Wednesday, 06 June 2007
It's a pretty sad trophy, isn't it? Lewis Libby is nailed for 30 months
for doing what? Testifying about conversations from years ago that he
remembered differently from someone else.
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Fitzgerald tried to get Bush and got nothing
He tried to get Cheney and got nothing
He tried to get Rove and got nothing
He tried to get Rice and got nothing
He tried to get Rumsfeld and got nothing.
So Fitzgerald was left with a crumb....someone not accused of anything
relating to outing valerie plame - you know, the same valerie plame whose
activities were so covert that she has a BOOK about to come out about
them. The valerie plame who got her proven liar husband joseph wilson the
mission in Niger that he lied and said she didn't get him. That one.
Nope, after years of trying, Fitzgerald wound up with......nothing. So
he nailed one guy no one ever heard of, for daring to discuss valerie plame -
like so many others did during that period - and not remember the conversations
the same way someone else did. That's the big trophy.
Barry, of course, can't let this go. He is obsessed with "getting"
someone for it, preferably Bush and/or Cheney and/or Rove. What the "it"
is, no one knows, because Fitzgerald neither indicted anyone for outing plame or
even showed that she was covert under the law he was investigating.
We're at war. Terrorists are trying to blow up our airports. But
this is what the hard core left wants to worry about. Ok, let them.
But leave the rest of us to worry about the important things.
That's a good deal.
Today is the 63rd anniversary of D-Day, the USA landing on Normandy.
I've talked a great deal in the past about how today's media would have
treated WWII. And my conclusion has been that. by D-Day, they would have
turned public opinion completely against the war - complete with howls from
every quarter that Franklin Delano Roosevelt should be impeached and
removed from office.
Well, D-Day took place well over 2 years after our full entry into
the European Theater of Operations. Think of it as the WWII version of
a "troop surge". Here's what happened on that day, courtesy of www.onwar.com:
On the Western Front... Operation Overlord
begins. In Normandy, France, during the predawn hours, the US 101st and 82nd
Airborne Divisions are dropped inland from the right flank beach. The British
6th Airborne Division is landed inland from the left flank beach. These forces
achieve their objectives and create confusion among the German defenders. The
Allied Expeditionary Force lands in Normandy at dawn. Forces of the 21st Army
Group (Field Marshal Montgomery) commands the US 1st Army (General Bradley) on
the right and the British 2nd Army (General Dempsey) on the left. There are five
invasion beaches: Utah on the right flank, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword, on the
left flank. At Utah, the US 7th Corps (General Collins) lands with US 4th
Division spearheading the assault. The troops advance inland against light
resistance. Admiral Moon provides naval support. At Omaha, the US 5th Corps
(General Gerow) lands. There is heavy resistance and by the end of the day the
American forces have advance less than one mile inland. Admiral Hall provides
naval support. At Gold, the British 30th Corps (General Bucknall) lands with
50th Infantry Division and 8th Armored Brigade leading the assault. There is
reasonable advance inland although the assigned objectives are not met. At Juno
beach, the British 1st Corps (General Crocker) lands with the Canadian 3rd
Infantry Division and the Canadian 2nd Armored Brigade leading the assault. The
tanks and infantry quickly push inland. Naval support is under the command of
Commodore Oliver. At Sword beach, other elements of the British 1st Corps land.
The British 3rd Infantry Division, 27th Armored Brigade and several Marine and
Commando units lead the assault. The beach is quickly secured and bridges over
the Orne River are captured but the first day objectives are not reached. The
German 21st Panzer Division counterattacks in the late afternoon but does not
dislodge the British defenders. Overall, the Allies land almost 150,000 men.
Naval support and massive aerial interdiction prevents the German defenders from
concentrating forces for a decisive counterattack.
In Italy... The French Expeditionary Corps
(part of US 5th Army) completes the capture of Tivoli. Recent combat has
depleted 4 German infantry divisions and reduced six of their panzer and panzer
From Berlin... General Lemelsen replaces
General Mackensen as commander of the German 14th Army in Italy.
In New Guinea... On Biak, elements of the US
41st Division prepare to advance on Mokmer Airfield while other elements are
engaged near Ibdi.
What would today's media say about that?
-Over two years after we jumped in, NO END IN SIGHT, and now we're
-Nobody says Hitler is a good guy, he isn't. But did he ever attack the
USA? Never, not for one second. What are we doing fighting in
Europe? Let the Europeans settle their problems.
-What will that bloodthirsty idiot FDR do next? How many of our boys
are going to die on foreign soil to fight someone else's battle?
Do these arguments sound familar? Of course they do.
Now add in the fact that about 2,500 of our soldiers died on D-Day - that one
day - just to establish a beachhead there. Not to win a war, not to take a
major city, not to drive Germany back within its borders, but just to establish
Add in the number of GI's who died on the TRAINING runs for D-Day, and you
have as many or more as have died in the entire war in Iraq. In total over
400,000 of our brave soldiers died in WWII.
Do me (and yourself) a favor: Remember this the next time you hear the
standard arguments against our involvement in Iraq. Ask the person making
them what he/she thought about WWII, especially about D-Day.
I can't guarantee it, but it is an excellent bet that they don't
know a thing about what happened then, have no idea of the parallels, have no
idea of the body counts and will probably try to duck the question.
When that happens, you will know, even if they don't, that it may be their
voice talking, but it isn't their mind working. They are reciting someone
else's agenda without even knowing it.
Try it and see.
THE MIDDLE EAST DOUBLE STANDARD
Is there a double standard in the way the world treats Israel versus other
countries? If you don't know by now you probably never will. But
just in case, here is a terrific article, courtesy of www.FrontPageMagazine.com,
laying it out in the context of today's events in Lebanon, compared to
events in Lebanon during the fight between Israel and the terrorist group
The fighting in Lebanon has drawn global
condemnation. The Arab League has demanded an immediate halt to the
violence, and denounced what it calls the armys disproportionate response.
That a Lebanon-based terrorist group prompted the violence is irrelevant. The
issue is not this faction or that, according to Arab League Secretary General
Diplomats and heads of
state have also lined up against the war. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan has
deplored the armys excessive use of force and insisted that the collective
punishment of the Lebanese people must stop. European power
brokers have delivered comparably stern rebukes, with EU foreign policy
chief Javier Solana voicing his vocal disapproval and French Foreign Minister
Philippe Douste-Blazy calling the armys bombardment an irresponsible act.
It will not be lost
on the observant reader that the war in question is the Israeli armys
counteroffensive last summer against Hezbollah. Triggered by the Lebanese
terrorist groups illicit capture of Israeli soldiers, its naked violation of
Israeli sovereignty, and its ceaseless shelling of northern Israel, the war made
the Jewish state into an object of international vituperation. For daring to
defend herself against terror, Israel, not for the first time, was all but
banished from the society of civilized nations.
It is thus a
commentary on the shameful double standards of the international community
that the Lebanese armys ongoing efforts to root out the Palestinian terrorist
faction Fatah al-Islam from the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon
have met with an altogether different reception.
Take the Arab League. In contrast to its
resounding silence on the criminal aggression of Hezbollah, the organization has leapt to
defend Lebanon's right to act against terror. To that end, it has
issued a statement
in which it strongly condemned the criminal and terrorist acts carried out by
the terrorist group known as Fatah al-Islam. In addition, the league has
pledged to give its full support to the efforts of the army and the Lebanese
government to impose security and stability in Lebanon, even promising military
assistance the Lebanese army.
Equally, when Kofi Annans
successor Ban Ki-moon recently denounced criminal attacks in Lebanon, he was
referring to the Islamist assaults on the Lebanese military, rather than the
other way around. Javier Solana has also condemned this terrorist group,
committing the EU to full support for the Lebanese government. Even the Quai
d'Orsay has shifted its views. Incoming French Foreign Minister Bernard
Kouchner has reportedly traveled to Lebanon to meet Prime Minister Fuad
Siniora and "reaffirm France's solidarity with Lebanon." In short, the diplomatic
establishments line on the fighting in Lebanon is precisely the inverse of what
it was just one year ago.
No less revealing is what you
wont hear from these sudden converts to counterterrorism. You wont hear, for
instance, the Lebanese army assailed for its disproportionate response. This
is despite the fact that the army has vowed to fight until Fatah al-Islam has
been routed or killed, whichever comes first. As one Lebanese military
insider said last week: It will only end with the final end of this gang.
Parliament member Saad Hariri seconded the armys position, saying, We are not
in a hurry. If Arab leaders fear that this is a prescription for a
disproportionate response against Palestinian refugees, they have kept their
concerns private. One need only recall the outraged censure directed at Israels
comparatively halting and restrained strikes against Hezbollah targets to detect
hypocrisy at work.
Nor will you hear every accidental tragedy held up as
evidence of the injustice of military retaliation. Remember that during
last summers war, Israel was widely accused of intentionally targeting Lebanese
civilians, a claim that scanted the fact the Hezbollah terrorists were purposely
positioned in civilian areas. Human Rights
Watch (HRW) executive director Kenneth Roth accused Israel of indiscriminate
bombardment, while his HRW colleague Peter Bouckaert published an editorial
with the jarringly incendiary, and wholly unjustified, headline, For Israel,
Innocent Civilians Fair Game. HRW even published a lengthy report, Fatal
Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians in Lebanon, blaming
Israel for allegedly targeting
Now that Israelis are no longer guiding the missiles,
critics seem content to hold their fire. How else to explain that, despite the fact that at least
27 civilians have
been killed and 125 injured since the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) began their offensive on May 20, neither HRW
nor kindred human-rights watchdogs have directed the same level of scrutiny, not
to speak of censure, at Lebanon?
Indeed, next to the
relentless torrent of anti-Israel demagogy produced by HRW last summer, its
judgment of the fighting in Lebanon is a model of judicious restraint: Fatah
al-Islam militants must not hide among civilians, and the Lebanese army must
take better precautions to prevent needless civilian deaths, is all the
organization has had to say on the matter. Not even the fact that the Lebanese
armys shelling has indeed been indiscriminate -- eyewitness accounts attest to
countless missiles gone astray and the collateral damage from the current
fighting has been said to match the worst days of Lebanons civil war from
19751990 -- has generated the antipathy with which Israel was forced to
And what of the
notorious cycle of violence? That thoughtless clich, intended to equate
Israels defensive retaliation with the Islamic terrorism that makes it
necessary, was invoked endlessly throughout last summers war. But when a member
of Fatah al-Islam exploded his suicide belt in Tripoli last week, no one made
the absurd suggestion that Islamic terrorism and Lebanons militarily response
to it were essentially indistinguishable. Meanwhile, almost all Palestinian
factions have distanced themselves from Fatah al-Islam. Suddenly, the cycle of
violence has run its course.
Also vanishing in the
fog of the current war is another anti-Israel talking point. While Israels
detractors relish citing the alleged mistreatment of Palestinians as the chief
source of regional instability, Lebanon has generally escaped such criticism.
The irony is that Lebanons record in this regard is far worse. Whereas Israel
has sought to extend full civic equality to Arab citizens -- even, until
recently, going so far as to tolerate an Israeli-Arab parliamentarian, Azmi
Bishara, who openly cheered for Hezbollah during last summers war -- Lebanon
has unapologetically treated Palestinian refugees as a permanent subclass.
The reality is grim.
Under Lebanese law, Palestinians are denied property rights, access to state
schools and basic medical services, and even the right to legal work, with
poverty rates as high as 60 percent the inevitable result. Theres just not
much sympathy for Palestinians in Lebanon, says David Schenker, a senior fellow
in Arab politics at The Washington Institute. Nor are Lebanese unmindful of the
fact that extremism -- including support for groups like al-Qaeda -- is
nurtured in the Palestinian environment. Unsurprisingly, the military campaign
enjoys a broad consensus in Lebanon, and the LAFs [Lebanese Armed Forces]
campaign ignites popular support, Schenker observed in an interview this
It does not follow
from all this that Lebanon is wrong to bring its military might to bear on
Fatah al-Islam. On the contrary, whether the army succeeds in destroying the
al-Qaeda affiliated terror group has important consequences for US policy in the
region. The United States has a strong interest in
helping the Lebanese government root out Fatah al-Islam to prevent it from
turning Palestinian refugee camps into bastions of support for al-Qaeda attacks
on the U.S. and its allies, James Phillips, a Middle Eastern Affairs
analyst at the Heritage Foundation, tells FrontPage. Phillips points out that,
like the Taliban before it, Fatah al-Islam seeks to
violently impose its radical Islamic ideology on Palestinians and Lebanese,
disrupt Lebanons precarious stability, and use Lebanon as a base for terrorist
attacks against Israel and the U.S.
significance is that the fighting in Lebanon could bear directly on the U.S.-led
war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan. Shihab Al-Qaddour, reportedly Fatah
al-Islams second in command, recently explained his groups significance this
way: We adopt guerilla warfare, which no army can vanquish as demonstrated in
Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Defeating Fatah al-Islam would do much to
demonstrate that, contrary to popular belief, terrorist insurgencies are not
That other countries have
recognized the justice of Lebanons cause is a welcome development. Let it
not be forgotten, though, that many of those now rushing to declare
their solidarity with Lebanon turned their backs when it was the Jewish state in
the terrorists sights-
As I said before, if you don't know by now you probably never
Fortunately, in the USA most people are fully cognizant of the double
standard. But if you're one of those who pretends it doesn't exist,
consider this another proof that you'll have to add to your "ignore"
Let us all support Joe Wilson and get Rove, Cheney and others under oath
Mr. Libby has been tried by a jury of his peers and yet people like Henry
Kissinger, Mr. Disgrace Wolfowitz. and many other righties have said let him
go. Last night all of the Republican candidates said they would Pardon
He must be forced to serve immediately, so that he will be in jail for at
least 18 months before Bush pardons him. It will also give him a final
opportunity to tell the truth.
THE ACCURACY OF LEFTWING BLOGSITES
After my previous blog, it occurred to me that you might be wondering where
an otherwise intelligent guy like Barry could possibly be getting such
misinformation. Interestingly, Brian Maloney, at www.radioequalizer.blogspot.com
happens to have an excellent piece about this, specifically relating to the JFK
terrorist plot. Here it is:-
Bill O'Reilly, JFK Terror Plot, Think Progress
WAS ON PAGE
Lefty Attack Against Talkers Over JFK
Who are the
real "big fat"
After their assertion
was refuted even by the New York Times
itself, a nasty attack by liberal bloggers against conservative talk show hosts
After Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and other hosts
lambasted the Sunday New York Times for
burying news of the JFK terror plot bust, Think
Hounds and other lefties
accused them of lying.
By claiming the story actually was covered on page one and even asserting
that O'Reilly intentionally misled viewers by showing only the top part of the
page on camera, these smear sites were truly pulling a fast one.
Limbaugh said JFK terrorism plot coverage was found on page A30, O'Reilly says he found it on A37.
Over the weekend, four Muslims were
accused of planning to blowup JFK airport here in New York City. That comes on
the heels of six Muslims arrested for planning to kill U.S. soldiers in New
Jersey. But hey, don't be alarmed. According to John Edwards and The New York
Times, this is no big deal.And from
In Sunday's Times,
editor Bill Keller put the JFK story on, ready, page 37 right above a story
about kids playing at a Fuddrucker's restaurant. Every other New York City
paper had the Muslim suspects on page one, where they should have
Now apparently The Times isn't real concerned about Muslim guys
allegedly trying to set up another 9/11. On page one of Sunday's New York
Times was this story: some poor people in India making
RUSH: This terror plot.
As I say, I found this on page 30 of the New York Times. They didn't think it
was a big deal at all. Here's a report from CBS in New York: "Feds Say
Terrorist Plot Poorly Planned -- In the latest terrorist threat to New York
City, the alleged terrorists are all middle-aged men, the oldest 63-year-old
Guyanese immigrant Russell Defreitas." It's not Russell. He calls himself
"Mohammed." See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. One of these guys is
a citizen.From there,
Think Progress accused them of lying,
singling out O'Reilly here:
These are homegrown,
and whether or not their plot made any sense and whether or not it worked --
and it probably wouldn't have worked. The problem with blowing up jet fuel or
gasoline is, jet fuel is essentially kerosene, and it burns in a very narrow
range of fuel and air mixtures.
downplaying this as, "Well, this wouldn't have worked," and, 'These guys are
just a bunch of idiots." But that's not the point of this. The point of this
is, here we have the report. How many people now are going to be even more
nervous than they are about flying?
Bill OReilly calls the New York
Times quasi-socialistic and has placed the newspaper on his enemies list.
Last night, he devoted an entire segment of his show to attacking the Times
for not covering the arrests made in an alleged JFK airport terrorist plot on
the front page.The real
problem is that O'Reilly isn't
lying and neither was Rush. In the "evidence" provided by Think Progress, they point to a tiny, one
paragraph teaser found in the right sidebar.
In Sundays Times,
editor Bill Keller put the JFK story on ready page 37, right above a story
about kids playing at Fuddruckers restaurant, OReilly said. He claimed the
Times isnt real concerned about Muslim guys allegedly trying to set up
One problem: the New York
Times did cover the JFK terror plot on the front page of its Sunday edition.
You wouldnt know it from watching OReilly, who chose to show only the top
fold of the front page during his broadcast. Now Im not making this up, he
told his viewers. You see it. This is not the Colbert Report. This is The
Factor and this is the fact. But OReilly is
Not in a million years would
that qualify as front page coverage!
In fact, two Think Progress commenters were quick to bust
Please dont call me a troll
or a Republican for this but, he is right - the article is not headlined on
the front page. Theres a small reference to the story on the interior page
(metro section).From there, it gets worse: even
the New York Times admits it buried the
story! But it does have an excuse, though it seems weak. This is from
a reader Q & A with National Editor Suzanne
I receive the print version of the Times. I remember
thinking, thats good - theyve put this on page 37 instead of on the front
page, because, if previous terror scares are any indication, within 48 hours
this will have been downgraded from the end of the world to
Think Progress can do better, and 99 percent of the time
Comment by eddy tompkins June
5, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Im not a fan of OReally or Faux, but
from the picture given us of below the fold I cannot make out much of a
headline or whether the story is covered on the front page.
Comment by leftcoast June 5, 2007 @ 12:37
The J.F.K. Airport Bomb
Q. I live in California
and was astounded yesterday to look at my print edition of The Times for the
article on the J.F.K. bomb plot and to find it
back on page A30!
has happened with the news judgment of your colleagues? A terrorist plot that
could have badly damaged the entire economy of the nation, including those of
us who live in the Bay Area, and it's relegated to the level of bridge club
reports. You might wish to suggest to your editors that your readers do not
live in a vacuum, that we do have alternative sources for news and they only
make The Times look foolish with such ineptitude. No wonder your circulation
and advertising are falling; your editors are turning a once-honored newspaper
into a dinosaur in the electronic age.
-- Richard Godfrey, San
Q. Could you offer
some insights on how The Times decided to play the story about the alleged
J.F.K. terror plot? It was noticeably different than the way the other leading
national papers played it; your placement
(Metro) and coverage have been more skeptical. I'm particularly curious about
why it was not considered a national story, but rather, a local one.
A. Here's the basic thinking on the J.F.K. story: In
the years since 9/11, there have been quite a few interrupted terrorist plots.
It now seems possible to exercise some judgment about their gravity. Not all
plots are the same. In this case, law enforcement officials said that J.F.K.
was never in immediate danger. The plotters had yet to lay out plans. They had
no financing. Nor did they have any explosives. It is with all that in mind, that the editors in
charge this weekend did not put this story on the front page.
truth, the decision was widely debated even within this newsroom. At the front
page meeting this morning, we took an informal poll and a few editors thought
the story should have been more prominently played. Some argued it should have
been fronted, regardless of the lameness of the plot, simply because it was
what everyone was talking
Will O'Reilly, Limbaugh and the
other hosts who made this point get an apology from the smear websites? Don't
hold your breath. -
The problem? If someone only reads LAMB** sites like the ones cited by
Maloney, their frame of reference for news is entirely distorted by
the ideologies of those sites.
Are there rightwing sites that exaggerate and lie also? Sure.
That's why people who want to know what they're talking about may read them, but
will not rely 100% on them to the exclusion of every other source of
You don't get a well rounded education by looking at a semi-circle.
**Lunatic-left And Mega-moonbat Brigade