Exultate Justi

Wednesday, November 26, 2003

NOT MUCH POSTING TODAY

Trying to finish a couple of projects before the long Thanksgiving weekend. Coming Monday, Part 2 of my response to Aakash. Have a great Thanksgiving!

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:39 AM |

ON A HOLIDAY EVE

Brian J. Noggle has a post that I can relate to regarding new versions of Christmas carols. YOU READ NOW!

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 10:52 AM |

SHOW UP AND GIVE HER A LITTLE TWEAK

This, from uber-blogger Joshua Sharf:

Nancy Stohlman, the head of Colorado Campaign for Israeli Surrender, er, Middle-East Peace (CCMEP), is going to be speaking at the Tattered Cover Cherry Creek at 7:30 PM. We need to publicize this and give her a, um, warm reception. They do this sort of thing all the time. I think it's time we started showing up at their events and politely asking pointed questions.

Be there, or be square. No tomato-chucking, people. Remember...we're the civilized ones (i.e., we can't seem to bring ourselves to justify the slaughter of Israeli civilians by suicide thugs. Who would have thought that's all it would take to be civilized?)

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 9:28 AM |

THE INEPTITUDE OF THE LEFT

Sean over at The Vatican of Liberalism has a great post by this title. You can read the whole thing here, but here's an excerpt:

The War on Terror: The Left always becomes squeamish when Bush and the Right talk about the War on Terror because they fail to acknowledge the existence of evil. They do not believe in objective moral truth and lack the cajones to confront the Islamo-facisits as well as secular Europe. They're more into talking and being "nice" and not offending anyone. They seek the U.N. in all matters because they lack the moral fiber to make the tough decisions. To quote El Rushbo, who quotes Thatcher, "Consensus is the absence of leadership."

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 9:21 AM |

Tuesday, November 25, 2003

MY RESPONSE TO AAKASH, PART 1

As I posted yesterday, I’ve received some thoughtful comments from a blogger named Aakash Raut (his fine blog can be found here), who feels that President Bush and those who he describes as “neoconservatives” (find out if you’re a neocon by clicking here. Whaddya know? I am!) are more in alignment with the Left than they are with “traditionalist” conservatives. In particular, Aakash takes exception to claims that were made in Stephen Hayes’ now-famous piece in The Weekly Standard, detailing possible connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda. In addition, he dislikes many of the President’s domestic policies and initiatives. Lastly, he has raised questions about US policy in regard to al-Qaeda, making the point that, during the conflict in the Balkans, the US worked with Muslim forces which may have ties to that terrorist group.

Well, we have to begin somewhere, so let’s begin with Aakash’s contention that, in his words,

the Weekly Standard has hardly a leg to stand on in alleging 'links' to bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

Allow me to try and sum up Aakash’s reasoning behind this statement (as spelled out here, here, here, and here):

Iraq’s ties (via the Ba’ath Party) to al-Qaeda are/were far looser than those enjoyed by many other nations in the region, including Saudi Arabia. In addition, during the Clinton Administration, the US supported Muslim forces in the Balkan conflicts (combating ethnic Serbs, led by Slobodan Milosevic). This support, while couched in terms of support for Muslims in the former Yugoslavia, was actually helped to finance Osama Bin Laden’s terrorist network. The Weekly Standard (in which Hayes’ piece ran) supported the US mission in the Balkans.

While I realize that Aakash is trying to say that, due to The Weekly Standard’s support of actions with which he disagrees (in the Balkans), they cannot be taken seriously on the Iraq/al-Qaeda matter, the argument comes across more like this:

France is whiny. So is Germany. If France has the Eiffel Tower, why does Argentina export croutons? Easy to follow, no?

Here is the core problem with Aakash’s analysis of the Iraq/al-Qaeda situation – he is attempting to draw in so many disparate, unrelated issues, that the core of his argument is absolutely submerged in a sea of What the...?

Now, it would be unfair to limit my response to humor, so let’s take a look at the individual parts of Aakash’s argument, and my responses to those individual points.

1. Iraq’s ties to al-Qaeda are looser than are those held by many other regional actors.

Based on what? This sort of sweeping statement is dangerous to make s\without serious backup, and all I’ve been able to find thus far is the traditional Lefty argument that, due to the fact that Saddam was, personally speaking, almost completely secular, it is impossible for the ultra-pious Bin Laden to have sought a relationship with the Ba’athists of Iraq. This argument, of course, is utterly wrong-headed. Whether personally religious or not, Saddam Hussein has, since his seizure of power in 1969, sought to create and solidify his persona as “Arab Superman”. With the advent of radical Islam as a political force (vis-à-vis Islamic terrorism), Hussein shifted his modus operandi from one based wholly on Arab nationalism, to one that blended nationalism with Islamic imagery and verbiage. As Iraq suffered through its disastrous war with neighboring Iran, as well as its resounding defeat by Coalition forces following the seizure of Kuwait, Hussein felt that he was vulnerable to the type of uprising that had previously claimed secular leaders in Iran, Egypt, and Syria. As such, he began ramping up his efforts to appear more than sympathetic to radical Islam, and to the cause of terror. In particular, Hussein worked to tie himself to the Palestinian cause, and provided millions of dollars to the families of suicide terrorists in Israel. There is, in short, copious evidence that Iraq was, in fact, a key state sponsor of terrorism, and, as such, a move against Iraq was completely in keeping with the “Bush Doctrine”.

Let’s take the issue further, though. Aakash, and those who, like him, believe that the pious Bin Laden would hesitate to form a relationship with such an openly-secular Arab power neglect one of the central truths of warfare in general, and terrorism specifically: Ideology does not necessarily trump convenience. To put it another (and much more well-worn) way, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Osama Bin Laden’s loosely-bound terrorist network (ranging from al-Qaeda - with hotbeds in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and parts of Eastern Europe – to groups like the Abu Sayaaf and The Moro Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines), runs on cash. Bin Laden himself got his start in “the business” through his wealthy family in Saudi Arabia, and his organization has constantly (and consistently) violated its most deeply- and publicly-held convictions through various alliances through the years, all based on the partner organization’s ability to provide Bin Laden with funding for his group’s operations. To think that he would turn down overtures by Iraq (again, Hussein desperately sought “street cred” with the Islamic world. What better avenue than through an alliance with the most-loved Islamic icon in the Arab world?) is foolhardly, and naïve. Even before Hayes’ piece ran, there was abundant evidence (from the open and very well-publicized operations of the al-Qaeda-affiliated Ansar al-Islam in the North, to the long-acknowledged terrorist training facility at Salman Pak) that Iraq was at least turning a blind eye to the operations of Islamic terrorists within its borders. Terrorists don’t tend to run around with name tags listing their group affiliation, and the ties that do exist tend to be quite fluid and dynamic. To say that, because no one had previously seen any flashing neon signs that said “Welcome to Ansar al-Islam – a subsidiary of al-Qaeda corp., there were no ties, is to show a fundamental ignorance of terrorist operations, and to deny the obvious.

Aakash’s arguments are thoughtful, and, in general, well-stated. The only problem is that the foundations upon which his case is built – Bin Laden has ties to the CIA, the war in Iraq was unjustified, Iraq had no ties to al-Qaeda, the US willfully funded Islamic terror groups – are illusions. There’s no “there” “there”.

One of the most serious hits to Aakash’s credibility comes from his selection of sources like The Emperor’s New Clothes - an online journal featuring the analysis of folks like Stella Jatras, who he calls “a conservative foreign policy expert”. Let’s take a look at some of the stories currently circulating out at TENC:

- Evidence of High-Level Government Complicity in the Events of 9/11

- Guilty for 9-11: Bush, Rumsfeld, Myers!

- Why the First Gulf War? To Protect Iranian Islamism.

And so on. The site’s main goals seem to the be exposure of a gigantic conspiracy between the US and Iran, and the deification of Slobodan Milosevic – delivered with strongly worded claims that the massacre at Srebrenica was a hoax.
While there may be some validity to some of the pieces on the site, it would seem to me to be foolish to quote any of the editors of that material as agenda-free sources of objectivity, pure as the driven snow.

Much more to come...

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:23 AM |

WHADDYA BET THE DEMS SEE THIS AS BAD NEWS?

WASHINGTON — The economy roared ahead at an astounding 8.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter, the fastest pace in nearly two decades and a much stronger performance than previously thought. It raises hope that a long spell of lackluster business activity is finally over.

(hat tip Instapundit)

''Growth is now super-super strong compared to super strong,'' said Joseph LaVorgna, senior U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank Securities, whose forecast of 8.3 percent was the highest in a Bloomberg News survey.

Hmm. Like Glenn, I, too, have trouble with this techno-speak. Super-super strong? Does that mean we're getting close to double-super-super strong? Perhaps Super-duper strong, or maybe even the rarely-seen Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet? The possibilities, it would seem, are endless.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 9:34 AM |

NITWIT-LITTWIN STRIKES AGAIN

[sigh]

For those of you outside of the Denver/Rocky Mountain region, Mike Littwin is the Rocky Mountain News' resident unreconstructed hippie. He's got a reputation for writing about events in ways that are SO different from other accounts, that you're left wondering if he's describing the same event as everyone else, or simply having an acid flashback. I mean, look at the guy:

Yikes.

Anyway, in typical Littwin style, he's managed to take President Bush's visit to Ft. Carson Army Base in Colorado Springs (also the subject of a very positive News piece here), and with it, construct a piece that baffles the mind.

See, his goal in writing the piece seems to be to whip up a frenzy over the suppression of the hundreds, nay, thousands of soldiers who were just itching to tell Dubya just what they they think of his imperialist adventuring in the Middle East...they wanted to stick it to the man! Littwin had hoped to interview lots of disgruntled grunts for his piece. I mean, these guys are fighting Bush's war, right? Surely they can see that they're just being used. Certainly they know that they're just grist for the Haliburton mill, huh? Littwin's plans were derailed by two things, however. The first was a large Sergeant Major, who lectured the crowd (including the media) on protocol. The other, was an apparent lack of palpable anti-Bushism among the troops.

The other piece covering yesterday's events describes the setting thusly:

Beneath a 25-foot-high U.S. flag illuminated by a bank of stage lights, soldiers in camouflage uniforms, holding the hands of spouses and children, waited nearly two hours, listening to country-western music on the public-address system. Some soldiers walked through the crowd handing out miniature U.S. flags, and a sergeant major drilled the crowd on cheering the president when he arrived.

...A roar erupted when Bush finally entered the hangar at 1:40 p.m. Bush returned the sentiment, unsparing in his admiration and appreciation.

Littwin remembers it this way:

Before the press was herded into the giant hangar in advance of George W. Bush's pep rally/photo- op with the Fort Carson troops, we were given the rules.

No talking to the troops before the rally.

No talking to the troops during the rally.

No talking to the troops after the rally.

This is a theme throughout Littwin's piece. In general, if I've read him right, his points of contention are as follows:

1) President Bush should visit more families of fallen soldiers, like Darius Jennings. Elaine Johnson, Jennings' mother, is mad (understandably so) because there was no representative of the Administration at her son's funeral.

2) If, in fact, the President DOES visit such families (as he did in a closed-door meeting for around 2 hours) at places like Ft. Carson - hit hard by the War on Terror, he is being disingenuous.

3) The soldiers who cheer the President must be lying...or brainwashed...or something. The one soldier with whom Littwin managed to speak with briefly had this to say about getting to meet the President:

way cool.

4) The President is a big poopy head, and Littwin can't, for the life of him, see why these camouflaged rubes cheer the Chimp In-Chief. POOPY HEAD! CAMO RUBES!

Here, in contrast to the Littwin dreck, are some more quotes from that other piece:

"I thought it was wonderful that he came out. He certainly can't go to every funeral, but coming out here shows it bothers him, too," said Cindy Loia, the mother of Johnna Loia. Johnna Loia's fiance, Spc. Brian Penisten, died when a Chinook helicopter carrying him to a homebound plane and his wedding was shot down Nov. 2

Melissa Givens, 27, of Fountain, met the president with her two sons, Dakota, 6, and Carson, 5 Â½ months.

"The tears in his eyes, I'll keep that memory forever," Givens said. "I've always thought he cared, and today I know he cares."

She did not ask the president any questions.

"I just wanted to let him know I support his decisions, even though my husband died," she said.

Donald R. Bucklew, the father of another fallen soldier, Sgt. Ernest Bucklew, who also died when the Chinook helicopter was shot down, said he was also struck by the president's demeanor.

"He laughed and he cried and he hugged each and every one of us," Bucklew said. "It was a very heartfelt experience."

A Vietnam veteran of the Army, Bucklew said he "did not shy away from asking him any questions, and neither did he."

"I think what the country needs to do is get behind the president 100 percent," he said.

The soldiers came away pleased.

"He was inspirational," said Capt. Kyle Zablocky, who came with his wife and two children.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 9:18 AM |

Monday, November 24, 2003

POSTS TO COME

I've been paid a visit by a high-quality blogger named Aakash, who has posted some thoughtful comments to several of my pieces. Later today, I'll be answering a few of his points regarding what he sees as a great divide between "traditionalist" conservatives, and "neoconservatives", who he views as dangerous - as much so as liberals. I'll post some of his comments, and my reactions to those comments.

See you in a bit.

UPDATE
Not gonna be able to get to it today. Hopefully tomorrow...

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:31 AM |

Friday, November 21, 2003

WHAT I'M LISTENING TO FRIDAY

Right at this very moment, I'm listening to Come Unto Me. AWESOME song.

AND

Not quite as stong as Come Together, but there are some terrific tracks, particularly May Your Wonders Never Cease, and My Offering.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:37 AM |

THIS WEEK'S COUNCIL VOTES

Congratulations to our winners this week!

Where Are the Factory Jobs Going?, by Alpha Patriot

and

Iraq is Better Off, at Patriot Paradox.

Lots of good reading this week. The voting results, in their entirety, may be seen here.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 10:37 AM |

Thursday, November 20, 2003

THE SCHISM

We have come to that place. The schism between Left and Right is no longer one of mere political disagreement, but instead, a divide that swallows up politics, culture, and even national survival. Oh, we have always disagreed, of course. Hence the distinctions between Left and Right. In the past, however, when “life and death” matters arose, we could usually find common ground upon which to draw a line, and fight our national battles. That time is no more. The far Left has moved from the role of political opponent, to that of threat. Their actions...their stances now pose a very real threat to our way of life, and in fact, to our very survival.

What do you say to people who today conclude that British people have died and been maimed as a result of you appearing here today, shoulder-to-shoulder with a controversial American President?

And, Mr. President, if I could ask you, with thousands on the street -- with thousands marching on the streets today here in London, a free nation, what is your conclusion as to why apparently so many free citizens fear you and even hate you? (Biased media? What biased media?)

The great demon of the Left worldwide (including the American Left) is not terrorism, or oppression caused by totalitarian regimes. Instead, it is America. It is not, as we are often led to believe, merely the Bush Administration, or our treatment of Israel as an ally. Rather, whether they are prepared to admit it or not, the Left has moved to a position of opposition to the very values that differentiate America from the rest of the world...the things that define us as a nation.

[Bush is] the greatest threat to life on this planet that we’ve most probably ever seen. - Ken Livingston, Mayor of London

From Within
Americans have always had a strong sense of self-criticism. This trait has, in the past, served us quite well, ensuring that we avoid the French tendency toward an ill-informed, over-inflated sense of superiority. In addition, this ability to look objectively at our own faults and failings has helped to instill in Americans both a great desire for self-improvement, and a willingness to devote ourselves to the betterment of our own nation, and the world at-large. In general, the opposition party (whether it be the Democratic Party or the Republican Party) has tended to voice its criticisms of the policies of the party in power more vocally, of course, as a matter of political expediency.

In recent history, however, the criticism of the Left has moved away from the simple disagreements over methodology, and has begun to chip away at the end goals of US policy, and the motives that drive those policy decisions. The American Left has begun to conform to the traditionally-European view that, because the US is powerful, any use of that power is motivated by a purely selfish, and, in the end, unworthy (if not downright evil) desire for expansion, and for the establishment of some sort of new imperialism.

From Democratic Presidential candidates who rail against our actions in liberating Afghanistan and Iraq, to academics who voice their support for the plight of the 9/11 terrorists, much of the most strident, irrational criticism of the actions taken by the US in the War on Terror is coming from within our own borders.

From Without
Of course, if one wants to bear witness to the most truly off-the-wall, wee-haw, bull-moose nutso criticism of the United States, it still pays to drop in on Europe. As demonstrated by the silly question quoted above (from the joint press conference held by PM Blair and President Bush on November 20, 2003), the European media tend to be a terrific source of utter apoplexy regarding the impending doom threatening the rest of the world, as imposed by that cowboy President (you know, the one who we all know is really stupid, but also manages, somehow, to be clever enough to pose the greatest threat to life that this planet has ever seen). In addition, books implicating the US in conspiracies ranging from the attacks of 9/11, to, I would assume, the utter irrelevance of continental Europe tend to sell like hotcakes. Michael Moore is, even now, rumbling about Europe, trumpeting the evils of American capitalism (the horrible system that’s made him filthy rich), and the veritable crushing of all forms of dissention by “Adolph” Ashcroft (the crushing of dissent that’s allowed him to sell scads of books, and to make fictional films that somehow win Academy Awards in the “Best Documentary” category, despite reams of provable inaccuracies). His speeches, I hear, are usually sell-outs, and generally speaking, he seems to be afforded the same degree of slathering devotion that the American Left has granted him.

The Danger of the New Left
Though it’s all very entertaining, there is, in fact, a great deal of danger in the turf being occupied by the Left both here, and overseas. In staking out such a radical position (that the US is the greatest threat/source of evil/oppressor of the proletariat/kitten-puncher in the world), the Left has, in effect, thrown in its lot with the forces of al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Abu Sayaaf, the PLO, Islamic Jihad, DPRK, the Mullahs of Iran, and any and every other Islamic/Fascist/Islamo-Fascist/Communist group in this world who, if given their druthers, would prefer to see America fall – hopefully with as many explosions and painful deaths as is possible. I’m waiting with baited breath to get the first hate email/comment along these lines: I’m on the Left...how dare you question my patriotism!! !#$@ you! Well, I guess I should just come right out and say it, then...I do, in fact, question...nay...deride the patriotism of anyone who willfully aligns themselves with groups like International ANSWER, MoveOn.org, or any number of other protest/socialist cover-front organizations. If you can look me in the eye and tell me that, in your mind, America is, in fact, the greatest source of evil in the world, then you and I have a serious problem. By saying such a thing, you are, by default, saying the following: 1. The US is more evil than North Korea, which is, even now, starving, jailing, torturing, and executing its own people by the thousands, if not millions. 2. President Bush is, in fact, more evil than was Saddam Hussein, though we have now discovered in the neighborhood of half a million bodies in mass graves around that now-liberated nation. 3. The people of Iraq and Afghanistan don’t deserve the freedoms that we enjoy here. Somehow, they were better off under regimes that, out of sheer capriciousness, might very well have chosen to have them killed...on a whim. 4. The attacks of 9/11 were our fault, and that, somehow, just by being Americans, the 3,000-plus people who were slaughtered that day – men, women, and children – had it coming. 5. It’s our responsibility to understand those who want us dead, even though this statement reveals a degree of cultural arrogance and psychosis-level projectionism that renders the holder of such a belief utterly incapable of intelligent discussion of the matter. The Wahabists don’t want to be understood. They want to reestablish a Caliphate; this reestablishment can only be brought about through the suppression/destruction of Western culture. If we will not convert, we must die. Period. I could go on, but I’ve a life to lead.

The Left, through its philosophical alliance with our enemies, endangers my life, the lives of my family, and the lives of every single American. They provide aid and comfort to the forces of Islamic terrorism, as well as to totalitarian regimes the world-round. Should they, once again, be put in a position to make policy decisions on the matter of terrorism and national security issues, their utter unwillingness to see evil as such, and to avoid capitulation and exposure will render us vulnerable to attacks on a scale that will mark 9/11 as the beginning of the end of our way of life.

In contrast, the current Administration has endeavored to transform the tragedy of that atrocity into the spark of a great uprising against terrorism...something more akin to the first shot at Concord. Let us hope that the Left never again gains the opportunity to disarm the minutemen, and, with the smugness that can only come from a baseless sense of moral superiority, deliver the innocent to their deaths.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:23 AM |

ERK...ACK...BLIMEY!!!

(hat tip King of Fools)

Woman Has Stroke, Gets British Accent

Truly the strangest story I've ever read.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 10:05 AM |

Wednesday, November 19, 2003

NEW COMMENTS PROVIDER

I've shifted from enetation to BlogOut, in hopes that my comments section will be more reliable. Hey, they're both free, so I guess I shouldn't complain about enetation.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 4:18 PM |

STEVE TAYLOR

As a Christian, and somewhat of a music nut, it's only natural that one day, sooner or later, I'd have to post SOMETHING about Christian Music - specifically, Christian rock. I know, I know...for most people, the words "Christian Rock" immediately bring to mind that band "Testament" from The Simpsons [shudder]. In all actuality, however, some of the best, most thought-provoking music out there right now is coming from bands that are either covertly (U2), or overtly Christian. A few years back, Billboard Magazine had this to say about my favorite band, Third Day:

“not only one of the best Christian bands of the ‘90s, but one of the best rock bands period.”

They've sold millions of records, but, because Christian music is considered to be such a "niche" market, they get nearly zero airplay (save for on specifically Christian stations).

Set the wayback machine for, say, 1983, and meet Steve Taylor. Taylor (a fellow Denverite, and former youth pastor) was BIG in Christian music back in the 80s, and the video for his hit Meltdown (at Maddame Tussaud's) got a ton of airplay on MTV (back when they played music videos).

Taylor has never fit the stereotype of "Christian musician as milquetoast-slinger". He was always VERY edgy, and was never afraid to call the Church on the carpet for its transgressions (see "I Manipulate" and "Color Code"). At the same time, he confronted sin in our culture in a way that was amazingly witty, powerful, and convicting (specifically in "I Blew Up the Clinic Real Good", and in the song I address below, "Baby Doe").

On my way home from work yesterday, I listened to his '84 LP, Meltdown, and was newly impressed. One song in particular, left me feeling hollowed-out, and raw.

Baby Doe is a song about a 1982 case in Bloomington, Indiana, wherein a baby boy, born with Down's Syndrome, was allowed to starve, despite many pleas hat he be given up for adoption, etc. Here's a description by Steve Taylor himself:

"I must credit both the Christian philosopher Francis Shaeffer and Village Voice columnist Nat Hentoff for their influence and inspiration in helping me to develop a foundational belief in the sanctity of human life. Ten years after the events described in this song occurred, the alarm they and others sounded rings prophetically true. But it continues to be drowned out by the rhetoric of 'freedom of choice' and 'quality of life'. A baby was born in Bloomington, Indiana with down's syndrome, and despite numerous outside pleas for adoption, the parents, doctors, and ultimately the courts agreed to allow Baby Doe to starve to death, right there in the hospital. I began writing this song with the sense of outrage that fingers those responsible and demands justice. But the more I thought about what had happened, the more I realized that I shared in the blame -- that my silence had helped clear the way for Baby Does' suffering and death. Hearing this song again leaves me feeling empty and a little numb. In our democratic society, the battle for the sanctity of human life is being lost. And when that window closes, nothing will be sacred."

The song's lyrics are as follows:

Unfolding today
A miracle play
This Indiana morn
The father - he sighs
She opens her eyes
Their baby boy is born

"We don't understand
He's not like we planned"
The doctor shakes his head
"Abnormal" they cry
And so they decide
This child is better dead

I bear the blame
Believers are few
And what am I to do?
I share the shame
The cradle's below
And where is Baby Doe?

A hearing is sought
The lawyers are bought
The court won't let him eat
The papers applaud
When judges play God
This child is getting weak

They're drawing a bead
Reciting their creed
"Respect a woman's choice"
I've heard that before
How can you ignore?
This baby has a voice

I bear the blame
Believers are few
And what am I to do?
I share the shame
The cradle's below
And where is Baby Doe?
Where will it end?
Oh, no, no...

It's over and done
The presses have run
Some call the parents brave
Behind your disguise
Your rhetoric lies
You watched a baby starve

I bear the blame.
Believers are few
And what am I to do?
I share the shame
The cradle's below
And where is Baby Doe?

Devastating.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 12:50 PM |

A MAN'S MAN'S MOVIE

Micheal Leaser on Master and Commander:

In the sewer that comprises much of modern cinema, three characterizations of men dominate the scene: the incredibly hip gay or metrosexual in touch with his feminine side, the overly aggressive, boorish, and/or insensitive lout who desperately needs to be, and the dazed and confused milquetoast wallowing in his sensitivity.

Bucking that trend and hearkening back to an era in film when men apparently didn't need to be feminized, director Peter Weir delivers, in Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, a refreshingly realistic and honest portrayal of a group of men, uncorrupted by fashionable psychotherapeutic sentiment.

I'm going to have to see this film.

Earlier this year, my men's small group went through John Eldridge's terrific book on the subject of "real" manhood (from a Christian perspective), Wild at Heart: Discovering the Secret of a Man's Soul, and it was truly a triumphant experience. I recommend it highly.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:09 AM |

BUSH IN BRITAIN

You can find the full text of the President's wonderful speech to an audience at Whitehall Palace here.

Some key excerpts:

President Wilson had come to Europe with his 14 points for peace. Many complimenting him on this vision yet some were dubious.

Take, for example, the prime minister of France. He complained that God himself had only 10 commandments.

(LAUGHTER)

Sounds familiar.

(LAUGHTER)

At Wilson's high point of idealism, however, Europe was one short generation from Munich and Auschwitz and the Blitz.

Looking back, we see the reasons why. The League of Nations, lacking both credibility and will, collapsed at the first challenge of the dictators.

Free nations failed to recognize, much less confront, the aggressive evil in plain sight. And so, dictators went about their business, feeding resentments and anti-Semitism, bringing death to innocent people in this city and across the world and filling the last century with violence and genocide.

Through world war and cold war we learned that idealism, if it is to do any good in this world, requires common purpose and national strength, moral courage and patience in difficult tasks. And now our generation has need of these qualities.

On September the 11th, 2001, the terrorists left their mark of murder on my country and took the lives of 67 British citizens. With the passing of months and years, it is the natural human desire to resume a quiet life and to put that day behind us as if waking from a dark dream. The hope that danger has passed is comforting, is understanding and it is false.

This was truly an historic speech, and was the strongest that the President has given on the need for resolute committment to the War on Terror. It bears reading, and repeating. Bush's performance overseas echoes many of those of Reagan, who tended to give some of his most sterling foreign policy addresses while across the pond.

Tony Blair had a tremendous quote, as well, in his speech to the House of Commons -

"It really is about time we started to realize who our allies are, who our enemies are, stick with the one and fight the other,"

He said, to a great chorus of "Hear Hears"

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 7:41 AM |

J.P. CARTER VS. DEAN ESMAY ON HELL

Meaty discussion taking place at The Evangelical Outpost regarding Dean Esmay's rejection of the Evangelical view of God/Heaven/Hell. As will come as no surprise, my position would be that espoused by J.P., but the discussion in the comments section is truly worthwhile and thought-provoking reading. Check it out.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 7:26 AM |

THE WAY OF THIS WORLD

First comes the rage...the blinding, teeth-gnashing, wall-punching rage. Then, it all just settles in to a feeling of utter sorrow. I get choked up when I see this:

This is Tanner Dowler. Earlier this year, Tanner died at Denver Health Medical Center, where he had been airlifted for treatment to an array of injuries inflicted by his parents. According to a piece in today’s RockyMountain News,

Medical personnel and police officers said Tanner's parents seemed clueless as to how close to death their baby was hovering.

While doctors struggled to stabilize Tanner for the flight to Denver, the Dowlers waited in the lobby.
Lafayette Police Sgt. Fred Palmer, the first officer on the scene, said Joseph Dowler's demeanor was "very casual."

"They seemed more concerned about the fact that Audra's parents would be upset than anything else," Palmer testified.

When Tanner died, doctors compiled a list of injuries that were truly horrifying. Tanner was suffering from bleeding of the brain, his feet were burnt and blistered, and were wrapped in toilet paper that was tightly bound with adhesive tape (the result of deliberate burns inflicted by his parents). Both arms were broken, one of his legs was broken in two places, and he had at least seven broken ribs. He was eight weeks old. Eight. Weeks. Old.

His brief life was marked by pain, fear, and violence. When news reports about new developments in this case air, I have to turn the channel...particularly when I’m holding my three month-old daughter. The pain that this case elicits in my heart is absolutely unreal. I ache for this little baby, and wish that I could have done something...anything, to take him away from the monsters that bore and killed him. He didn’t deserve to die...to be murdered and thrown aside like a piece of trash. His mother apparently called him “it”, and “thing”, as well as several vulgarities better reserved for people like herself than applied to an innocent child.

Audra Dowler, who knew of, and participated in the brutalization of this child, copped a plea, and is serving 10 years in the Colorado State Penn. Her husband, the vile thug who wreaked most of the physical damage on this child, is now on trial, and facing life in prison. They both deserve far worse. This world is fallen, but there is a Judge who watched over Tanner, as well as those who treated him with such cruelty. I believe that, in the end, there will be justice. Perhaps that justice won't come in this world, but it will come. Tanner is safe now; his parents can't hurt him. He feels no pain, and is cradled in the arms of a real Father...a Father who can look into his eyes, and laugh with him. He is loved.

2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, 3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. 6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. - Matthew 18:2-6 (KJV)

The greatest trick the devil ever played is to convince the world that he doesn’t exist. – The Usual Suspects

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 6:45 AM |

Tuesday, November 18, 2003

PERHAPS THE TROOPS ARE TAKING NOTICE...

Of the negative slant of the media's coverage of operations in Iraq. The "bird" chirping in the AP photo below would lead one to that conclusion, methinks.

Funny stuff. Good on ya, trooper.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 4:39 PM |

NOT MUCH BLOGGING TODAY

Working on a report for the folks in DC. Verrrrry busy.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:44 AM |

HMM. DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK ABOUT THIS...

Just checked my Sitemeter...apparently, somebody found this site by doing a search for "Reconstituted Animal Fat." I think I need to hit the weights pretty hard tonight...

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 9:43 AM |

Monday, November 17, 2003

CANI RIPUGNANTE. UCCIDALO TUTTE!

(hat tip Instapundit)

This lovely bit of info via the Beeb -

A group of Italian anti-war militants is raising funds to support the armed Iraqi resistance, the BBC has learned.

The discovery comes as Italy mourns 19 men killed in a suicide attack in Iraq last week.

The "Antiimperialista" organisation's internet campaign asks people to send "10 Euros to the Iraqi resistance".

In typical BBC style, the piece doesn't take sides (at least not against terrorists or their supporters) -

The Antiimperialistas are a group of European anti-war and anti-globalisation supporters.

They are currently organising an anti-war demonstration in Italy next month, and it remains to be seen whether news of the fund-raising activities will deter more moderate anti-war activists from attending.

I would bet not.

Lovely.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 12:47 PM |

MR. PRESIDENT, IT'S TIME TO USE THE BULLY PULPIT

The Democrats are getting away with an unprecedented degree of obstructionism and politicization of the judiciary, there is a growing fear that the White House’s new strategy in Iraq involves cutting and running, and the release of new information seems to indicate solid evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein’s regime and al Qaeda. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration seems to be losing the PR battle because of what seems to be a degree of reluctance to use the “bully pulpit” of the Presidential office to trumpet the Administration’s successes (particularly in regard to the improving economy and the good news coming out of Iraq, as well as the likely vindication of the Administration’s suspicion of ties between the Ba’athists in Iraq and Osama Bin Laden’s terrorist network), and to confront the lies of the Left.

Andrew Sullivan highlights one of the more important passages from this weekend’s Weekly Standard piece by Stephen Hayes, summarizing a recently-leaked CIA document illustrating the relationship between Saddam Hussein’s regime, and the al Qaeda network:

Then we have the smoking vial, the intelligence that a link-up between the maniacs of al Qaeda with the resources of the Baathist terror-state was real, and that it could lead to attacks more devastating than 9/11:

26. During a custodial interview, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [a senior al Qaeda operative] said he was told by an al Qaeda associate that he was tasked to travel to Iraq (1998) to establish a relationship with Iraqi intelligence to obtain poisons and gases training. After the USS Cole bombing in 2000, two al Qaeda operatives were sent to Iraq for CBW-related [Chemical and Biological Weapons] training beginning in Dec 2000. Iraqi intelligence was "encouraged" after the embassy and USS Cole bombings to provide this training.

The analysis of this report follows.

CIA maintains that Ibn al-Shaykh's timeline is consistent with other sensitive reporting indicating that bin Laden asked Iraq in 1998 for advanced weapons, including CBW and "poisons."

Again, all this is amazing stuff: a phenomenally important story, if true.

Sullivan continues:

The notion that the pragmatic Saddam, who had grown closer and closer to Islamism in the 1990s, would eschew any contacts with al Qaeda has always struck me as bizarre. The alliance is a natural. More important: you're in the administration after 9/11. All sorts of intelligence like this crosses your desk. You can't confirm all of it for absolutely sure. But just as surely, you cannot ignore it. The consequences of complacency are too horrifying for words. They still are. Yet today's 20/20 critics seem eager to claim that, even after 9/11, the administration should only have acted against Saddam if it had proven beyond any reasonable doubt that he was indeed in league with al Qaeda. Well, they were wrong before this report. They are triply wrong now. Thank God we have toppled Saddam. And thank God we had a president who, after so many years of complacency, weakness and denial, took the action that was vital to protect this country.

This is but one of the issues that the Administration should be making more of an effort to highlight. The issue of the Senate Democrats’ intransigence in dealing with the President’s judicial nominees is another. After listening to the alternately-maddening and side-splitting grandstanding by such luminaries as Chuck Schumer (A hundred-and-sixty-eight to four! A hundred-and-sixty-eight to four! A hundred-and-sixty-eight to four!), Ted Kennedy (Whaht about the millions of Americahns who [insert malady/affliction/struggle-not-pertaining-to-issue-at-hand]? Hahve we talked abouht them?), and Mary Landrieu (AH WILL NOT YIELD! NO, AH WILL NOT YIELD!!), it becomes clear that their near-slanderous treatment of these highly-qualified judges is motivated by nothing more than naked partisanship, and by a sickening willingness to follow the marching orders of NOW, NARAL/PRO-CHOICE USA, and others on the fringe Left. The President should be on TV – in prime time – addressing this issue directly. Bush would do well to follow the example of Ronald Reagan who, knowing that the press would never allow him a fair hearing, went over their heads, and took his case directly to the American people. If President Bush is unable to shame the Democrats into acting with some sense of propriety and protocol, he should highlight the individuals against whom the Democrats have mounted such a smear campaign. If these judges remain merely names...if there is not some effort to show the American people what sorts of individuals the Democrats have labeled “lemons”, “extremists”, and “neanderthals”, the Left will succeed yet again, and, as in the case of Miguel Estrada, another quality individual will be left to twist in the wind.

President Bush has shown himself to be a genuinely good guy. He doesn’t tend to take attacks on his Administration personally, and, as a consequence, he tends to remain above the fray when the mudslinging begins. This is, of course, a generally admirable personality trait. However, when the fight is taken to the trenches, he must show a greater willingness to jump in and take some swings. He has, on many occasions, shown a willingness to take risks, and to take a stand. When Republican Congressional candidates around the nation needed his help in their campaigns, he worked tirelessly, at no small risk to his own political life. In doing so, he helped to push the Republicans to new heights in an off-year election – one that was supposed to be fairly unkind to the Right. He has, of course, shown tremendous backbone in the war on terror, managing to largely undo the damage down by eight-plus years of retreat and neglect. Why he seems unable or unwilling to take a more public approach to both the national debates currently underway, or to counter the flood of negativity flowing from the national media is a mystery to me...a mystery that needs to be solved.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 10:07 AM |

Friday, November 14, 2003

ABOUT TO PASS 10,000 VISITS

Thanks for playing along, everybody.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 10:29 AM |

TEDDY KENNEDY (GLUG, GLUG)

We now take you live to the Senate floor, where the Senator from Massachussetts continues to ramble aimlessly...

What about the millions of Americans who are, eh, afflicted with, eh, painful cahnker sores, ahnd, eh, thayahfoah unable to, er, eh, enjoy citrus drinks like ahrange juice, and the like? Hahve we er, eh, talked about them?

What about my next dah neighbor? She's er, eh, unable to drink milk, as she's lahctose intohlerant. There ah millions of Americans who er, eh, shayah this affliction. Hahve we talked about them?

What about those cabbies here in our nation's capitol? You know the ones I mean...the ones with thaht smell? What about the millions of American's who suffah from hahrrible B.O.? I mean, did you, er, eh, see thaht episode of "Seinfeld" a few yeahs bahk? They were er, eh, making fun, but I think we all know thaht this is, er, eh, a serious issue. Hahve we talked about thaht aht all? No...we hahven't.

This message brought to you by Hugh Hewitt, and the NRSC. Give gererously, and make Teddy shut up and sit down.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 8:25 AM |

THIS WEEK'S COUNCIL VOTING RESULTS

Congratulations to our winners in this week's vote. It was a close one (well, for second place...)!

In the category of Best Council-Written Piece, the (big) winner was Generosity in Red and Blue, at Aaron's Rantblog.

In the category of Best Non Council-Written Piece, the winner was the harrowing 300,000 in Mass Graves in Iraq, at Trojan Horseshoes.

The results may be seen in their entirety here. Nice work by all involved this week!

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 8:15 AM |

Thursday, November 13, 2003

NIENTE?

Niente? No dell'OH, non "niente"! Non posso levarsi in piedi per andare un giorno senza il bleat!

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 8:47 AM |

MORE TERRI SCHIAVO

(hat tip to reader JDNick)

This vile thing (by the oh-so-witty Ann Telnaese) just ran in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (what the @#$! is an "Intelligencer", anyway?!)

Touching, isn't it? I especially like the way the "Christian Right" is grinning malevolently as he makes poor Terri dance. Boy...that's funny stuff. Really, really good.

Hmm...it couldn't be that those wacky Christians might actually care for Mrs. Schiavo, could it (see the piece on death by dehydration below)? No, no, no...silly me. They obviously see some value in using her as a pawn in their sinister drive to prevent the entirely noble and merciful practice of euthanasia.

As a Christian, this dreck fills me with an absolutely unreal sense of rage. This woman, who can't speak for herself (but, according to some of her doctors and family members, is able to interact on some level), is being told that her life isn't worth living, and that she'd be better off dead (Lane, what are you doing?). Maybe the folks who speak with such certainty about the mercy inherent in Schiavo's proposed death by dehydration should read this passage from Wesley Smith's piece from The Weekly Standard (referenced in my earlier post) -

MOST OF THE TIME, we never know for sure what a starved or dehydrated person experiences. But in at least one case--that of a young woman who had her feeding tube removed for eight days and lived to tell the tale--we have direct evidence of the agony that forced dehydration may cause.

At age 33, Kate Adamson collapsed from a devastating and incapacitating stroke. She was utterly unresponsive and was diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). At the urging of doctors, who believed she would never get better, her nourishment was stopped. But midway through the dehydration process, she began to show subtle signs of comprehension, so her food and water were restored.

Adamson eventually recovered sufficiently to author "Kate's Journey: Triumph Over Adversity," in which she tells the terrifying tale. Rather than being unconscious with no chance of recovery as her doctors believed, she was actually awake and aware but unable to move any part of her body voluntarily.

Again, from Smith's piece:

The agony of going without food was a constant pain that lasted not several hours like my operation did, but several days. You have to endure the physical pain and on top of that you have to endure the emotional pain. Your whole body cries out, "Feed me. I am alive and a person, don't let me die, for God's Sake! Somebody feed me." (emphasis original)

Her vile "husband" wants her dead, and he wants the State of Florida to pull the trigger, so his conscience can be kept clear, and the "Right To Death" community is all-too-happy to carry out his dirty work for him.

Coldhearted Bastards.*

*A note on this particular Anglo-Saxonism: some of you who know me know that I would likely never actually use sort of word in my day-to-day speech. However, as my buddy John's Grandpa used to say, The problem with Christians is that sometimes, we don't cuss enough. In other words, the right word, aptly chosen, can make a point more, shall we say, "punchy". In this case, with the subject matter at hand, I think that the term "coldhearted bastards" sums things up rather well. Please accept my sincere apologies if I've offended. Such was not my intention.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 8:23 AM |

Wednesday, November 12, 2003

THE WEEKLY STANDARD ON SCHIAVO'S DEHYDRATION

Today's online Weekly Standard features a truly disturbing and infuriating piece detailing the process of death by dehydration, as wished upon Terri Schiavo by her "husband".

Entitled A "Painless" Death?, the piece raises more than a few disturbing questions and possibilities. From the piece -

The time has come to face the gut wrenching possibility that conscious cognitively disabled people whose feeding tubes are removed--as opposed to patients who are actively dying and choose to stop eating--may die agonizing deaths. This, of course, has tremendous relevance in the Terri Schiavo case and many others like it. Indeed, the last thing anyone wants is for people to die slowly and agonizingly of thirst, desperately craving a refreshing drink of orange Gatorade they know will never come.

Read the whole thing, and get the word out.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 10:28 AM |

CAPTAIN HARRY "ZAN" HORNBUCKLE

Though I've a busy day ahead, with not much time for blogging, I would be remiss were I not to point you to a piece from today's Wall Street Journal, by way of the Powerline guys, detailing the story of Army Captain Harry Hornbuckle, who recently earned a Bronze Star (with "V") for his actions during an intense firefight for control of a strategic intersection with the improbable name, "Curly".

The piece, with accompanying photos, is harrowing, and inspiring. As I've discovered with the WW2 vets I correspond with, the true heroes are usually quiet...you'd never know what they'd been through or accomplished. This is true of Harry Hornbuckle, who, I'm willing to bet, you'd never heard of (just as I hadn't).

Read his story, and thank God that we have men like him in our Armed Forces.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 9:56 AM |

Tuesday, November 11, 2003

DENNIS PRAGER ON GIBSON'S PASSION

Many of you are undoubtedly familiar with talk show host Dennis Prager. Prager, a practicing Jew, is one of the more thoughtful, gracious, and good-hearted guys in the business, and his show is consistently thought-provoking, and entertaining.

Prager is also an accomplished columnist, and recently wrote a piece detailing his viewing (at Mel Gibson's personal request) of The Passion of Jesus, Gibson's filmic interpretation of Jesus' arrest and crucifixion. Needless to say, the film has caused quite a stir in both the Jewish and Christian communities. Among Evangelicals (like myself), the film is being hailed as an unimaginably moving account of the suffering and death of our Lord and Savior. Among many Jews, however, the film has evoked fear and trepidation, largely due to traditional epithets hurled at the Jews as a people (Christ-killer, and other such nonsense), as well as the history of anti-semitic violence that has all-too-often accompanied such insults.

Now, in response, Prager has written what I consider to be a truly important piece about the gulf in perception between the Jewish and Christian communities as it pertains to The Passion. As Prager puts it, we truly are "watching two different movies". The points made in the piece are so salient, and so insightful that I would be remiss were I not to pass it along to you. If you are a Christian, you will gain insight into the suspicion and fear with which so many Jews are approaching the film, and, if you are Jewish, you will ge given an insight into the mindset of the Christian who sees this film. Such understanding is to be celebrated. Read the whole thing, as they say.

The Passion: Jews and Christians are Watching Different Films

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 4:57 PM |

VETERAN'S DAY VIEWING

Here are my suggestions -

Band of Brothers - I don't yet own it, but hopefully can pick it up soon. It's pricey for the whole set, but, if you've seen it, I don't need to tell you that it's worth every penny.

Saving Private Ryan - The original Spielberg/Hanks/European Theater collaboration, and still one of the most powerful films ever made.

We Were Soldiers - The Anti-Platoon. 'Nuff said.

Black Hawk Down - The opening salvo in our current conflict against Wahabist Islam.

Tora Tora Tora - No Michael Bay as far as the eye can see.

Glory - My favorite Civil War film, closely followed by Gettysburg.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 4:13 PM |

IDF AID SITE

Fellow Colorado blogger Joshua Sharf alerted me to this site a couple of weeks back, and I forgot to link to it. I do so now, as it's truly worthwhile.

Friends of the IDF

The organization provides much-needed aid and comfort for these fellow front-liners of the War on Terror. Pay it a visit, and make a donation.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 4:04 PM |

SABURO NISHIME

One of the most generous men I've had the pleasure of corresponding with is Saburo Nishime - one of the few men to serve in the European theater for the entire duration of the war. He was drafted on November 15, 1941, and served with the 100th Infantry Battalion until the war's end, in 1945.

Nishime saw Pearl Harbor bombed. He saw action in Italy at the Volturno River, Casserta, and Monte Cassino (some of the bloodiest fighting of the war). He was wounded on more than one occasion, and received several decorations, including the Purple Heart.

His buddies all thought he looked like an Arabic character from a movie they'd seen, so, for the duration of the war, Saburo went by the nickname "Akim", rather than his real name. Even now, at gatherings of the surviving members of the Battalion, Nishime is more well known by his wartime nickname than by his real name.

Saburo is a very private, kind, giving, and compassionate guy. He sent me several books detailing the story of Nisei soldiers in both WW2 and the Korean War. In addition, he sent me a copy of his memoirs - Lest We Forget - The Peons of the One-Puka-Puka.

The letters, books, memoirs, and event seemingly-trivial details in my possession are truly a national treasure. I hope to preserve them for my children, and for my childrens' children. Along those lines, I wanted to link to the website of an organization that I've just discovered, called Go For Broke Educational Foundation. Check out the site, and become a member or volunteer. I plan on getting them copies of the materials in my possession. Just as is the case with our veterans at-large, to let the story of the 442nd/100th fade from our national memory would be utter folly.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 2:56 PM |

RONALD REAGAN ON VETERAN'S DAY

I thought it appropriate to reprint a Reagan speech that I carry with me in my wallet. It was given at a wreath-laying ceremony on Veteran's Day, 1985 -

It is, in a way, an odd thing to honor those who died in defense of our country - in defense of us, in wars far away. The imagination plays a trick. We see these soldiers in our minds as old and wise. We see them as something like the Founding Fathers - grave and grey-haired. But, most of them were boys when they died, and they gave up two lives - the ones they were living, and the ones they would have lived. When they died, they gave up their chances to be husbands and fathers and grandfathers. They gave up their chances to be revered old men. They gave up everything for our country...for us. And all we can do, is remember.

Happy Veteran's Day.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 1:13 PM |

BELATED COUNCIL RESULTS (OCTOBER 30th)

While I was on hiatus, I was unable to post the results of one of our Council votes. As such, I do so now. For the October 30th vote, the results were as follows:

In the category of Best Council-Written Piece, the winner was the always-trenchant Commiewatch, with Commiewatching By The Bay.

Others in this category receiving signifigant votes included the following:

Action Against Domestic Terrorism, by e-Claire.

Our Partially Constitutional Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, at Damnum Absque Injuria.

Differences In Perspective, by Alpha Patriot.

In the category of Best Non Council-Written Piece, the winner was Michael J. Totten, with The New Skinheads.

Others in this category receiving signifigant votes included the following:

Union Lessons, by The Angry Clam.

The Vietnam-Quagmire Argument, by Mrs. Du Toit.

The results may be viewed in their entirety here.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 1:04 PM |

Monday, November 10, 2003

HEADS SHOULD ROLL

This was the reaction of Senator Zell Miller (D-GA) upon reading a Democratic memo recently circulated in the press, and widely blogged about for the past week or so. For any of my readers who have yet to read the thing, the entire text can be found here.

The memo details the Democrats' strategies for undermining the President's credibility as it pertains to the Administration's use of intelligence in the run-up to war in Iraq. Here is a choice excerpt -

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic "additional views" to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it. In that regard, we have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims and contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry. The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an independent commission (i.e. the Corzine amendment).

The summary is similarly fascinating -

Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet, we have an important role to play in the revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war. The approach outline above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives and methods.

The Democrats must be called on the carpet for this one. Overt partisanship has no place in intelligence oversight, and the Democrats' willingess to stoop to this level merely serves to further underscore their utter lack of trustworthiness in the area of national security.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 3:45 PM |

A WEEK OF HEROES

Over the past few years, I've had the good fortune to correspond regularly with quite a few vets (particularly those who served in WW2). In each case, my interactions with these men (and, in a few cases, women) have left me humbled, and honored that these folks would take the time to write me.

One of my most prized possessions is an autographed picture (as well as several letters) of George T. Sakato, an elderly gentleman who lives here in Denver. He's pretty frail now, but in the hours before dawn on August 29, 1944, he was a lion.

Private George T. Sakato distinguished himself by extraordinary heroism in action on 29 October 1944, on hill 617 in the vicinity of Biffontaine, France. After his platoon had virtually destroyed two enemy defense lines, during which he personally killed five enemy soldiers and captured four, his unit was pinned down by heavy enemy fire. Disregarding this fire, Private Sakato made a one-man rush that encouraged his platoon to charge and destroy the enemy strongpoint. He proved to be the inspiration of his squad in halting a counterattack on the left flank during the reorganization of his platoon. It was at this time that his squad leader was killed. Taking charge of the squad, he continued his relentless tactics. Private Sakato used an enemy rifle and P-38 pistol to stop an organized enemy attack. During this entire action, he killed 12 and wounded two, personally captured four and assisted his platoon in taking 34 prisoners. By continuously ignoring the enemy fire and by his gallant courage and fighting spirit, he turned impending defeat into victory and helped his platoon complete its mission. Private Sakato’s extraordinary heroism and devotion to duty are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit on him, his unit, and the United States Army. - From George Sakato's citation upon his being awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.

Since I began writing "thank you" letters to WW2 vets in 1998, I have taken a particular interest in members of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team. This group, of course, was made up largely of Japanese-Americans who volunteered from behind barbed wire in internment camps. They became the most highly-decorated group in US military history, with 13 Medal of Honor winners represented (not counting the several additional CMHs won by her sister unit, the 100th Battalion).

I have been blessed to hear from men like Sakato, as well as several other former members of the 442nd/100th, and am honored to trumpet their courage on this blog. Throughout the course of this week, I'll be posting profiles and pictures detailing the heroism and patriotism that these men displayed on an everyday basis.

Thank a vet for your freedom, and pray for those serving even now.

If any of you have names and addresses of vets (particularly WW2 vets, but I'll write to anyone in uniform), and feel that they'd appreciate a note of thanks and encouragement, please forward them to jaredkeller74-at-hotmail.com. I truly appreciate it.

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 9:39 AM |

Friday, November 07, 2003

HIT AND RUN

I'll be back blogging regularly on Monday, but in the meantime, here are the results of the most recent Council voting -

Best Council-written entry:

Gun Control "Logic", at Damnum Absque Injuria (an excellent read, by the way...)

Best non Council-written entry:

Why I Left The Democratic Party (Rosemary), at the always-terrific Dean's World.

The full voting results can be seen here.

Back to blogging on Monday. See you then!

(permalink) Posted by Jared @ 11:03 AM |

Patronize 'em!

Currently Reading/Recommending

What's in my ears right this minute

The Rocky Mountain Alliance of Bloggers

Meaty Links

Evangelical Links

Reach

Other Quality Blogs

80s Nostalgia!

Aloha Links