Once in a while the AP surprises you. I’ve been ripping them up because there have been no pictures, to my knowledge, that showed heroism, or our soldiers doing good things. Here are two exceptions.

Here is the narrative that came along in the email enclosing the two photographs. And thanks to JG for sending this in.

Howdy,

My pilot friend in Baghdad is counting the days. His tour is set to end in 14 days. I thought you might enjoy this.

Cheers
Jg

Subject: A story in pictures

I got the following from one of the guys I work with….Every Democrat, every politician, and every American should see this. Maybe they would understand a little better why we are here.

BOB

This is a good shot!

Some news photos are so rich in symbolism they’re almost like Renaissance paintings in how much they communicate. Such an Associated Press photo recently appeared on the front page of the New York Times’ national edition. It’s a picture of the scene after a bombing in Baghdad. Adding to the chaos of the bombing, which killed at least 21 people and injured at least 66, was a shooter, maybe targeting people in the crowd. Amid all the Iraqis who are running from the gunfire was a U.S. soldier, standing tall, perhaps looking in the direction of the gunshots, not apparently looking for cover.

An Iraqi boy seeks shelter behind the soldier, a member of the 82nd Airborne Division. The kid took shelter behind a hero. The boy knows who will not kill him but will save him. If the trooper was following the wishes of the cut and run crowd, the trooper would have grabbed the boy and thrown him into the gunfire. It’s that simple.

It would be difficult to stage a picture that provides a more potent metaphor for the role played by United States in this wretched world. That kid just did a virtual essay on “What America Means to Me”.

———————

With the 4th of July rapidly approaching, I just want to say “thanks” to all those who are wearing the uniforms of the US military services in whatever capacity you serve, and God bless you and your families.

The BBC

An eyewitness at Glasgow Airport has told how he intervened to help tackle a man who was on fire and “fighting” with police officers.

Eyewitnesses are emailing images of what appears to be an attack on Glazgow Airport’s main terminal with a flaming jeep. An asian man was thrown to the ground…

Strafor.

Also at Stop the ACLU from earlier.

Steven Millroy at Fox talks about a really weird piece at NRO by Jim Manzi advocating that conservatives should just throw in the towel on the global warming debate, sell out, and use it to get votes in 2008.

Manzi responds to Milloy in here and concludes with this:

letting cap-and-trade advocates of off the hook by allowing them to continue to argue at a high rhetorical plane with the straw man of “there is no global warming” is the wrong way to go about winning it.

“There is no global warming” is not a straw man, if you read what climatologists have to say about it in powerpoint presentations, on blogs, etc.. This is misleading and a purely meaningless and rhetorical argument. Manzi calls Milloy Hansen ‘unhinged’ in that piece, based on this quote from Millroy:

it was NASA’s climate-alarmist-in-chief, Jim Hansen, who looked foolish for criticizing Griffin — who holds a doctorate in aerospace engineering and master’s degrees in aerospace science, electrical engineering, applied physics, civil engineering and business administration — as being “ignorant.”

Ignorant, I guess because Griffin said “I am not sure that it is fair to say that [global warming] is a problem we must wrestle with.” Apparently Manzi disagrees. Although Manzi calls Hansen an ‘unhinged ideologue’ which in retrospect may be true, how he can jump to the assumption that we should LEVERAGE global warming when it doesn’t exist to get votes in 2008 is a huge leap. It makes him appear to be not all that different than the ‘unhinged ideologue’ he maligns.

Global warming is a myth; promulgated by clueless people who are not scientists. MIT’s Richard Lindzen Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science:

….lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.

Roy Spencer,

What little evidence we now have suggests that precipitation systems act as a natural thermostat to reduce warming.

And

Finally, remember that phrase, “the Earth’s greenhouse effect keeps the Earth habitably warm?” I’ll bet you never heard the phrase that is, quantitatively, more accurate: “Weather processes keep the Earth habitably cool.”

Were it not for weather, the natural greenhouse effect would cause the surface of the Earth to average 140 degrees.

Dr. Roy Spencer (according to Wikipedia) is a principal research scientist for University of Alabama in Huntsville, has served as Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, and is the recipient of NASA’s Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement. He is principally known for his satellite-based temperature monitoring work, for which he was awarded the American Meteorological Society’s Special Award. He is is skeptical of the view that human activity is primarily responsible for global warming.

TGIF!

Thank God I’m FREE! Thanks to guys like Jack Idema.

C’mon and trackback! Put up a post that you think deserves some special attention from this past week.

Watch for Open Trackbacks here on Fridays, Sundays and Wednesdays.

Here’s the link:

http://caosblog.com/5208

Here is the trackback link to this post:

http://caosblog.com/5208/trackback/

To trackback to any post just use the post slug or “permalink” and add trackback/ to the end of it.

One other thing.

I will be deleting trackbacks when the posts don’t show that you’ve linked here. Make sure you do as I did, below–either saying thanks to Cao’s blog and linking to this post, or mention that I have a trackback party, and link to this post. Otherwise the trackback will be deleted.

If you are unable to send trackbacks, then use the Wizbang Standalone Trackback Pinger.

Others with Open Trackbacks:

Add this Blogroll to your site

A shocking admission about the BBC was published casually by the Jeruselum Post talking about working toward Alan Johnston’s release:

the coordinator of government activities allowed a Hamas member who works for the BBC to enter the Gaza Strip last week

Did you catch that? A Hamas member who works for the BBC. People, particularly people who work in journalism, have officially taken leave of their senses.

As Charles Johnson points out, how can it possibly be that a Hamas member could work for the BBC when the UK identifies it as a terror group? Adding to the Associated Press’s Amir Shah who was formerly in the Taliban ministry, Bilal Hussein who was detained by the Army for his relationship with terrorists, (specifically detained in Iraq for five months after US military captured him with insurgents, including an alleged al Qaeda leader, in a Ramadi apartment with bomb-making material [Malkin, 2006]) and Tim McGirk who had Thanksgiving with the Taliban? The BBC, you would think, would have more sense, being that Britain is a strong ally of ours in the WoT, having experienced 7/7, ?? Journalists don’t care, as long as what they write achieves tearing down and/or blaming America or attacking Israel for what is wrong in the world. Journalists seem to welcome terrorists in their midst with open arms; the goals of the journalists and terrorists seem to be the same.

Update: It should be noted that the BBC denies it;

BBC strongly denied that any of its employees were members of Hamas.

In a statement, the BBC said, “Like all large international organizations, the BBC regularly seeks the assistance of the Israeli authorities in moving its Palestinian staff in and out of Gaza. The BBC does not employ anyone who is a member of Hamas or any other Palestinian faction.”

Cheers to Wednesday–what some folks call “hump day” because once you’ve reached the afternoon, you’re over the hump on the way to the weekend!

Trackback with one of your posts that you think deserves some special attention from this past week.

Watch for Open Trackbacks here on Fridays, Sundays and Wednesdays.

Here is the trackback link to this post:

http://caosblog.com/4980/trackback/

To trackback to any post just use the post slug or “permalink” and add trackback/ to the end of it.

One other thing.

I will be deleting trackbacks when the posts don’t show that you’ve linked here. Make sure you do as I did, below–either saying thanks to Cao’s blog and linking to this post, or mention that I have a trackback party, and link to this post. Otherwise the trackback will be deleted.

If you are unable to send trackbacks, then use the Wizbang Standalone Trackback Pinger.

Others holding trackback parties:

Add this Blogroll to your site

Since I’m still tweaking my paper, I’d thought I’d do a little exercise, based on Rosa Brooks’ article “In Defense of Women in Combat”. This is from her Los Angeles Times article from July of 2005, also available at her blog here.

The deaths of five female soldiers in Iraq this month have fueled a new surge of opposition to allowing women to serve in the military in combat roles. But it’s based on some pretty dubious claims.

So let’s examine them.

“Women aren’t big and strong enough for combat.” I’ll buy this when someone explains why the Marine Corps will cheerfully accept a 4-foot-10 male recruit who weighs 96 pounds.

That’s kind of interesting hyperbole. I’m not sure where Rosa gets her information, but according to what I have, the physical height requirement of a man in the Marine Corps is 5′5″, with corresponding weight. There is no man as far as I know who has ever joined the Marine Corps who was 4′10″ who weighed 96 pounds. My dad is former Marine Corps, he’s 6′1″ and a very large guy; his hands look like baseball mitts.

Sure, the Marines will make a man out of him, but even if they water the guy with Miracle-Gro, they won’t be able to turn him into a 6-footer. The average man may be bigger and stronger than the average woman, but plenty of women are bigger and stronger than many men. Why discriminate based on gender when you could have straightforward, task-specific strength requirements?

Very funny, but not accurate. First, the 4 foot tall Marine guy doesn’t exist. Next, a woman’s size is on average about 60% of a man’s.

“Plenty of women are bigger and stronger than many men.” That’s a sweeping generalization that is not based on fact.

Photo Credit: By Rick Kozak — Associated Press

C Company, 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment soldiers carry injured colleagues to a medical center at the base in eastern Baghdad after an bomb destroyed a Bradley fighting vehicle, killing five U.S. soldiers and an Iraqi interpreter.

Here is a very good example of why women do not belong in a combat situation/scenario. A woman would be required to help carry the bodies of wounded, injured, and killed soldiers; and she doesn’t have the same upper body strength as a man does.

Through email I received even more compelling information regarding this picture and why the collocation rule should stand:

[This picture].. portrays a “luxury” situation. When soldiers are under fire and attacking, as was the case in Fallujah in November 2004, a fallen soldier frequently has to be rescued by another single soldier strong enough to carry him off the battlefield on his back. Other soldiers are busy engaging the enemy and providing cover. This is why the collocation rule is important, and why it should be retained.

I witnessed such a “fireman’s carry” rescue during a live fire exercise at Fort Bragg in 1992. The soldiers were very matter of fact when I asked why they didn’t use stretchers. On ships as well as on land, you cannot count on several people to perform a life-saving rescue.

This is a picture of the ‘fireman’s carry’.

Think about it. How many funerals have you attended where the pallbearers were women?

Carrying a body, whether dead or injured, requires physical strength; which women do not have a great amount of in comparison to men. That’s not a fantasy; that’s reality.

A study found that “[m]ore than half US soldiers have been medically evacuated from Iraq and treated at two of the military’s large pain treatment centers suffer not from battle wounds but from bad backs”. “Inherent in being a soldier is carrying large weights. Historically, the ideal ‘carry weight’ is a third of your body weight,” said Lt. Col. (Dr.) Frank Christopher, chief of deployment health at Fort Bragg, North Caolina. (Weise, 2005)

Many troops in the field carry much more than that - up to 180 pounds in some cases. (Weise, 2005)

Side plates in the new body armor system have nearly doubled the weight of protective vests from sixteen to thiry-one pounds since March of 2003. (Cox & Maze, 2006)

During one training cycle, some of the women participated in an urban warfare course. One of them promptly broke her leg doing a spider drop out a window. Her smaller frame could not take the shock of landing after dropping approximately 6 feet while weighted down with all the equipment a Marine is expected to wear in battle. (Neumayr, 2005)

Bearing just some of this in mind, what kind of kooks would intentionally wish combat on women in uniform, let alone actively campaign for it?

In any case, in a war that mixes high-tech weaponry with low-tech hazards, being big and strong isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. You don’t need to be big and strong to fly a modern combat jet, and size won’t help when you’re up against suicide bombers and improvised explosive devices. Why do we believe that bigger people make better soldiers? In Vietnam, an army of big, strong American men fought an army of small, slender Vietnamese men — and lost.

Using Pat Schroeder’s “push button wars” characterization of modern day warfare, heh? With memories of pictures from the Battle of Fallujah fresh in my mind, that one battle pretty much wipes that argument off the face of the map. Wars are not videogames. War is still tough, rough and hard. Hand-to-hand combat and firefights are real, and will still be fought. To ignore that, and intentionally place a woman in that situation in my opinion is a demonstration of willful ignorance.

In Vietnam, by the way, were winning on the ground. If we’d just let them to their job, we wouldn’t be faced with still wondering what happened to our POW/MIAs. When you’re talking from a position of defeat, you really have no bargaining chips.

It was the politicians and the propaganda about the war at home, coupled with Nixon’s resignation and the democrats cutting the funding that led to our throwing in the towel on that conflict, just like Harry Reid is trying to do today.

To say our military lost it is another defining example of ignorance of historical fact.

“Allowing women in combat will hurt military morale, cohesion and readiness.” On the contrary, studies suggest that the presence of women has a neutral or positive effect on military morale and cohesion. Maybe that’s why support for women serving in combat positions is stronger in the military than in the general population: Two-thirds of military personnel support allowing women to serve in combat, compared with roughly 50% of the general population. The more familiar people are with the military, the more they support full participation for women — which ought to tell us something.

What studies? Military personnel aren’t allowed to speak against affirmative action or equal opportunity, lest they might be ‘discriminating’ against women. And it is more than 50% of the general population who don’t agree with sending our daughters to combat. 90% enlisted women surveyed said they don’t want to be sent to combat, but they stopped asking women what they thought about it in 2001. That makes sense, doesn’t it? If you don’t want to hear the answer, don’t ask the question.

“We can’t let women into combat because they might be taken prisoner and raped.” Male prisoners can be raped too. And how exactly is rape worse than the numerous other horrors (such as beatings and torture) to which prisoners of either sex might be subjected? Anyone who volunteers for combat needs to be prepared for possible mistreatment if captured. If women understand and accept the risk of rape, that should be the end of the debate.

Isn’t it much worse to contemplate a fresh-faced girl right out of high school and pigtails, only 19-year old, whose MOS was a supply clerk, faced with being anally raped by Saddam’ horrible fayadeen like Jessica Lynch was? When their FSC (forward support company) got lost and they found themselves under fire, Lynch and Piestewa looked at each other, saying they weren’t supposed to be there. Indeed, the military is breaking the rules ALREADY on putting women in dangerous situations, and the American people, I’m sure, wouldn’t agree with it if the awareness was raised.

Isn’t it odd how military women complain about a crotch grabbing incident and demand the careers of naval officers like in the Tailhook incident, but it’s perfectly alright for women to be tortured, maimed, sexually molested and killed as long as it’s by the enemy. This is a bizarre double standard that requires at least some kind of explanation to understand.

“We can’t let women into combat because they might get killed.” They surely will, but so what? Women die in car accidents and from heart attacks, but though these deaths too are cause for sorrow, we still let women ride in cars and super-size their fries. And contrary to near-universal belief, even if we allowed women to participate in the full range of combat positions, women in the military would probably be no more likely to die than women in civilian life.

That’s also kind of a strange argument. Let’s just tie women to the railroad tracks like Snidely Whiplash and then have SERE training like they do in the Air Force so that men will not respond to the screams of a damsel in distress. This again is disingenuous and meaningless argument.

In 2002, the death rate for full-time military personnel was 64.4 per 100,000, a rate substantially lower than for civilians with the same age breakdown. (Why? Military personnel get good healthcare and keep fit). The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have increased the military death rate, but not by as much as most people assume. Crunching available numbers from the last three years suggests that the current death rate of military personnel deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan is roughly 150 per 100,000.

Precisely why the anti-war people are wrong about their complaints, thanks for pointing that out.

Source: Investors.com hat Tip: RTLM & Gateway Pundit

Whether you consider that high or low depends on what you compare it with, but here are a few data points: the 2002 civilian death rate for 15- to 24-year-olds was 171 out of each 100,000 in Washington, D.C., 131 per 100,000 in West Virginia, and 119 per 100,000 in Louisiana. For 25- to 34-year-olds in those same states, the death rates were, respectively, 158, 173, and 134 per 100,000.

Again, thanks, but I don’t know why that is a substantial argument in favor of women in combat. I think it’s more illustrating the point that even though we’re at war, the nation doesn’t feel particularly like we are; we aren’t experiencing heavy casualties like we did during WWI or WII. But during those conflicts, we didn’t have an integrated force, and there was conscription, so everyone had a relative who served, and it was considered your civic duty to serve. Nowadays, people are so removed from the military experience because of base closures and the fact that it’s ‘voluntary’ and universities outlawing military recruiters on campus, the public perception of serving in the military is very different.

In contrast to the bogus arguments against women in combat, there are strong arguments in favor. Locking women out of combat positions makes it harder for women to advance within the military, limiting their opportunities to attain more prestigious jobs and higher salaries. This in turn hurts their families and increases gender inequalities in society as a whole.

I would consider the bogus arguments on the pro women in combat side. Rosa just hit on the real reason why this is an issue. The small percentage of women who are officers want to be promoted, and they are campaigning for women in combat in direct opposition to what the majority of enlisted women want.

Denying women the opportunity to take on combat roles also reduces their future ability to shape national policy. In the post-9/11 world, credibility on military and security issues is increasingly necessary for those who hope to succeed in important public positions — and if only men can occupy combat roles, that gives them a substantial edge.

This is laughable; denying the 90% of enlisted women who disagree with women in combat to have a voice is denying THEIR right to shape national policy, and is an outrage. Why should we allow a handful of aggressive women with their eyes on promotions to shape national policy, and send our young women into dangerous situations they never dreamed they’d ever be in? What’s the problem with the military remaining male-dominated? The military only leverages traits that are inherently male, including strength.

With the rise of terrorism and asymmetrical warfare, the distinction between “front” and “rear” has eroded. In Iraq, women in noncombat military jobs, such as escorting cargo convoys or serving as military police, are in harm’s way. And here at home, hundreds of women lost their lives in the wreckage of the twin towers.

Why not let them serve in a separate corps? Why not let them serve in support positions that are more suited to them, like nurses, clerks, etc.? Why are we so determined to do what no other country has done? We are leading the disastrous way where this policy of integrating women into our fighting force is concerned, and we’ve already reaped some of the benefits of that disastrous policy.

General Karpinski and Abu Ghraib, anyone?

Locking women out of combat positions may help a few American men maintain the illusion of gallantry, but it’s time to acknowledge reality. Women will die alongside men in any terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and women, like men, are affected by our national defense policies. It’s time to give them the right to fight for their country.

There is no reason to put a defenseless young woman like Jessica Lynch or young mothers like Lori Piestewa or Shoshona Johnson intentionally into the hands of the enemy for the sake of a few women who want to be promoted. That’s like intentionally sending men and women to the slaughter so that you can say you’ve provided an ‘equal opportunity’, which doesn’t exist on the battlefield, considering women’s smaller physical stature and lesser strength.

Women have a greater opportunity to get killed in a combat situation. Placing them intentionally alongside men increases the risk to men’s lives in a combat zone, as well. This isn’t a very smart thing to be advocating, in my opinion.

You can thank John Kerry for burying our POW/MIAs in order to have trade with Communist Vietnam. You can thank John Kerry for our putting up the white flag and retreating from Vietnam when we were winning.

There is much John Kerry will answer for one day, to be sure. In this life, or the next.

Obfuscation, linguistics, and various websites have downplayed Hillary’s role with the Black Panthers over the years. Websites poopoo and downplay what her role was when she was a student activist at Yale.

The story, as Richard Poe pointed out here in 2003, isn’t a hoax, although there’s an email that has been traveling around that mixes truth with a few oddities. One version of it carries a byline by Paul Harvey which he didn’t write, which brings the Hillary supports around to say that the whole thing is untrue.

A couple of things, though. Keep an eye on the website the Hillary project as they’ve come up with some great articles over there. Media Matters is another Soros-funded group, and since Hillary is one of Soros’ handpicked funded candidates for the presidency in 2008, it should be no wonder that it helped attack Don Imus and openly admits its next targets to take down will be Rush Limbaugh, Mike Savage, and other conservative radio talk show personalities.

Viciousness in public discourse now rules the day, and if you have money and power, you wield a big club against anyone who might stand in your way. This is Hillary’s way. Note Judi McLeod’s article regarding Hillary’s role in Don Imus’ firing at the Hillary Project. Is it any wonder that Media Matters has targeted Mike Savage? Mike Savage calls her “Satan”.

Peter Paul, who is suing the Clintons for renigging on a business deal and for lying to the FEC repeatedly about personal money he donated to Hillary’s campaign, points out that

“But Imus was ill prepared for the iron fist of Hillary Clinton that struck a knock out blow to his future as a media personality this week. His humorously pathetic efforts to emulate a Hip Hop artist in his choice of phraseology about a black girls’ basketball team provided the fuel that Hillary’s media goon squad could use to finally burn Imus at the stake in the name of racial respect. Hillary was poised to pounce on Imus’ mainstay of racially lame humor when it was politically convenient for her to do so.

“On April 5, Imus gave Hillary’s race baiters the necessary race card to remove the only media gadfly that dared to call a spade a spade when it came to Hillary Clinton’s malevolent and above the law political career and ambitions.”

Paul remembered that Imus had snubbed his nose at who he describes as “the would-be Empress of the World” and her “lack of any socially redeeming political clothes”.

“Almost instantaneously, the “nappy headed ho” quote was recalled from the previous day by the always indignant defender of all things Black, Reverend Al, who came forward to incite the willing media hordes and set the bonfire that guaranteed Imus’s immolation.”

I thought it was very odd that Michelle Malkin, sitting in for Bill O’Reilly, ended up verbally duking it out with a black panthers member, but then when recalling the Clinton’s history with the Black Panthers, none of that should have really come as a surprise.

Hard to believe that even as Imus was pulling the shiv out of his back, the rap music that keeps the image of “nappy headed hos” alive played on.

Just as the brouhaha rocks on.

Earth to right wing radio talk show hosts: It’s getting closer to Election Year and Hill’s still on the rampage.

Or as Paul so aptly puts it: “Once again Hillary has shown that anyone in the media who tangles with her will be destroyed offering the highest profile media victim to date as an example to everyone in the media, who might consider exposing or commenting on her pervasive corruption, that they’ll be completely vanquished and destroyed.”

“It should be crystal clear that what is happening to Don Imus today is illustrative of what will happen to anyone who dares criticize or expose Hillary Clinton for the unprincipled and amoral megalomaniac that she is, especially after she usurps the absolute power of a Hillary Clinton white House should the American people’s indifference enable her to do so.”

The Hillary Clinton White House would be the one from which rap music not the refined tinkling of the piano would always emanate.

Rap music, we hear, contributes strongly to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

More than ironic when considers that in her own way a girl called Hillary Rodham was a sort of Don Imus without the microphone.

“In his book “State of a Union: Inside the Complex Marriage of Bill and Hillary Clinton”, Jerry Oppenheimer alleges that Hillary Rodham—then Bill Clinton’s girlfriend—called adviser Paul Fray a “Jew bastard” to his face on election night. Bill Clinton lost the race for Arkansas’ 3rd Congressional District to incumbent Rep. John Paul Hammerschmidt by 6,000 votes out of 190,000 cast,” writes Paul.

“Oppenheimer stood by his account on Sunday. “Three witnesses have now publicly acknowledged that she said it,” Oppenheimer said.

“The three people identified by Oppenheimer told CNN that Rodham uttered the slur.

The witnesses, Oppenheimer said, are 57-year-old Fray, the Arkansas native and career political operative who led Bill Clinton’s unsuccessful 1974 race; his wife, Mary Lee Fray, who also worked on the campaign; and Neill McDonald, another former campaign worker.

But there are more witnesses to her meglamaniac personality, as these quotes attest.

“Where is the G-damn f**king flag? I want the G-damn f**king flag up every f**king morning at f**king sunrise.”
(From the book “Inside The White House” by Ronald Kessler, p. 244 - Hillary to the staff at the Arkansas Governor’s mansion on Labor Day, 1991)

“You sold out, you mother f**ker! You sold out!”
From the book “Inside” by Joseph Califano, p. 213 - Hillary yelling at Democrat lawyer.

“It’s been said, and I think it’s accurate, that my husband was obsessed by terrorism in general and al-qaida in particular.”
(Hillary telling a post-9/11 world what a ‘great’ commander in chief her husband was; Dateline, NBC 4/16/2004.)

“I have to admit that a good deal of what my husband and I have learned [about Islam] has come from our daughter.”
(TruthInMedia.org 8/8/1999 - Hillary at a White House function, proudly tells some Muslim groups she is gaining a greater appreciation of Islam because Chelsea was then taking a class on the “religion of peace”)

“F**k off! It’s enough that I have to see you sh*t-kickers every day, I’m not going to talk to you too!! Just do your G*damn job and keep your mouth shut.”
(From the book “American Evita” by Christopher Anderson, p. 90 - Hillary to her State Trooper bodyguards after one of them greeted her with “Good morning.”

“You f**king idiot.”
(From the book “Crossfire” p. 84 - Hillary to a State Trooper who was driving her to an event.)

“If you want to remain on this detail, get your f**king ass over here and grab those bags!”
(From the book “The First Partner” p. 259 - Hillary to a Secret Service Agent who was reluctant to carry her luggage because he wanted to keep his hands free in case of an incident.)

“Get f**ked! Get the f**k out of my way!!! Get out of my face!!!”
(From the book “Hillary’s Scheme” p. 89 - Hillary’s various comments to her Secret Service detail agents.)

“Stay the f**k back, stay the f**k away from me! Don’t come within ten yards of me, or else! Just f**king do as I say, Okay!!!?”
(From the book “Unlimited Access”, by Clinton FBI Agent in Charge, Gary Aldrige, p. 139 - Hillary screaming at her Secret Service detail.)

“Many of you are well enough off that [President Bush’s] tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to have to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”
(Hillary grandstanding at a fund raising speech in San Francisco; SFGate.com 6/28/2004.)

“Why do I have to keep proving to people that I am not a liar?!”
(From the book “The Survivor,” by John Harris, p. 382 - Hillary in her 2000 Senate campaign)

“Where’s the miserable c*ck sucker?”
(From the book “The Truth About Hillary” by Edward Klein, p. 5 - Hillary shouting at a Secret Service officer)

“No matter what you think about the Iraq war, there is one thing we can all agree on for the next days - we have to salute the courage and bravery of those who are risking their lives to vote and those brave Iraqi and American soldiers fighting to protect their right to vote.
(Was posted on Hillary Clinton’s senate.gov web site on 1/28/05)

“Put this on the ground! I left my sunglasses in the limo. I need those sunglasses. We need to go back!”
(From the book “Dereliction of Duty” p. 71-72 - Hillary to Marine One helicopter pilot to turn back while en route to Air Force One.)

“A right-wing network was after his presidency…including perverting the Constitution.”
(To Barbara Walters about the Republicans who impeached her husband; 20/20, ABC 6/8/2003.)

“Son of a b*tch.”
(From the book “American Evita” by Christopher Anderson, p. 259 - Hillary’s opinion of President George W. Bush when she found out he secretly visited Iraq just days before her highly publicized trip to Iraq)

“What are you doing inviting these people into my home? These people are our enemies! They are trying to destroy us!”
(From the book “The Survivor” by John Harris, p. 99 - Hillary screaming to an aide, when she found out that some Republicans had been invited to the Clinton White House)

“I mean, you’ve got a conservative and right-wing press presence with really nothing on the other end of the political spectrum.”
(C-Span, 1/19/1997 - Hillary complains about the mainstream media, which are all conservatives in her opinion)

“Come on Bill, put your dick up! You can’t f**k her here!!”
(From the book “Inside The White House” by Ronald Kessler, p. 243 - Hillary to Gov. Clinton when she spots him talking with an attractive female at an Arkansas political rally)

“You know, I’m going to start thanking the woman who cleans the restroom in the building I work in. I’m going to start thinking of her as a human being” -Hillary Clinton
(From the book “The Case Against Hillary Clinton” by Peggy Noonan, p. 55)

“You show people what you’re willing to fight for when you fight your friends.”
(From the book “The Agenda” by Bob Woodward, ch. 14)

“We are at a stage in history in which remolding society is one of the great challenges facing all of us in the West.”
(From the book “I’ve Always Been A Yankee Fan” by Thomas D. Kuiper, p. 119 - During her 1993 commencement address at the University of Texas)

“The only way to make a difference is to acquire power”
(From the book “I’ve Always Been A Yankee Fan” by Thomas D. Kuiper, p. 68 - Hillary to a friend before starting law school.)

“We just can’t trust the American people to make those types of choices….Government has to make those choices for people”
(From the book “I’ve Always Been A Yankee Fan” by Thomas D. Kuiper, p. 20 - Hillary to Rep. Dennis Hastert in 1993 discussing her expensive, disastrous taxpayer-funded health care plan)

“I am a fan of the social policies that you find in Europe” Hillary in 1996″
From the book “I’ve Always Been A Yankee Fan” by Thomas D. Kuiper, p. 76 - Hillary in 1996)

This ill-tempered, violent, foul mouthed, hateful and abusive woman wants to be your president and have total control as commander-in-chief of a military that her party so openly and proudly admit they detest.

And she wants all of this AFTER having plundered the whitehouse one time already when she left the Whitehouse as First Lady. Some little tidbits from a transcript from Larry King Live “Clintons changed the gift system”:

After being criticized for taking $190,000 worth of china, flatware, rugs, televisions, sofas and other gifts with them when they left the White House, the Clintons announced last week that they would pay for $86,000 worth of gifts.

Then on Wednesday, the Clintons returned 19 items after some donors said their gifts were for the White House, not the former first family. The goods — lamps, tables, chairs, sofas and prints — were put on a truck in Chappaqua, N.Y., where the Clintons have a house, and shipped to a warehouse in a Maryland suburb of Washington where White House items are stored.

After concluding that the items the Clintons took with them were the property of the White House, not personal gifts they were entitled to keep, the National Park Service on Friday released an inventory of the items returned.

Questions remain about why the items ended up with the Clintons.

The big picture the emerges isn’t one that I’m particularly relishing as an example of someone we should be having ‘conversations’ with. Bill and Hill left behind the legacy of a death list and a laundry list of pardoned criminals.

All of this when her husband the rapist while the American people have visions Bill in the Oval Office sodomizing an intern with a cigar. We deserve someone with elegance, manners, eloquence, civility and someone who is cultured, not someone who hangs with the Black Panthers and uses her power to silence the opposition, and can’t even manage to be nice to people who say ‘good morning’.

It looks as though she got back at Imus…so she’s vicious on top of nasty.

Clinton’s rape of Juanita Broderick is detailed here in Broderick’s own words.

I dont understand why people aren’t completely embarrassed by all of this disgusting behavior and why they still have the nation’s attention.

SICK AND SICKER is a feature-length movie in currently in post-production that explores the ethics and realities of a government take over the medical profession.

SICK AND SICKER will investigate whether government intervention in the U.S. medical system is the cause of, or the solution to, our problems and whether Canada is really the health care utopia that politicians tell us it is. Criticisms of the U.S. medical system will be reviewed and solutions will be discussed with authors and experts across the political spectrum.

But this won’t be a dry documentary that will put you to sleep. Logan Darrow Clements will bring the abstract concepts to life in dramatic and surprising ways. If he can show how a monkey with darts (above) can beat the investment return of Social Security then you know it will be a movie you won’t forget.

But this movie will not be made unless you help. Here’s how.

Read the Interview with Logan Darrow Clements about Sick and Sicker at Frontpage Magazine, here.

In a week or two I’m going on vacation and I need some people to guest blog while I’m away, keep akismet clean and watch over the comments section.

Let me know if you’re interested, and I’ll let you know the dates. It’s coming up in July, faster than I care to think!

In this photo released by the Stark County Sheriff’s Department, Bobby Lee Cutts, is shown in this booking photo Saturday, June 23, 2007, in Canton, Ohio. Authorities on Saturday arrested Cutts, the boyfriend of a missing nine-month pregnant woman on murder charges and said they recovered a body believed to be hers. (AP Photo/Stark County Sheriff’s Department via The Repository)

It’s confirmed, Jesse Davis is dead, and Bobby Cutts has been arrested for the crime.

The Summit County medical examiner on Sunday identified a body found in Cuyahoga Valley National Park as that of Davis. The dead, nearly full-term fetus was still in her womb.

Jesse’s body was found in a field. May God rest her soul, and give her family some peace now that Cutts has been arrested for this horrible crime.

Click here. It’s at Youtube

Lawrence Lebowitz of the law firm Cohen & Grigsby gives a seminar instructing people from different corporations how not to hire Americans and and get H-1B permits. Lebowitz and his staff tell hiring employers how to run classified ads with the ultimate goal to NOT finding any qualified American applicants. Then, he outlines the steps you go through to disqualify even the most qualified Americans in order to secure H-1b visas for immigrants classified as “skilled workers.” H-1B visa holders typically perform well paying jobs at a fraction of what an American citizen earns for the same work.

From the Council of Conservative Citizens, The Voice (can’t find the link), Century of the Common Iowan, United for A Sovereign America has Lou Dobbs on the subject, and it’s being discussed at numerous other websites.

It’s time to put down your remote, get off the couch and get involved and to the streets in the faces of these loud illegal proponents, and burn up the phone lines to your representatives. It’s insanity to accept this, but this is one of the George Soros backed initiatives to get rid of American supremacy.

Here they talk about how, just as in the case of women in combat, they’re making a case for this, claiming that there are no Americans to fill the jobs. But you can see that they’re manipulating the system to make it appear that way; it isn’t true.

Photo Credit: By Rick Kozak — Associated Press

C Company, 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment soldiers carry injured colleagues to a medical center at the base in eastern Baghdad after an bomb destroyed a Bradley fighting vehicle, killing five U.S. soldiers and an Iraqi interpreter.

Wow, I don’t see a single female face in this group of guys. Here is another example of why women do not belong in a combat situation/scenario. A woman would be required to help carry the bodies of wounded, injured, and killed soldiers; and she doesn’t have the same upper body strength as a man does.

Through email I received even more compelling information regarding this picture and why the collocation rule should stand:

[This picture].. portrays a “luxury” situation. When soldiers are under fire and attacking, as was the case in Fallujah in November 2004, a fallen soldier frequently has to be rescued by another single soldier strong enough to carry him off the battlefield on his back. Other soldiers are busy engaging the enemy and providing cover. This is why the collocation rule is important, and why it should be retained.

I witnessed such a “fireman’s carry” rescue during a live fire exercise at Fort Bragg in 1992. The soldiers were very matter of fact when I asked why they didn’t use stretchers. On ships as well as on land, you cannot count on several people to perform a life-saving rescue.

This is a picture of the ‘fireman’s carry’.

Women are excluded from serving with infantry units (for very good reasons) under the current guidelines.

GAO Report to the Ranking Minority Member Sucommittee on Readiness, Committee on Armed Services, US Senate, entitled “Gender Issues: Information on DoD’s Assignment Policy and Direct Ground Combat Definition”, October, 1998, Chart created from the information available in DoD Exclusions And Number of Restricted and Closed Positions, P. 18

Women have on average about 40-50% the upper body strength of men.

A study that was published in 2000 examined the effects of affirmative action on police hiring. While comparing male and female public safety officers, it was discovered that female officers had 32 percent to 56 percent less upper-body strength and 18 percent to 45 percent less lower-body strength than male officers. (Lott, 2005)

So it would seem that although the numbers seem to be different depending on where you look, the outcome/bottom line/conclusion is the same: women are simply not as strong as men and for that reason they shouldn’t be put in physically demanding all-male positions/jobs that call for typical male strength.

I heard in the hallway the other day, people talking politics at work. It’s usually not politically correct to do so; but they were all laughing at a manager saying that she was sick of President Bush and her ‘dream team’ was Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

I am consistently appalled at how little people know about the politics of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Most don’t know, for example, that both of them can pretty much be categorized as marxists, and that Hillary Clinton, along with George Soros, have a dream to mold America into something that none of us have ever known; to destroy the constitution, among other things, and as Hillary said, “take things away from you for your own good”.

Do the people who think of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as saviors from the evil Bush regime stop to think about what they would be putting into place? Obama is supposed to be a constitutional lawyer, yet his positions on issues seem to be in juxtaposition to the constitution. Hillary Clinton’s marxist ideas go all the way back to when she was a shill for the black panthers during her days as a student at Yale.

George Soros, the multi billionaire, also supports both Obama and Clinton as candidates. His financial support for them was there when they ran for the Senate, too…and his involvement in the McCain Feingold agreement to get rid of the soft money contributions to the democratic campaign only succeeded in binding him and his money spigot exclusively to the democratic party.

By pushing McCain-Feingold through Congress, Soros cut off the Democrats’ soft-money supply. By forming the Shadow Party, Soros offered the Democrats an alternate money spigot – one which he personally controlled. As a result the Democrats are heavily – perhaps even irretrievably – dependent on Soros. It seems reasonable to consider the possibility that McCain-Feingold, from its very inception, was a Soros power play to gain control of the Democratic Party. (Horowitz, Poe, 2004)

Some have said that Clinton and Soros are our very own Lenin and Stalin. And Soros has not only his money controlling goals and strategy, but his sons are firmly planted in American progressive politics, through Moveon.org, and with a vision for tomorrow that we should all be resisting and horrified by.

I am sick of the Bush administration’s stance on issues as much as the next guy. Bush isn’t a conservative republican; he’s a big government guy who has succeeded in making the United Nations, a corrupt organization that should be thrown out of the United States, legitimate with the decision to go to war with Iraq based on Saddam’s ignoring UN sanctions.

If there was a candidate who proposed limiting government, culling socialist policies, platforms and branches like OSHA and FEMA, I would be all for it. It’s time we started seeing two real choices in a presidential candidate instead of two candidates where the choice is always the lesser of two evils.

“Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it.” —Woodrow Wilson

This is something that no one in today’s democratic party, and few politicians on the republican side, recognizes.

In this interview with Richard Poe, other points on this are very clearly spelled out about Soros’ influence in the democratic party. The main one that struck me was this:

The Shadow Party is the real power driving the Democrat machine. It is a network of radicals dedicated to transforming our constitutional republic into a socialist hive.

I think I have to pick up the book by Poe and Horowitz called “The Shadow Party” now…he suggests that we learn as much as we can about this phenomenon before the 2008 election. The power of Soros money pushing initiatives can be seen and felt through what Poe talks about in that interview with Jamie G.

On the economic front, he is shorting the dollar in global currency markets, trying to force a devaluation. At the same time, Soros is orchestrating a nationwide movement to encourage mass immigration into the United States, and to mandate the provision of free social services to illegal immigrants. These measures alone have the potential to bankrupt the nation. However, if they fail, Soros has another program that will certainly finish the job. A long-time Soros operative named Jeffrey Sachs has been placed in charge of the United Nations Millennium Project – a global war on poverty designed to transfer wealth from rich countries to poor ones. Sachs is currently demanding that American taxpayers turn over $140 billion per year to his global welfare bureaucracy.

On the political front, Soros has poured massive funding into such groups as the ACLU, which uses lawsuits to hamstring the War on Terror. Soros also funds Amnesty International, whose US executive director has called for the arrest of President Bush as a war criminal. Another Soros-funded group, The Center for Constitutional Rights, has drawn up detailed articles of impeachment against the President.

You can see that working, and I’m not sure how an increased awareness is going to stop it.

It’s Sunday, folks, say a prayer for Jack and Brent, that they’ll be kept safe and alive until one day they can come home.

C’mon and trackback! Put up a post that you think deserves some special attention from this past week.

Watch for Open Trackbacks here on Fridays, Sundays and Wednesdays.

Here’s the link:

http://caosblog.com/4497

Here is the trackback link to this post:

http://caosblog.com/4497/trackback/

To trackback to any post just use the post slug or “permalink” and add trackback/ to the end of it.

One other thing.

I will be deleting trackbacks when the posts don’t show that you’ve linked here. Make sure you do as I did, below–either saying thanks to Cao’s blog and linking to this post, or mention that I have a trackback party, and link to this post. Otherwise the trackback will be deleted.

If you are unable to send trackbacks, then use the Wizbang Standalone Trackback Pinger.

Others with Open Trackbacks:

Add this Blogroll to your site

What is disgusting is we have trade relations thanks in part to John Kerry’s burying the POW/MIA issue, which is far from dead, in my opinion.

People protested Nguyen Minh Triet’s visit, one man chanting through a bullhorn “no communists! no communists! no communists!”

We should try that chant at anti-war rallies where there are members of Code Pink, International ANSWER, United for Peace and Justice, the World Workers Party, et. al.

Was there anyone protesting the return of the remains of our missing POW/MIAs? Was there anyone there defending their honor? Was there anyone demanding that Vietnam give up what they know about our missing soldiers, nurses and missionaries?

President of Vietnam Nguyen Minh Triet waves as he arrives in Los Angeles Friday June 22, 2007. Nguyen Minh Triet, the first Vietnamese head of state to visit the U.S. since the end of the Vietnam War, is leading a delegation of more than 100 Vietnamese businessmen, to focus on accelerating U.S.-Vietnam trade relations. No additional identification. (AP Photo/Nick Ut)

Picture and caption from John Kerry’s fans at the Boston Globe.

More at Gateway Pundit, showing the protestors. There are some really good pics and commentary there, too. Here’s an earlier post at Jim’s; the protestors were anticipating this visit with disdain.

And let’s not forget our POW/MIAs

We are looking for someone who can identify these two men:

There are, in fact, at least 19 servicemen that we know ’survived into captivity’ who the POW/MIA families have been pleading the government to help find out what happened, yet Kerry, in cold-hearted response, rolls his eyes and says “talk to my aid, I don’t have time for this.’

Nine servicemen, acknowledged by the Vietnamese as “captured alive” are:

Carlos Ashlock, James T. Egan, Jr., Robert L. Greer, Roger D. Hamilton, Gregory J. Harris, Donald S. Newton, Madison A. Strohlein, Robert L. Platt and Fred Schreckengost. Remains for both Greer and Schreckengost were recovered. Commenting on Greer and Schreckengost, Tourison notes; “During the recovery of their remains in 1990 Vietnamese officials acknowledged they had been captured alive and killed in captivity. The U.S. Marine Corps still does not list them as having died in captivity but to have died while in a MIA status.”

Of the 7 remaining “new POWs” Tourison offers the following information:

Carlos Ashlock – “Vietnam has now acknowledged that Corporal Aslock (sic) was captured alive in Quang Ngai Province. His eventual fate has not yet been determined.”

James Egan, Jr. — – “Vietnam has now acknowledged that Lieutenant Egan was captured alive and has reported that he died in captivity in December 1968.”

[It should be noted that Egan’s name was not on the list of POWs who died in captivity presented in Paris in January 1973. Yet, based on this new information Egan survived in captivity for almost 3 years, from January 21, 1966 to December 1968. As no other POW reported seeing Egan in captivity, where was he held?]

Roger D. Hamilton – “Vietnam has now acknowledged that Lance Corporal Hamilton was captured alive in Military Region 5. His eventual fate has not yet been determined.”

Gregory J. Harris – “Vietnam has now acknowledged that Corporal Harris was captured alive. His eventual fate has not yet been determined.”

Donald Newton – “Vietnam has now acknowledged that Sergeant Newton was captured alive and taken to Hospital 102 of Military Region 5. His eventual fate has not yet been determined.”

Robert L. Platt – “Vietnam has now acknowledged that Private First Class Platt was captured alive. His eventual fate has not yet been determined.”

Madison Strohlein – “Vietnam has now acknowledged that Sergeant Strohlein was captured alive on June 22, 1971 in Quang Nam Province. His eventual fate has not yet been determined.”

Whatever the reason, this information was not made public during the life of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs.

Added to the list of men who “survived into captivity” are: Richard C. Bram, John F. Dingwall, Fredric M. Mellor, Charles J. Scharf/ Martin J. Massucci, John F. O’Grady, Thomas A. Mangino, Paul A. Hasenbeck, David M. Winters, Daniel Nidds, and John T. McDonnell.

The horrible emotional toll of not knowing if your loved one is alive or dead, or just wanting to bring them home for a proper burial is a devastating reminder of what kind of man we’re dealing with in John Kerry; someone who puts his political aspirations, and friendships with other lying communists, above all else.

Ted Sampley has written about this, too. See his bio, here.

Sampley points out that Kerry isn’t the only one to have taken part in burying evidence that there were POW/MIAs alive in Vietnam;

“the person in Washington who has done more to bury the POW/MIA issue than any other elected official is none other than U.S. Senator John McCain from Arizona, himself a former POW.”

The POW/MIA families will readily supply file folders inches thick of correspondence related to Kerry and McCain’s betrayal.

The Select Committee, established in August 1991, was tasked with the mission of resolving the lingering POW/MIA issue by either gaining the release of American prisoners of war believed to be alive under the control of Hanoi, but never released, or explaining what happened to the missing prisoners.

In hindsight, it is obvious that McCain and Kerry were more interested in using the Select Committee as a means to justify lifting the U.S. imposed trade embargo against Vietnam than resolving the issue of missing U.S. servicemen.

So this visit was a result of their disgusting politics.

In a California appeals court, a civil fraud suit was brought against Hillary and her husband, the former President and rapist, Bill Clinton. I reported on Peter Paul’s website Hillcap before (although the video at google was taken down, apparently). He threw an amazing star-studded “fundraiser” that was held in August of 2000 that cost Peter Paul almost $2 million for Hillary’s campaign, out of his own pocket, in a quid pro quo type of agreement with the Clintons. They conveniently ‘forgot’ the terms of the agreement once the event was over.

This tape was submitted as evidence in that civil fraud suit.

Federal election law limits ‘hard money’ contributions from individuals to $2,000 per person. As you hear in this conversation, her long time aid was involved in the preparations, so -she was knowingly participating and helping to plan it. Accepting or soliciting $25,000 or more in a calendar year for a political campaign is a felony carrying a prison sentence of up to five years.

See the thread at Free Republic

Hillcap

The Largest Election Fraud In History

Worldnet Daily: The Smoking Gun Tape Released

This is a great article by Michael Fumento at Townhall, “No negotiations with the Taliban”

The leader of the social democrat party in Germany, clueless Kurt Beck, thinks it’s about time we ‘negotiate’ with what he calls the ‘moderate’ Taliban. 2/3 of Canadians polled in May thought we should ‘negotiate’ with the Taliban. Even the Afghan Senate has called for a ‘ceasefire’ and ‘negotiations’, and Karzai has invited them to participate in government in the past.

“They are Afghanistan’s people,” Karzai said, referring to the Taliban. “They can go for registering their votes and take part in the elections and do what they want to do,” he told a news conference while on a visit to Kandahar.

That cluelessness is coming from Karzai himself, who has an eighth grade education [but a few honorary degrees] and was strategically positioned by the United Nations for the presidency role in Afghanistan. It wasn’t long before that he was chopping tomatoes at his brother’s restaurant in Maryland.

So it isn’t only the Pakistani President’s idea that the Taliban should be forgiven and invited into politics. Yet, the people of Afghanistan who really know Afghanistan have a differing opinion to those who would open their arms to terrorists like Karzai and others…

Afghan Foreign Minister Rangin Dadfar Spanta, responding to Beck, said “I do not think there is a moderate and ‘non-moderate’ Taliban. This distinction was invented by somebody who knows nothing about Afghanistan.”

That’s precisely the point. Canadians, Musharraf, Karzai and Kurt Beck do not have even a basic understanding of what it is they’re suggesting with this silliness. There is no ‘moderate’ Taliban, just like there were no ‘moderate’ nazis. And the Taliban’s outlook on totalitarianism is much the same as the nazis’ outlook.

Read the whole thing, but Fumento makes some important points…

Negotiating with the Taliban is like going to dinner with Hannibal Lector.

We should go back to supporting our allies who really stood with us on terrorism instead of those people who would throw their hands up in complete oblivious submission.

There are some Afghanistanis who get it.

They are still looking for her.

Uniontown — More than 1700 people arrived at the Greentown Fire Station this morning to continue the effort to find Jesse Davis, the pregnant Stark County woman who has been missing for 10 days.

This morning, buses took teams of volunteers out into the surrounding areas to search new terrain. Over the past two days, searchers have covered nearly 20 square miles around Davis’ Lake Township home, which is outside Canton.

Officials said they expect up to 1,000 more volunteer searchers to arrive in the afternoon.

People have said that with ‘no suspects’, the obvious person who pops into mind is the police officer, the boyfriend and married father of her unborn child and 2-year-old son, Bobby Cutts.