Islamophobia- Koran Burning-Censorship

When it comes to Islamophobia, there is no end of craven cowardice. Our elected and appointed leaders seem devoid of spinal & testicular fortitude. They demonstrate their abject fear of Islam by attempting to appease it through condemnation and censorship of free speech.

Texas v. Johnson,  stands as precedent for protecting flag burning as a mode of free speech. [Wikipedia]   The flag is a symbol of the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.  Burning it in protest demonstrates enmity to our precious rights & liberties.  If that act is protected free expression, how can expressing contempt for a war cult that inculcates hatred and incites genocidal jihad/terror be any less protected?

Bare Naked Islam sounded an early warning: Reid & Graham consider ban on Koran burning.

“I  wish we could find a way to hold people accountable. Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war,”

“During World War II, we had limits on what you could do if it inspired the enemy,” Graham said, adding that he wanted to do “anything we can to push back here in America against acts like this that put our troops at risk.”

.

put our troops at risk

Pastors Jones & Sapp did not put our troops at risk; President G.W. Bush sent them into harm’s way. The accursed abomination should have been answered with tactical nuclear warheads, not boots on the ground.  Sending troops to “liberate” people who prefer to remain slaves is a fool’s errand of the worst sort.  So long as the population of Afghanistan remains Muslim, we have lost; our blood and treasure has been wasted.

Provocations are desired and sought to rationalize jihad and motivate the rabble to participate, but they are not the cause of Islamic violence.  Islamic violence is doctrine driven, not grievance driven.

• 2:216. Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.
  • Footnote to 2:190. (V.2:190) Al-Jihâd (holy fighting) in Allâh’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islâm and is one of its pillar (on which it stands). By Jihâd Islâm is established, Allâh’s Word is made superior, (His Word being Lâ ilaha illallâh which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allâh), and His Religion (Islâm) is propagated. By abandoning Jihâd (may Allâh protect us from that) Islâm is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihâd is an obligatory duty in Islâm on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.
    Narrated ‘Abdullâh bin Mas‘ûd رضي الله عنه: I asked Allâh’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم “O Allâh’s Messenger! What is the best deed?” He replied, “To offer the Salât (prayers) at their early fixed stated times.” I asked, “What is next in goodness?” He replied, “To be good and dutiful to your parents.” I further asked, “What is next in goodness?” He replied, “To participate in Jihâd in Allâh’s Cause.” I did not ask Allâh’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me more. (Sahih Al-Bukhâri, Vol.4, Hadîth No.41).
• 8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.
• 9:29.Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
• 9:120.  It was not becoming of the people of Al-Madinah and the bedouins of the neighbourhood to remain behind Allah’s Messenger (Muhammad SAW when fighting in Allah’s Cause) and (it was not becoming of them) to prefer their own lives to his life. That is because they suffer neither thirst nor fatigue, nor hunger in the Cause of Allah, nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers nor inflict any injury upon an enemy but is written to their credit as a deed of righteousness. Surely, Allah wastes not the reward of the Muhsinun
• 9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious – see V.2:2).
• Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
  Narrated Anas bin Malik:
  Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”
• Reliance of the TravellerO9.1: The Obligatory Character of Jihad

  Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2).  When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others (O: the evidence for which is the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

  “He who provides the equipment for a soldier in jihad has himself performed jihad,”

  and Allah Most High having said:

  “Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s path with their property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each, Allah has promised great good” (Koran 4:95).

  If none of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there was a possibility of having performed it. In the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

  The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, “Jihad is a communal obligation,” meaning upon the Muslims each year.

  The second state is when non-Muslims invade a Muslim country or near to one, in which case jihad is personally obligatory (def: c3.2) upon the inhabitants of that country, who must repel the non-Muslims with whatever they can).

• Al-Hedaya Volume II, Book IX, Chapter 1
  • Page 141 The destruction of the sword  is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the  sacred writings which are generally received this effect.
  • Marginal note: Page 140
    • War must be carried on against the Infidels, at all times, by some party of the Muslims.

“During World War II, we had limits on what you could do if it inspired the enemy,” Graham said, adding that he wanted to do “anything we can to push back here in America against acts like this that put our troops at risk.”

Flip your calender back  66 years. Should an American citizen be punished for criticizing, condemning or burning Mein Kampf?  Why, exactly?  The     major difference between Mein Kampf and the Qur’an is the latter’s purported divine origin.

Our troops and our society were put at risk by the weakness of previous Presidents.  Carter responded with dithering timidity when our Embassy was seized. When he finally acted, his action was poorly planned and ineffectually implemented.  Displaying weakness to a predator invites further attacks.

Reagan sent the Marines to save Arafat’s bacon, a fool’s errand if there ever was one. Hundreds of Marines died as a result. Reagan reacted with a few artillery shells; he should have erased the Hezbollah enclaves in Lebanon.

The Wall Street Journal reveals some interesting remarks from Gen. David Petraeus.

“This was a surprise,”

The event was publicized months in advance on a web site, in press releases and a Facebook page.  I know that the government knew about it because the Department of Homeland Security read my blog posts about it well in advance of the event.  The OIC was aware of it immediately and held an emergency meeting four days after the event to draft a  letter to Ban Ki-moon.

“hateful, extremely disrespectful and enormously intolerant.”

In view of the doctrine outlined above, hatred disrespect & intolerance of Islam’s demonic scripture is certainly well warranted.  Bitter kvetching about those attitudes is evidence of extreme intellectual incapacity or inactivity.

From Newsmax we learn that the Majority leader of the Senate is aroused.

“We’ll take a look at this of course. As to whether we need hearings or not, I don’t know.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: Reid: Probe of Quran Burning Considered

George Washington said it best: “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
That is exactly what Islam demands. Islamic law forbids any and every negative expression about itself.

• Reliance of the Traveller
  • O8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam

    (O: Among the things that entail apostasy from Islam (may Allah protect us from them) are:

    -1- to prostrate to an idol, whether sarcastically, out of mere contrariness, or in actual conviction, like that of someone who believes the Creator to be something that has originated in time. Like idols in this respect are the sun or moon, and like prostration is bowing to other than Allah, if one intends reverence towards it like the reverence due to Allah;

    -2- to intend to commit unbelief, even if in the future. And like this intention is hesitating whether to do so or not: one thereby immediately commits unbelief;

    -3- to speak words that imply unbelief such as “Allah is the third of three,” or “I am Allah”-unless one’s tongue has run away with one, or one is quoting another, or is one of the friends of Allah Most High (wali, def: w33) in a spiritually intoxicated state of total oblivion (A: friend of Allah or not, someone totally oblivious is as if insane, and is not held legally responsible (dis: k13.1(O:) ) ), for these latter do not entail unbelief;

    -4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

    -5- to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: v1);

    -6- to be sarcastic about Allah’s name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;

    -7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

    -8- to mockingly say, “I don’t know what faith is”;

    -9- to reply to someone who says, “There is no power or strength save through Allah”; “Your saying `There’s no power or strength, etc,’ won’t save you from hunger”;

    -10- for a tyrant, after an oppressed person says, “This is through the decree of Allah,” to reply, “I act without the decree of Allah”;

    -11- to say that a Muslim is an unbeliever (kafir) (dis: w47) in words that are uninterpretable as merely meaning he is an ingrate towards Allah for divinely given blessings (n: in Arabic, also “kafir”);

    -12- when someone asks to be taught the Testification of Faith (Ar. Shahada, the words, “La ilaha ill Allahu Muhammadun rasulu Llah” (There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah) ), and a Muslim refuses to teach him it;

    -13- to describe a Muslim or someone who wants to become a Muslim in terms of unbelief (kufr);

    -14- to deny the obligatory character of something which by the consensus of Muslims (ijma`, def: B7) is part of Islam, when it is well known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one rak’a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if there is no excuse (def: u2.4);

    -15- to hold that any of Allah’s messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their being sent;

    (n: `Ala’ al-din’ Abidin adds the following:

    -16- to revile the religion of Islam;

    -17- to believe that things in themselves or by their own nature have any causal influence independent of the will of Allah;

    -18- to deny the existence of angels or jinn (def: w22), or the heavens;

    -19- to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law;

    -20- or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet’s message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3-4) (al-Hadiyya al-`Ala’iyya (y4), 423-24). )

    There are others, for the subject is nearly limitless. May Allah Most High save us and all Muslims from it.)

If a Muslim says any of those things, he is an apostate, and must be killed.

• • O8.1

    When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

    O8.2

    In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

How does that apply to non-Muslims?  When Muslims conquer Christians, the Christians must agree to a treaty of protection and pay Jizya. The treaty imposes certain limitations on them, and if they violate it, they are subject to execution.

• • O11.10

    The agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the subjects does so anyway, though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:

    -1- commits adultery with a Muslim woman or marries her;

    -2- conceals spies of hostile forces;

    -3- leads a Muslim away from Islam;

    -4- kills a Muslim;

    -5- or mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.

  • O11.11

    When a subject’s agreement with the state has been violated, the caliph chooses between the four alternatives mentioned above in connection with prisoners of war (o9.14).

    • O9.14

      When an adult male is taken captive, the caliph (def: o25) considers the interests (O: of Islam and the Muslims) and decides between the prisoner’s death, slavery, release without paying anything, or ransoming himself in exchange for money or for a Muslim captive held by the enemy.

      If the prisoner becomes a Muslim (O: before the caliph chooses any of the four alternatives) then he may not be killed, and one of the other three alternatives is chosen.

The list of impermissible expressions is contained in O8.7, reproduced above.  That is what they seek to impose upon us at the UN through resolutions and a binding protocol to ICERD.  The mobs demand that Pastor Jones be executed.

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.

Open Letter

Write Your CONgress Critters!!

From Spree and Miss Beth…

Open Letter to Congress and the Senate

It is that time again where our public officials, the retreat in defeat crowd will once again make a big show voting on bills with timelines that they already know will be vetoed and that they do not have the votes to over ride.

This post is following up on Miss Beth’s previous post found here.

Beth has asked me to publish my letter that has been sent and will continue to be sent to members of both the Senate and to Congress, on a daily basis, until they understand that defeat is not an option and trying to snatch defeat from the amazing progress we have been seeing just as General Petraeus has gotten the troops he requested for the new strategy, will cost them their political positions in the next election.

The Letter:

The Senate should not vote to start withdrawing troops from Iraq within 120 days.

General Petraeus has started implementing the new strategies and is seeing tremendous success and anyone, ANYONE that tries to undermine that success will be held publicly responsible by EVERY conservative blog for every man, woman and child that dies as a result of a premature withdrawal, OR the tying of our troops hands to ensure defeat.

al-Qaeda has just recently been outed by Michael Yon as having fed people their own children for lunch, with those poor childrens mouths stuffed like pigs at a feast, and this is who the Democrats and some wobbly Republicans wish to abandon the innocent men, women and children of Iraqi to?

We will see to it that those images are blasted across the world and along with those images, the politicians names, each and every one of them will be shown side by side with the horrible pictures of the atrocities said politicians helped al-qaeda accomplish.

COUNT ON IT.

Anyone that votes with Baghdad Reid and his ilk against our continued efforts in Iraq will be forever associated with the chaos and consequences of what follows, just as Democrats have been associated, since we withdrew from Vietnam, with the Cambodia killing fields.

Make no mistake, voting for a timeline, is encouraging our enemies to believe we are weak and cannot stomach a fight when it gets tough and it also serves to demoralize our troops.

My blog as well as other blogs have those words published from OUR TROOPS themselves in letters and emails we received asking us to “keep congress off their backs”, so that they can get the job done, which THEY say is possible.

We Win, They Lose.

This is the only outcome acceptable.

Sending emails, calling, faxing can all be tiring, but it is what needs to be done to be heard over the screeching from the left.

Feel free to use this letter or write your own, but we must rise up, stand tall, be firm and make our voices heard.

The silent majority will be silent no more.

Lets roll folks.

(Note: At the top of this page is a link to join a google group, Beth has made available, every email for every staffer of the 24 targeted Republicans that needs to hear your voice, I would suggest joining the group, because these emails are divided up so you can simply copy them, paste them into the “send to” line and send them out, 50 at a time, enmasse.)

I have made the full list available on its own page here to make it easier for you.

[Update] Gallup has the President’s approval rating down to 29%, second term, country at war, I perfectly understand this number, what I do NOT understand is how a NEW Democratically controlled Congress, in a poll by the same organization, Gallup, has an approval rating of under HALF the Presidents… Congress approval rating is down to 14%, the lowest in the history of Gallup for congress.

So the president, in a time of war, on his second term is TWICE as popular as Congress….in the recent examples from the far left liberals, isn’t that some kind of “mandate”, telling Congress they are heading in the wrong direction and perhaps they should be trying to help America win instead of trying to force us into defeat?

Heh.

The Retreat Caucus Didn’t Learn The Last Time

Bush: Will he stay the course as others run? “America good! Al Qaeda bad!” – A trader in the Qatana bazaar, Ramadi, Iraq

Rich Lowry…NY Post

THIS is a sentiment that the Iraqi trader felt safe to utter as a visiting U.S. gen eral passed by, according to John Burns of The New York Times, only after a furtive glance “up and down the narrow refuse-strewn street to check who might be listening.” In a microcosm, this is the reason why we’re finally making progress against al Qaeda in Iraq: The protection afforded by American combat power has made it possible for Iraqis in Sunni areas to turn against the terror group.

In a global struggle against Islamic extremism, it is an incontestably welcome development that ordinary Sunnis in the Arab heartland are spurning al Qaeda. The extremist group has been on a campaign of savagery in Iraq that has discredited its own cause. The grassroots revolt against it means that it is within our reach to deny al Qaeda its most important current geopolitical objective, which is plunging Iraq into a bloody chaos in which it can thrive.

But a group of Republican senators have picked precisely this moment to call for deconstructing the troop surge that has begun to give us the upper hand against al Qaeda. They thus reveal a key dishonesty in the debate over the war: Everyone professes to want to fight al Qaeda in Iraq – as opposed to policing the sectarian war – but the number of politicians willing to support the means to that end is ever-dwindling.

From General Petraeus (recently to the troops)

From General Petraeus (recently to the troops)

Monday, May 14, 2007 4:45 PM

Listen Up!

From Yon: “…This letter from General Petraeus deserves the widest possible dissemination.  It should be published widely, and posted on every headquarters wall, and read aloud by every troop in Iraq and Afghanistan.  We can pummel al Qaeda and other terrorists mercilessly and grind them into the dirt, but we cannot afford to turn local populations against us while we do it.”

From General Petraeus:

Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen serving in Multi-National Force-Iraq:

Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right. Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy. This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we—not our enemies—occupy the moral high ground. This strategy has shown results in recent months. Al Qaeda’s indiscriminate attacks, for example, have finally started to turn a substantial proportion of the Iraqi population against it.

In view of this, I was concerned by the results of a recently released survey conducted last fall in Iraq that revealed an apparent unwillingness on the part of some US personnel to report illegal actions taken by fellow members of their units. The study also indicated that a small percentage of those surveyed may have mistreated noncombatants. This survey should spur reflection on our conduct in combat.

I fully appreciate the emotions that one experiences in Iraq. I also know first hand the bonds between members of the ” brotherhood of the close fight. ” Seeing a fellow trooper killed by a barbaric enemy can spark frustration, anger, and a desire for immediate revenge. As hard as it might be, however, we must not let these emotions lead us—or our comrades in arms—to commit hasty, illegal actions. In the event that we witness or hear of such actions, we must not let our bonds prevent us from speaking up.

Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone “talk;” however, what the individual says may be of questionable value. In fact, our experience in applying the interrogation standards laid out in the Army Field Manual (2-22.3) on Human Intelligence Collector Operations that was published last year shows that the techniques in the manual work effectively and humanely in eliciting information from detainees.

We are, indeed, warriors. We train to kill our enemies. We are engaged in combat, we must pursue the enemy relentlessly, and we must be violent at times. What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight, however, is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect. While we are warriors, we are also all human beings. Stress caused by lengthy deployments and combat is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign that we are human. If you feel such stress, do not hesitate to talk to your chain of command, your chaplain, or a medical expert.

We should use the survey results to renew our commitment to the values and standards that make us who we are and to spur re-examination of these issues. Leaders, in particular, need to discuss these issues with their troopers—and, as always, they need to set the right example and strive to ensure proper conduct. We should never underestimate the importance of good leadership and the difference it can make.

Thanks for what you continue to do. It is an honor to serve with each of you.

David H. Petraeus,

General, United States Army

Commanding

Download the statement as a PDF here.

Mudville Gazette

Mudville Gazette

Saturday, April 28, 2007 2:05 AM

Greyhawk has a fantastic run down on General Petraeus and his meeting(s) with CONgress.  You know.  The General reid the mental midget called a liar?

What He Said (hat tip to yankeemom)

Progress Continues

Progress Continues

Friday, April 27, 2007 9:40 AM

But the reids and his ilk ignore these facts in favor of political posturing and treasonous acts.

It Will Be Interesting To Witness The Media Spin In The Days To Come

GEN. PETRAEUS: Well, good evening to you all. We’ve had two good sessions with the House and the Senate — good exchanges. We provided an update on the situation in Iraq, the operational environment, the challenges, the progress to date, the setbacks to date, and then had a number of good exchanges — questions and answers and so forth.

         Q     General, did you give the members any specific number in terms of violence, and what numbers did you give them?

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: What I did highlight was one of the areas in which there has been progress, and that is in the reduction in sectarian murders in Baghdad, which is about one-third now of what it was in January. That’s an important development because the sectarian murders can be a cancer in a neighborhood. It is something on which our commanders and the Iraqi commanders have focused quite a bit, and it is an area in which, as I say, there has been progress. Having said that, the ability of al Qaeda to conduct horrific sensational attacks obviously has represented a setback and is an area in which we are focusing considerable attention, as you might imagine.

 

         Q     Any other numbers you can share?

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: No, that really — that — really trends was what I was talking about.

 

         Q     General, a number of the members came away saying that you delivered a sobering report. Do you have an idea — I mean, is the progress not what you expected? Why would they come away with that?

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: I — what I tried to do is to give an accurate depiction of the situation in Iraq — a forthright assessment. It’s an assessment that therefore includes areas in which there’s been progress. As I mentioned, for example, the reduction of sectarian murders in Baghdad — a very important development. And again, remember we’re in very early days on this. We’re only about two months into the surge. We won’t have all the forces on the ground until mid-June and I pointed that out to them, and noted that Ambassador Crocker and I would be doing an assessment in early September and provide that to our respective bosses at that time. That’s something we agreed when Secretary Gates was out there.

 

         I also pointed out the progress in Anbar Province, which has been very substantial, as you know. Literally over the last two months, Anbar has gone — or certainly over the last six months — from being assessed as being lost, to a situation that now is quite heartening because of the decision by a number of Sunni Arab tribes to join the fight against al Qaeda, saying no more — they’ve had it — and linking arms with the coalition to take on al Qaeda and one city after another really cleaning them out all the way down the Euphrates River Valley from al Qaim and Husaybah through Haditha, Hit, Ramadi and so forth, although as I pointed out to each of the respective bodies — the House and the Senate — there still is considerable work to be done in Anbar Province although all the trends are in the right direction. And in fact the two additional Marine battalions that are part of the surge are now operating just for the first couple of weeks in Anbar Province, and they’ll be joined by some additional forces later on as with the two additional Army brigades as they move in to their respective areas in and around Baghdad.

 

         Q     General Petraeus, you once famously asked how did this end. How does this end and does the debate in Congress over timelines for withdrawal help define that endgame or is it hindering your efforts?

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: What I would like to see Iraq end as, of course, is a government — a country that is one Iraq with a government that is representative of and responsive to the people — all the people of Iraq, that can defend itself, at peace with itself, and ideally an ally in the global war on terror. I’m not going to get into the minefield of discussions about various legislative proposals. I don’t think that’s something that military commanders should get into. I did mention at one point during each of the different briefings that it is I think always helpful to remember the various audiences out there as this wonderful democratic process goes forward, and those are our partners, our allies, our coalition partners, the enemy, and also, frankly, our men and women in uniform who are giving their all for this effort, and their families who are sacrificing a great deal as well.

 

         Q     Does that mean they could be demoralized by some of the statements?

 

         Q     General, are you being pressured by the president to continue to say that the U.S. involvement should continue in Iraq?

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: I’m not being pressured by the president to say anything. I am a soldier and I’m going to give a forthright assessment, and that’s all that I will provide, and I’m not going to be pressured by political leaders of either party.

 

         Q     And you think U.S. involvement should continue even though you have said in the past —

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: Right here. I’m sorry, right —

 

         Q     General, beyond — beyond perhaps specific timelines or deadlines, would you agree with Democrats that the talk about benchmarks and requirements on the government is helpful to getting people — the parties on the ground in Iraq to get towards the political solution you’ve talked about?

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: Again, I’m not going to get into specifics about legislative proposals. What I will say is that what we did discuss in there is the fact that this Prime Minister Maliki — this is not — he’s not Prime Minister Blair with a parliamentary system that is all of his party. He was elected by one vote in a very close and lengthy process. The parties are all represented in this government. It is not truly one that you can call a government of national unity, and there are varying ethnosectarian interests represented by those different political parties and leaders. If you accept that — if you acknowledge that, then you realize that you have to encourage, reassure, pressure a number of different key individuals in this process.

 

         And it’s much more than just Prime Minister Maliki, who I do believe is doing his best to be a leader for all Iraqis and is trying to move forward the legislation that would reflect that desire. But you have to get to the leaders of the different coalitions of parties if you will, the Shi’a lists, the Tawafik (ph), the Sunni Arab parties, the Kurdish parties and then some of the other subordinate elements, sub elements of each of those different blocs. And again, you can’t just focus on him and make this happen. We have to encourage all of them, and we have to do all of that simultaneously. One last question, please.

 

         Q     Would you say that you are where you want to be in this operation by now?  I mean, you took command.

 

          You must have had an idea how this was going to work. Are you where you wanted to be, or are things not going so well?

 

         GEN. PETRAEUS: Sure, we are actually ahead of where I wanted to be in some areas and probably behind where we might have hoped to be in some other areas. We are ahead, I think, with respect, as I mentioned, to the reduction of sectarian murders in Baghdad. Progress in Anbar is almost something that’s breathtaking. We have made huge inroads. I think that you just saw an announcement — the killing of the security emir of al Qaeda Iraq in eastern Anbar province, the detention of the Qazali network. This is the secret cells of the Shi’a extremist network. I’m not sure whether we’ve announced it, but we picked up the Shavani (ph) network head in Iraq. That’s the explosively formed projectile element inside Iraq that gets from the other in Iran the explosively formed projectiles. We have learned a great deal more about Iranian involvement, very nefarious involvement involving funding, training on Iranian soil, advice and the provision of, again, lots of arms and ammunition, including these explosively formed projectiles that have been so lethal against some of our armored vehicles.

 

         In some other areas, we obviously have work to do, and that is, obviously, in the area of the car bomb networks. Although we did police-up the Resafah car bomb network in eastern Baghdad, one that was responsible for killing 650 Iraqis in a two and a half month period prior to their detention, and have picked up a number of others and a number of network leaders and other important participants in al Qaeda Iraq. Clearly, we have additional work to be done to make inroads into those who are carrying out these horrific suicide bombing attacks against all Iraqis.

 

         In fact, the other day, Secretary of Defense Gates said that his sense was that al Qaeda Iraq has declared war on all Iraqis. They have attacked Sunni Arabs, they have attacked Shi’a, they have attacked Iraqi Kurds. No one has been outside their crosshairs. And they have targeted indiscriminately civilians, crowds outside mosques and all the rest of that.

 

         There has been progress in terms of hardening markets, in terms of hardening neighborhoods. And although there is a big discussion about this one neighborhood, Adhamiya, which is sensitive because it’s the site of a very, very important Sunni Arab shrine, by and large,    these have gone on uneventfully. Most of the neighbors want to be secured against the bad guys who are coming in. This is not about walling off Sunni from Shi’a. This is about walling off neighborhoods. Sometimes they are predominantly one sect or the other. Sometimes, they are mixed. And again, the idea is you cannot hold the neighborhood if you cannot control access to it. And that means that you have to have a method of controlling vehicle flow in and out of it. And that’s why in fact Iraqis as well as coalition forces have carried forward this kind of effort. We have done the same thing in Ramadi, by the way, and it has been crucial, as we’ve literally reclaimed that city with Iraqi partners right by our side — in some cases in advance — literally pushing cement forward. And people talk about the concrete caterpillar that grows 500 meters every night in certain parts of Baghdad or the Arizona creeper. All of this is part of efforts to control population and to provide security for people in Baghdad and in other locations.

 

         Thanks very much for waiting. Thank you, all.

Petraeus: Interrogations Reveal Iranian Influence in Iraq

Petraeus: Interrogations Reveal Iranian Influence in Iraq

Friday, April 27, 2007 9:32 AM

The Moron Leftinistra Ignore This As Well…Why Is That?

WASHINGTON, April 26, 2007 – Through interrogations of key detainees in the past month, the United States has learned a great deal about Iranian involvement in terrorist activities in Iraq, specifically the financing and training of insurgent groups, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said here today.

The interrogation of leaders and members of the Qazali terror network who have been in detention for more than a month revealed that Iran provided the network substantial funding, training on Iranian soil, advanced explosive munitions and technologies as well as arms and ammunition, and in some cases advice and even a degree of direction, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of Multinational Force Iraq, said in a Pentagon news conference.

When these terrorists were captured, coalition forces discovered a number of documents describing attacks on U.S. forces, including a 22-page memorandum that detailed the planning, preparation, approval process and conduct of the Jan. 20 attack on the Provincial Joint Coordination Center in Karbala, Iraq, that killed five U.S. soldiers, Petraeus said.

“Our sense is that these records were kept so that they could be handed in to whoever it is that is financing them,” he said. “And there’s no question, again, that Iranian financing is taking place through the Quds force of the Iranian Republican Guards Corps.”

The U.S. has learned more about Iranian involvement in Iraq through the detention of one of the heads of the Sheibani network, which brings explosively formed projectiles into Iraq from Iran, Petraeus said. This leader’s brother was in Iraq, and was the conduit who received munitions from Iraq and distributed them among the extremist elements.

“Those munitions, as you know, have been particularly lethal against some of our armored vehicles and responsible for some of the casualties, the more tragic casualties, in attacks on our vehicles,” Petraeus said.

The coalition has not found a link between Iran and the spectacular car bomb attacks in Iraq, Petraeus said, as many of these attacks are conducted by foreign fighters coming into the country through Syria. Also, the U.S. has no evidence that indicates how high in the Iranian government the knowledge of this involvement goes, he said.

Petraeus called Iran’s activities “exceedingly unhelpful” as Iraqi leaders and security forces battle al Qaeda, extremist militias, sectarian violence, and limited political capacity to rebuild society. The situation in Iraq is exceedingly complex and challenging, he said, and while there have been successes under the new security plan, perseverance will be needed for the coming months.

“Success will take continued commitment, perseverance and sacrifice, all to make possible an opportunity for the all-important Iraqi political actions that are the key to long-term solutions to Iraq’s many problems,” Petraeus said. “Because we are operating in new areas and challenging elements in those areas, this effort may get harder before it gets easier.”

reid Ignores General Petraeus

reid Ignores General Petraeus

Friday, April 27, 2007 9:28 AM

 

The Leftinistra Ignore The Man They Confirmed

The Q&A session is at the web site.

DoD News Briefing with Gen. Petraeus from the Pentagon

GEN. PETRAEUS: Well good morning. It’s good to be with you all, and nice to see some familiar faces here this morning. My purpose this morning is to provide a short update on the situation in Iraq, including a brief description of the operational environment, the challenges Iraq faces, and the status of our operations, and then to take your questions. This is similar to my briefings to the House and Senate yesterday afternoon, but without the classified information that I provided to them, obviously.

The operational environment in Iraq is the most complex and challenging I have ever seen — much more complex than it was when I left last in September 2005, and vastly more complex than what I recall in Central America, Haiti and the Balkans in previous tours in those locations.

The increase in sectarian violence in 2006 following the Samarra Mosque bombing did enormous damage, literally tearing the fabric of Iraqi society, changing the demographics of Baghdad neighborhoods, and displacing millions of Iraqis.

Today, members of al Qaeda, extremist militias and Sunni insurgent groups seek to destroy what Iraqi leaders are trying to build. Political parties with ethnosectarian interests, limited governmental capacity, and corruption add additional challenges, and exceedingly unhelpful activities by Iran and Syria, especially those by Iran, about which we have learned a great deal in the past month, compound the enormous problems facing the new Iraq.

The situation is, in short, exceedingly challenging, though as I will briefly explain, there has been progress in several areas in recent months despite the sensational attacks by al Qaeda, which have, of course, been significant blows to our effort and which cause psychological damage that is typically even greater than their physical damage.

Iraq is, in fact, the central front of al Qaeda’s global campaign and we devote considerable resources to the fight against al Qaeda Iraq.

We have achieved some notable successes in the past two months, killing the security emir of eastern Anbar province, detaining a number of key network leaders, discovering how various elements of al Qaeda Iraq operate, taking apart a car bomb network that had killed 650 citizens of Baghdad, and destroying several significant car bomb factories. Nonetheless, al Qaeda Iraq remains a formidable foe with considerable resilience and a capability to produce horrific attacks, but a group whose ideology and methods have increasingly alienated many in Iraq.

This group’s activities must be significantly disrupted, at the least, for the new Iraq to succeed, and it has been heartening to see Sunni Arabs in Anbar province and several other areas turning against al Qaeda and joining the Iraqi security forces to fight against it. That has been a very significant development.

The extremist militias in Iraq also are a substantial problem and must be significantly disrupted. There can be no sustainable outcome if militia death squads are allowed to lie low during the surge only to resurface later and resume killing and intimidation.

There have been some significant successes in this arena as well, including the detentions — detention of the heads of the Sadr secret cell network, the Iraqi leader of an explosively formed projectile network from Iran, the former deputy minister of Health and his facility protection security force brigadier, who had effectively hijacked the Ministry of Health, and a national police officer accused of torture, with several of these detained by Iraqi forces.

Sunni insurgents and the so-called Sunni resistance are still forces that must be reckoned with, as well. However, while we continue to battle a number of such groups, we are seeing some others joining Sunni Arab tribes in turning against al Qaeda Iraq and helping transform Anbar province and other areas from being assessed as lost as little as six months ago to being relatively heartening. We will continue to engage with Sunni tribal sheikhs and former insurgent leaders to support the newfound opposition of some to al Qaeda, ensuring that their fighters join legitimate Iraqi security force elements to become part of the fight against extremists, just as we reach out to moderate members of all sects and ethnic groups to try to drive a wedge between the irreconcilables and the reconcilables, and help the latter become part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

There are also a number of challenges in the area of governance that the embassy and Multinational Force Iraq are helping the Iraqis to address. It is in fact important to recall that the government of Prime Minister Maliki is Iraq’s fourth government in as many years. Moreover, it is not a government of national unity. Rather, it is one comprised of political leaders from different parties that often default to narrow agendas and a zero-sum approach to legislation.

That is one reason that progress on key laws has been slow, though there has been some progress. The budget law, the base hydrocarbon law approved by the Council of Ministers, the emergency powers law and so forth have all been noteworthy. And it is in fact just noteworthy to acknowledge, as Ambassador Negroponte did yesterday, just what Iraq has achieved since he served there as the ambassador in 2004, with respect to its elections, its constitution, its government and so forth. I believe Prime Minister Maliki and many other Iraqi leaders are committed to achieving more in this area in the months ahead.

Though its institutions are slowly developing, Iraq still suffers from a lack of the governmental capacity needed to put Iraq’s oil revenues to work sufficiently for all its people. In view of this, we are working hard, together with the U.S. embassy again, to help strengthen institutions, doubling the number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams, establishing a law and order task force, developing an energy fusion cell, and increasing emphasis on ministerial mentorship.

The focus of Multinational Force Iraq is, of course, on working with our Iraqi counterparts to help improve security for the people of Iraq in order to give Iraqi leaders the time and space they need to come to grips with the tough political issues that must be resolved. Resolution of these issues is the key to the achievement of reconciliation among the various ethnic and sectarian groups, political parties and leaders in order to achieve a lasting solution to Iraq’s problems.

We are still in the relatively early stages of our new effort, about two months into it, with three of five Army surge brigades and two additional Marine battalions on the ground, and the remainder of the additional combat forces scheduled to be operating in their areas by mid-June.

Baghdad is the main effort, and we continue to establish joint security stations and combat outposts in the city and in the belts around it. The presence of coalition and Iraqi forces and increased operational tempo, especially in areas where until recently we had no sustained presence, have begun to produce results. Most significantly, Iraqi and coalition forces have helped to bring about a substantial reduction in the rate of sectarian murders each month from January until now in Baghdad, a reduction of about two-thirds. There have also been increases in weapons caches seized and the number of actionable tips received.

In the Ramadi area, for example, U.S. and Iraqi forces have found nearly as many caches in the first four months of this year as they found in all of last year.

Beyond this, we are seeing a revival of markets, renewed commerce, the return of some displaced families and the slow resumption of services, though I want to be very clear that there is vastly more work to be done across the board and in many areas, and I again note that we are really just getting started with the new effort.

I am well aware that the sense of gradual progress and achievement we feel on the ground in many areas in Iraq is often eclipsed by the sensational attacks that overshadow our daily accomplishments. While the enemy’s effectiveness in carrying out such attacks has been reduced by our operations to some degree, there clearly are still far too many of them, and we obviously are focusing heavily on actions to identify and dismantle the networks that carry out car bomb and suicide vest attacks and their supporting infrastructure.

Our achievements have not come without sacrifice. Our increase in operational tempo, location of our forces in the populations they are securing and conduct of operations in areas where we previously had no presence, as well as the enemy’s greater use of certain types of explosive devices, have led to an increase in our losses. Our Iraqi partners have sacrificed heavily as well, with losses generally two to three times ours or even more.

Indeed, while some Iraqi forces remain a work in progress, there should be no question that Iraq’s soldiers and police are fighting and dying for their country, and a number of them have impressively shouldered their part of the burden of the fight against al Qaeda and the other enemies of the new Iraq. To help them progress, we have steadily been increasing the number of transition teams, the train and equip effort, and steadily strengthening the partnership programs between our forces and Iraqi elements.

The situation in Iraq is, in sum, exceedingly complex and very tough. Success will take continued commitment, perseverance and sacrifice, all to make possible an opportunity for the all-important Iraqi political actions that are the key to long-term solutions to Iraq’s many problems. Because we are operating in new areas and challenging elements in those areas, this effort may get harder before it gets easier.

Success, in the end, will depend on Iraqi actions. As I noted during my confirmation hearing, military action is necessary but not sufficient. We can provide the Iraqis an opportunity, but they will have to exploit it.

During Secretary Gates’ recent visit to Iraq, we agreed that in early September, Ambassador Ryan Crocker and I would provide an assessment of the situation in Iraq with respect to our mission and offer recommendations on the way ahead. We will be forthright in that assessment, as I believe I have been with you today.

Finally, I’d like to take this opportunity to thank all Americans for their support of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and civilians serving in Iraq. Our young men and women in uniform deserve the recognition that Tom Brokaw accorded them when he described them as America’s “new greatest generation.” It’s a privilege to serve with them again.

Thank you. And I look forward to your questions.