicians who care for their own political fortunes far more than they do about the future of Iraq or the consequences of Iraq’s collapse for U.S. interests in the Middle East. Here again, they could stand to listen to Mr. Crocker.
“You can’t build a whole policy on a fear of a negative, but, boy, you’ve really got to account for it,” he said. “In the States, it’s like we’re in the last half of the third reel of a three-reel movie, and all we have to do is decide we’re done here . . . and we leave the theater and go on to something else. Whereas out here, you’re just getting into the first reel of five reels, and ugly as the first reel has been, the other four and a half are going to be way, way worse.”
Mr. Crocker is referring, of course, to the possibility of far nastier violence if the U.S. departs before Iraqi security forces can maintain order. Some will denounce this as a parade of horribles designed to intimidate Congress, but we also recall some of the same people who predicted that a Communist triumph in Southeast Asia would yield only peace, not the “boat people” and genocide. Those Americans demanding a U.S. retreat in Iraq will be directly responsible for whatever happens next.
GWB On Benchmarks For Iraq
Benchmark Speech by GWB 7/12/07
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Thank you. Yesterday, America lost an extraordinary First Lady and a fine Texan, Lady Bird Johnson. She brought grace to the White House and beauty to our country. On behalf of the American people, Laura and I send our condolences to her daughters, Lynda and Luci, and we offer our prayers to the Johnson family.
Before I answer some of your questions, today I’d like to provide the American people with an update on the situation in Iraq. Since America began military operations in Iraq, the conflict there has gone through four major phases. The first phase was the liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein. The second phase was the return of sovereignty to the Iraqi people and the holding of free elections. The third phase was the tragic escalation of sectarian violence sparked by the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra.
We’ve entered a fourth phase: deploying reinforcements and launching new operations to help Iraqis bring security to their people. I’m going to explain why the success of this new strategy is vital for protecting our people and bringing our troops home, which is a goal shared by all Americans. I’ll brief you on the report we are sending to Congress. I’ll discuss why a drawdown of forces that is not linked to the success of our operations would be a disaster.
As President, my most solemn responsibility is to keep the American people safe. So on my orders, good men and women are now fighting the terrorists on the front lines in Iraq. I’ve given our troops in Iraq clear objectives. And as they risk their lives to achieve these objectives, they need to know they have the unwavering support from the Commander-in-Chief, and they do. And they need the enemy to know that America is not going to back down. So when I speak to the American people about Iraq, I often emphasize the importance of maintaining our resolve and meeting our objectives.
As a result, sometimes the debate over Iraq is cast as a disagreement between those who want to keep our troops in Iraq and those who want to bring our troops home. And this is not the real debate. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t want to see the day when our brave servicemen and women can start coming home.
In my address to the nation in January, I put it this way: If we increase our support at this crucial moment we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home. The real debate over Iraq is between those who think the fight is lost or not worth the cost, and those that believe the fight can be won and that, as difficult as the fight is, the cost of defeat would be far higher.
I believe we can succeed in Iraq, and I know we must. So we’re working to defeat al Qaeda and other extremists, and aid the rise of an Iraqi government that can protect its people, deliver basic services, and be an ally in the war against these extremists and radicals. By doing this, we’ll create the conditions that would allow our troops to begin coming home, while securing our long-term national interest in Iraq and in the region.
When we start drawing down our forces in Iraq it will be because our military commanders say the conditions on the ground are right, not because pollsters say it will be good politics. The strategy I announced in January is designed to seize the initiative and create those conditions. It’s aimed at helping the Iraqis strengthen their government so that it can function even amid violence. It seeks to open space for Iraq’s political leaders to advance the difficult process of national reconciliation, which is essential to lasting security and stability. It is focused on applying sustained military pressure to rout out terrorist networks in Baghdad and surrounding areas. It is committed to using diplomacy to strengthen regional and international support for Iraq’s democratic government.
Doing all these things is intended to make possible a more limited role in Iraq for the United States. It’s the goal outlined by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. It’s the goal shared by the Iraqis and our coalition partners. It is the goal that Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus and our troops are working hard to make a reality.
Our top priority is to help the Iraqis protect their population. So we have launched an offensive in and around Baghdad to go after extremists, to buy more time for Iraqi forces to develop, and to help normal life and civil society take root in communities and neighborhoods throughout the country. We’re helping enhance the size, capabilities and effectiveness of the Iraqi security forces so the Iraqis can take over the defense of their own country. We’re helping the Iraqis take back their neighborhoods from the extremists. In Anbar province, Sunni tribes that were once fighting alongside al Qaeda against our coalition are now fighting alongside our coalition against al Qaeda. We’re working to replicate the success in Anbar and other parts of the country.
Two months ago, in the supplemental appropriations bill funding our troops, Congress established 18 benchmarks to gauge the progress of the Iraqi government. They required we submit a full report to Congress by September the 15th. Today my administration has submitted to Congress an interim report that requires us to assess — and I quote the bill — “whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks is or is not being achieved.”
Of the 18 benchmarks Congress asked us to measure, we can report that satisfactory progress is being made in eight areas. For example, Iraqis provided the three brigades they promised for operations in and around Baghdad. And the Iraqi government is spending nearly $7.3 billion from its own funds this year to train, equip and modernize its forces. In eight other areas, the Iraqis have much more work to do. For example, they have not done enough to prepare for local elections or pass a law to share oil revenues. And in two remaining areas, progress was too mixed to be characterized one way or the other.
Those who believe that the battle in Iraq is lost will likely point to the unsatisfactory performance on some of the political benchmarks. Those of us who believe the battle in Iraq can and must be won see the satisfactory performance on several of the security benchmarks as a cause for optimism. Our strategy is built on a premise that progress on security will pave the way for political progress. So it’s not surprising that political progress is lagging behind the security gains we are seeing. Economic development funds are critical to helping Iraq make this political progress. Today, I’m exercising the waiver authority granted me by Congress to release a substantial portion of those funds.
The bottom line is that this is a preliminary report and it comes less than a month after the final reinforcements arrived in Iraq. This September, as Congress has required, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will return to Washington to provide a more comprehensive assessment. By that time, we hope to see further improvement in the positive areas, the beginning of improvement in the negative areas. We’ll also have a clearer picture of how the new strategy is unfolding, and be in a better position to judge where we need to make any adjustments.
I will rely on General Petraeus to give me his recommendations for the appropriate troop levels in Iraq. I will discuss the recommendation with the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I will continue consultations with members of the United States Congress from both sides of the aisle, and then I’ll make a decision.
I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region, and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we’d allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.
The fight in Iraq is part of a broader struggle that’s unfolding across the region. The same region in Iran — the same regime in Iran that is pursuing nuclear weapons and threatening to wipe Israel off the map is also providing sophisticated IEDs to extremists in Iraq who are using them to kill American soldiers. The same Hezbollah terrorists who are waging war against the forces of democracy in Lebanon are training extremists to do the same against coalition forces in Iraq. The same Syrian regime that provides support and sanctuary for Islamic jihad and Hamas has refused to close its airport in Damascus to suicide bombers headed to Iraq. All these extremist groups would be emboldened by a precipitous American withdrawal, which would confuse and frighten friends and allies in the region.
Nations throughout the Middle East have a stake in a stable Iraq. To protect our interests and to show our commitment to our friends in the region, we are enhancing our military presence, improving our bilateral security ties, and supporting those fighting the extremists across the Middle East. We’re also using the tools of diplomacy to strengthen regional and international support for Iraq’s democratic government.
So I’m sending Secretary Gates and Secretary Rice to the region in early August. They will meet with our allies, reemphasize our commitment to the International Compact of Sharm el Sheikh, reassure our friends that the Middle East remains a vital strategic priority for the United States.
There is a conversion of visions between what Iraqi leaders want, what our partners want and what our friends in the region want, and the vision articulated by my administration, the Iraq Study Group and others here at home. The Iraqis do not want U.S. troops patrolling their cities forever, any more than the American people do. But we need to ensure that when U.S. forces do pull back that terrorists and extremists cannot take control.
The strategy that General Petraeus and the troops he commands are now carrying out is the best opportunity to bring us to this point. So I ask Congress to provide them with the time and resources they need. The men and women of the United States military have made enormous sacrifices in Iraq. They have achieved great things, and the best way to begin bringing them home is to make sure our new strategy succeeds.
Benchmark Assessment Report
Benchmark Report
Iraq Strategy Review
The Lame Stream Media Belches and Blinks
RUN AWAY!!!
From CNN
Report: Al Qaeda steps up efforts to hit U.S.
Al Qaeda is stepping up its efforts to sneak terror operatives into the United States and has acquired most of the capabilities it needs to strike here, according to a draft U.S. intelligence assessment, The Associated Press has learned.
The draft National Intelligence Estimate is expected to paint an increasingly worrisome portrait of al Qaeda’s ability to use its base along the Pakistan-Afghan border to launch and inspire attacks, even as Bush administration officials say the U.S. is safer nearly six years into the war on terror.
Naturally, we should withdraw.
From CNN
House passes bill to bring troops home in ’08
President Bush vetoed a war-spending bill with a similar withdrawal date in May and has threatened to spike any new effort to set a timetable for a U.S. pullout. His Republican allies in the House said the new measure has no chance of passage.
But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said Thursday’s mixed report on the progress of the war shows it’s time for American troops to come home.
“President Bush continues to urge patience, but what is needed — and what the American people are demanding — is a new direction,” she said.
Earlier Thursday, Bush said a report on U.S.-set benchmarks for Iraq shows “satisfactory progress” in eight areas. He admitted that there is “more work to be done.”
Naturally, we should withdraw. Sounds like a broken record.
From CNN
Iraq pullout legislation will be vetoed, Bush says
President Bush will veto a defense appropriations bill being debated in the Senate if it includes an amendment setting a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, the White House said Tuesday.
Senate Democratic leaders have said they plan to bring forward an amendment from Sens. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, and Carl Levin, D-Michigan, that calls for beginning a redeployment of U.S. troops in as little as four months, to be completed by next spring. House Democratic leaders announced late Tuesday that they would bring a similar proposal to a vote by the end of the week.
Naturally, we should withdraw.
Webb amendment vote
Senators on Wednesday refused to bring to a vote an amendment written by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia, that would set time limits between U.S. troop rotations in Iraq and Afghanistan, to give troops more time at home.
The tally was 56 to 41, failing to receive the 60 votes required to cut off debate on the amendment so a vote could be held.
Republicans voting for cloture:
• Sen. Norm Coleman, Minnesota
• Sen. Susan Collins, Maine
• Sen. Chuck Hagel, Nebraska
• Sen. Gordon Smith, Oregon
• Sen. Olympia Snowe, Maine
• Sen. John Sununu, New Hampshire
• Sen. John Warner, Virginia
Indepdents voting against cloture:
• Sen. Joseph Lieberman, Connecticut
Senators not voting:
• Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas
• Sen. Tim Johnson, D-South Dakota
• Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana
Naturally, we should withdraw.
CBS News has the same sort of stories here…
I agree with this statement:
Quote: “I don’t think Congress ought to be running the war. I think they ought to be funding the troops.”-President Bush
NRO:
Left’s Cries Of Support Ring Hollow
“…Which brings me to Iraq, the American soldiers involved, the antiwar crowd which condemns their efforts — yet contend they support the troops — and the feverish waving of the interim assessment of progress — or the lack thereof — being made on the ground (which began days before the assessment’s release, and two months before Gen. David Petraeus is to formally report on the status of operations and progress in Iraq)…”
Quote: “I believe the Left’s approach to supporting the troops is utterly disingenuous and condescending.”
Naturally, we should withdraw.
Naturally, we should withdraw. The “real surge” has started about 3 weeks ago and 18 benchmarks have not been met. 8 of the 18 have, in 3 weeks. There we have that Instant Success Syndrome again.
Naturally, we should withdraw.
As Wake Up Americans posted this morning:
Initial Benchmark Assessment Report : Iraq-UPDATE Congress cowards are back on the merry-go-round, VETO time again.
And then this afternoon…
Congressional Merry Go Round
And Miss Beth has this to say:
Brought to You by The “Religion of Peace.”
Iran begins executions for adultery and other violations
By Nazila Fathi
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
TEHRAN: The Iranian government confirmed Tuesday that a man was executed by stoning last week for committing adultery, and said that 20 more men would be executed in the coming days on morality violations.
A judiciary spokesman, Alireza Jamshidi, told reporters on Tuesday that a death sentence by stoning had been carried out last week near the city of Takestan, west of Tehran, despite an order by the chief of the judiciary, Ayatollah Mahmoud Shahroudi, not to permit such executions.
“The verdict was final, and so it was carried out for the man but not for the woman,” the ISNA news agency quoted Jamshidi as saying.
He said the 20 additional executions were for such things as “rape, insulting religious sanctities and laws, and homosexuality.” Most executions in Iran are hangings, often in public and at the scenes of the alleged crimes.
The police arrested about 1,000 people in May during a so-called morality crackdown. Jamshidi said 15 more men were being tried on similar charges and could receive death sentences.
The daily newspaper Etemad Melli reported Monday that Jaffar Kiani, 47, who had been convicted of adultery, was executed by stoning on Thursday in the cemetery of a small village near Takestan. “Villagers said the sentence was carried out by the local judge and authorities,” the newspaper reported.
Kiani and his partner, Mokarameh Ebrahimi, 43, who has two children, were scheduled to die on June 21, but the execution was put off by Ayatollah Shahroudi.
The liberal left in this country should take note. Gay Pride Parades and the decadent lifestyles of homosexuals are not tolerated by Islam.
NATURALLY, WE SHOULD WITHDRAW.