
Before

Now
...Virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone that renders us invincible. These are the tactics we should study. If we lose these, we are conquered, fallen indeed... Patrick Henry (1736-1799) US Founding Father
“Raiding American Forums is Among the Most Important Means of Obtaining Victory in the Fierce Media War... and of Influencing the Views of the Weak-Minded American”
“There is no doubt, my brothers, that raiding American
forums is among the most important means of obtaining victory in the fierce
media war... and of influencing the views of the weak-minded American who pays
his taxes so they will go to the infidel American army. This American is an
idiot and does not [even] know where Iraq is... [It is therefore] mandatory for
every electronic mujahid [to engage in this raiding].”“It is better that you raid non-political forums such as music forums and trivia forums... which American people... favor... Define your target[ed forum]... and get to know it well... Post your contribution and do not get into... futile arguments...”
Indicate You Are an American
“Obviously, you have to register yourself using a purely American name... Choose an icon that indicates that you are an American, and place it next to your nickname [in the forum].”“In my experience, the areas most visited in American forums... [are
titled] ‘Random Thoughts’ and ‘What’s going on in your mind?’... [The former]
takes priority in the American forums, and is highly popular. You should post
your contribution there... This should include films of the mujahideen in Iraq,
mujahideen publications in English, and images and films of the Americans’
crimes, [such as] killing unarmed civilians in Iraq... etc.”“Invent Stories About American Soldiers You Have [Allegedly] Personally Known”
“Obviously, you should post your contribution... as an American... You should correspond with visitors to this forum, [bringing to their attention] the frustrating
situation of their troops in Iraq... You should invent stories about American
soldiers you have [allegedly] personally known (as classmates... or members in a
club who played baseball and tennis with you) who were drafted to Iraq and then
committed suicide while in service by hanging or shooting themselves...”“Also, write using a sad tone, and tell them that you feel sorry for your [female] neighbor or co-worker who became addicted to alcohol or
drugs... because her poor fiancé, a former soldier in Iraq, was paralyzed or
[because] his legs were amputated... [Use any story] which will break their
spirits, oh brave fighter for the sake of God...”How to Make Americans Feel Frustrated With Their Government
“You should enter into debate or respond only if it is extremely necessary... Your concern should [only] be introducing topics which... will cause [them to feel] frustration and anger towards their government..., which will... render them hostile to Bush... and his Republican Party and make them feel they must vote to bring the troops back from Iraq as soon as possible.”“Do not... discuss issues pertaining to Arabs or Muslims
at all, whether negatively or positively... because this could be a trap for
you... In addition, do not ask people to circulate the material [you have
posted] in other forums... as these types of requests will expose you...”
These people have become caricatures of protesters. They embarrass us all with their anti-freedom message, their lies and their foolishness.

FORMERLY ATTRIBUTED TO JAMES ABBOTT MCNEILL WHISTLER
1834-1903
The Thames from Battersea Reach
Oil on canvas, 16 X 241/2" (40.64 x 62.23 cm.)
Signed, lower left
Museum purchase, 958-0-152
Since the time
of its first owner, New Yorker Edward Holbrook, The Thames from Battersea Reach
has been attributed to James Abbott McNeill Whistler. The painting shows the
embankment at Battersea Reach overlooking the Thames from Whistler's
neighborhood in Chelsea, with the factory smokestacks and church steeple of
Cremorne visible on the opposite shore, and interprets these much as Whistler
did around 1863-64, with predominantly gray coloring and swift, thin brushwork.
In recent years, it has been suggested that the painting is a document of
Whistler's friendship with Walter Greaves, and partially or wholly Greaves's
work.
When Andrew McLaren Young examined the painting around 1971, he felt that
the embankment and figure in the foreground, and the docked boats in the middle
distance did not ring true to Whistler, conjecturing that it might instead be
the work of Whistler's former pupil, Walter Greaves (1846-1930), an attribution
in which Young's co-author, Margaret MacDonald, concurred. A technical
examination of the painting revealed that the boats, embankment, and figure were
all made with the same paint, and that the inscription at the lower left,
"Whistler1863," which is not in Whistler's handwriting, was applied at the same
time as the surrounding passages of paint.
Walter Greaves was a native of Chelsea who met Whistler about 1863. He and
his brother Henry (1844-1904) operated rowboats for hire and regularly ferried
Whistler across the Thames so that he could make pastel sketches of the river,
particularly at night. When Whistler learned of the brothers' interest in art,
he invited them to his studio, where they gladly worked as his assistants and
errand boys. Whistler and his mother frequently visited the Greaves home, which
was very close to their own. Whistler described them as "the boat people, a sort
of Peggoty family. . . The two brothers were my first pupils."
The Greaves brothers became ardent admirers of Whistler, emulating his
manner of dress and comportment as well as his approach to art. Their only art
instruction seems to have consisted of carefully copying Whistler's sketches.
Walter Greaves worked alongside Whistler on some of his paintings and created
some of his own works by adding to canvases begun by Whistler. He also produced
etchings, pastels, and nocturnes reminiscent of Whistler's style.Whistler,
notoriously capricious in personal relationships, abruptly broke with the
Greaves brothers around 1872-73. Whistler's early biographers all agreed that
the loss of friendship was devastating to Walter Greaves, who took the rejection
personally. Although Whistler's associates still occasionally approached Greaves
for information about Whistler's painting technique and early years in Chelsea,
Greaves became increasingly withdrawn and isolated from the company of artists.
He continued to make paintings and drawings of Chelsea, many of which contained
memory images of Whistler, which he often inscribed with the date that
corresponded to the memory. As the years passed, Walter Greaves suffered
considerable impoverishment. He was reduced to selling scraps from Whistler's
studio and his own pastels and paintings for small sums to Chelsea visitors. The
manner of their sale led to their being later touted as previously unknown works
by Whistler.Both Andrew McLaren Young and Margaret MacDonald suggested that here
Greaves may have depicted Whistler standing at the embankment at Battersea
Reach, sketching the Thames as he would have done in 1863 when Greaves first
knew him. The inscription "Whistler-1863" would then be Greaves's identification
of the subject rather than the date of his contribution, which may have been in
the 1880s. The background is possibly Whistler's work, an unfinished view to
which Greaves may have added.
DIANA STRAZDES
Battle of Thermopylae
Despite their defeat by the Athenians at the Battle
of Marathon in 490 BC, the Persians were not finished with their determination
to conquer mainland Greece. For the Persians, Marathon barely registered; the
Persians after all controlled almost the entire world: Asia Minor, Lydia, Judah,
Mesopotamia, and Egypt.
The loss at Marathon was no more than an irritation
to the Persians. Darius was unable to respond immediately to his defeat because
of rebellions on the other end of his empire. While he was quelling these, he
was killed in battle. King Xerxes, son of Darius, ascended to the throne of
Persia after his father's death in 486 BC. After securing his throne, Xerxes
began to muster forces to once again invade Greece. He was determined to avenge
his father's defeat. By 480 BC, Xerxes had built up an enormous army of some one
hundred fifty thousand men and a navy of six hundred ships. Peoples
from many little-known nations in the vast empire of Xerxes joined in the army
of the Great King to invade little Greece. Following the chariot of Or'muzd are
soldiers from India, Thrace, Chal'y-be'a and both Ethiopias
The
Greeks heard of Xerxes army amassing and were better prepared for the invasion
than in the first Persian War (the Battle of Marathon). Athenians and Spartans
combined with about 29 other city-states, under the leadership of Sparta to
oppose this powerful army and the Athenians contributed a fleet of 200
triremines for their navy.
Themistocles, an Athenian general, convinced the
Athenians that the battle would be won at sea and that the profits from a newly
discovered silver mine should be used to build a navy. He knew that the Persian
army could only succeed if it were successfully supported by supplies and
communications provided by the fleet.
Travel by sea was perilous;
armies always traveled by land when possible. Xerxes decided to cross the
Bosporus and travel by way of Thrace, Macedonia and Thessaly. To cross the
Bosporus, he had a boat bridge built with each boat connected to the other with
planks. This bridge would be over a mile long and required a perfectly calm sea.
On several attempts winds and rough seas broke it apart. Frustrated and enraged,
Xerxes ordered that the Bosporus receive three hundred lashes with a chain.
Properly chastened, the sea remained calm and the bridge was
completed.
Some Greek city-states in the north submitted to the
Persians rather than face destruction. One reason was because the stronger
city-states in the south, such as Athens, Sparta and Thebes, had decided not to
meet Xerxes in the north. Thus these latter city-states stood alone against the
Persian giant. The Greeks together had three hundred ships and ten thousand men,
with the ability to raise about fifty thousand. They were led by King Leonidas
of Sparta who brought with him three hundred Spartans. The small turnout of
Sparta resulted from a disagreement as to where best to meet the Persians.
Sparta wanted to fight at the Isthmus of Corinth, others wanted to fight further
north and Athens still insisted that the war would be won or lost at sea.
The
Greeks realized that it was imperative that Xerxes be delayed as long as
possible so that the Athenians could desperately build up their navy. They
decided to send an expeditionary force north to meet Xerxes, to fight the
Persians at hopeless odds, and to sacrifice themselves in order to improve the
chances of ultimate victory. They decided to take this stand at
Thermopylae.
The Greek army, led by King Leonidas of Sparta, was about ten
thousand strong and in position at Thermopylae, when the Persians arrived.
Xerxes was incredulous that they would take a stand against his immense army.
After impatiently waiting four days while warning them to surrender, he launched
a massive attack. The Greeks, as at the Battle of Marathon, initially retreated
drawing the Persian army into the narrow pass. Then they turned and waged a
furious battle against the limited number of Persian who had entered the pass,
thoroughly routing them. Time and again the attacking Persians, including the
elite immortals, were unable to get through.
Unfortunately, a Greek
traitor named Ephialtes told Xerxes of an alternate route around the pass. He
led a large part of the Persian army to attack the Greek forces from the rear.
Leonidas learned of this treachery and decided to evacuate the Greek army while
holding the pass with only three hundred other Spartans long enough for the army
to make an organized retreat. The battle at Thermopylae ended with every last
Spartan fighting until they were killed. This distraction gave enough time for
the rest of the Greek army to retreat into southern Greece. Ephilates
expected to be rewarded by the Persians but this came to nothing when they were
defeated at the Battle of Salamis. He then fled to Thessaly with a bounty
on his head. According to Herodotus he was killed for an apparently
unrelated reason by Athenades of Trachis around 479 B.C.After this battle, the
Persian army advanced into central Greece and marched into Athens burning and
sacking it late in the summer of 480 BC. However, the Athenians had already
evacuated to the city of Salamis on an island west of Athens where the Greek
naval fleet was also positioned and prepared for a last stance against the
Persian powerhouse. This fight would be known as the Battle of
Salamis.
The Battle of Salamis
After the
Battle of Thermopylae, Athens was in despair. The Athenians knew that their city
would surely be destroyed by the Persians. There was simply no place between the
Persians and Athens where the Greeks dared to risk battle. Most of the Athenians
fled to the island of Salamis where they watched their city burn and placed
their trust in the fleet.
Knowing that winter would soon be arriving, Xerxes
decided on a naval assault on the remaining Athenians and their naval forces
stationed at Salamis. This great naval battle was fought between the Greeks and
Persians in 480 BC in the narrow straight between Salamis and Attica. The
Persian fleet was lessened somewhat because of a storm but it was still a vastly
larger force than the Greeks. The Persians had around seven hundred ships, the
Greeks around three hundred. The Spartans and other allies were encamped in the
Isthmus of Corinth, awaiting the outcome of the sea battle.
Xerxes was sure
of victory. He had his throne placed on a hill overlooking the sea, in part to
savor his victory and in part so his commanders would know that their king was
watching them.
The Greek forces were led by Themistocles, an
Athenian statesman, who was responsible for devising the strategy used during
the battle. However, he was not the general who carried out the plan; this was
done by Eurybiades, a Spartan commander. Many of the captains of ships of
Athen's allies were threatening to sail away to protect their own city
states. They feared that the much larger Persian fleet would destroy them.
Themistocles used a ruse to prevent them from fleeing. He sent a spy to the
Persians telling them that they should come at once and block the pass so the
Greeks could not escape. The Persians took the bait and sailed into the
harbor. There was nothing to do now for the Greek navy but to
fight!
The lighter Greek ships rowed out in a circular fashion and
rammed the front of their ships into the Persian vessel . The narrow straight,
the speed and maneuverability of the Greek ships and their knowledge of the
waters enabled them to sink two hundred Persian ships.
Some were
captured and the rest fled back to their bases in Asia Minor. King Xerxes, upon
seeing this great defeat at Salamis, headed back to Persia with what was left of
his navy and part of his army.
Xerxes was not done with Greece. He left
behind a sizable force under the command of the Persian general Mardonius. These
troops would be involved in the final of the Persian Wars, the Battle of
Plataea.
Battle of Plataea
At the Battle of
Salamis the Persian navy, despite its vastly superior numbers, suffered heavy
losses and was utterly defeated by the tactics of the Greeks in the narrow
straights. King Xerxes, upon seeing his great defeat, headed back to Persia with
what remained of his navy and part of his army. He left behind a huge force
under the command of the Persian general Mardonius. With winter approaching,
Mardonius withdrew from Athens, burned everything in his path, and settled in
central Greece to spend the winter. That portion of the Greek army led by the
Spartans and numbering about thirty nine thousand men, had been waiting at
Corinth for the outcome of the Battle of Salamis. They joined up with the
remaining Athenian army. The battlefield to drive the remaining Persian army
from Greece was to be at the city of Plataea. The battle took place in the
spring of 479 BC. The well trained Spartans, under the leadership of their King
Pausanias, fought strongly and withstood the charge of the Persians. The bravery
and discipline of the Greek army eventually defeated the Persians, killing
Mardonius and most of his army.
At the same time the Helenic league
sailed across the Aegean and destroyed the main Persian fleet at Mycale
triggering another revolt against the Persians in the Greek city-states of Asia
Minor. The victory over Persia was the greatest of all victories won by the
Greeks. It meant that Greece would stay Greek and not be absorbed into the
Persian Empire as had so many other cultures. It meant that Greek influence
would live and grow, to be spread further by Alexander and to be preserved and
extended by Rome.
A Strange Sequel To The Battle Of
Plataea
Pausanias
The next year after Plataea, Sparta
sent Pausanias, the hero of that great battle, to command the allied fleet and
drive the Persians from the Aegean. Pausanias took Cyprus; he expelled the
Persians from Byzantium, but his victories turned his head; he grew puffed up
with pride. Ambition awoke in his heart , and he entered into plots with
Xerxes-plots to betray all Hellas into the Great Kings hands. He planned to
wed Xerxes daughter and make himself King of all Greece, subject only to
Persia. As he dreamed these elaborate dreams, he began to treat the allies as
though he were already their royal lord and master; he adopted Persian dress,
protected himself with a bodyguard of Persians and Egyptians, and introduced
into his household all the luxurious habits and customs of the East.
Hearing
of these intrigues, Sparta recalled Pausanias, but nothing was proved against
him. He hired a Trireme for himself and returned to the scene of action. A
second time Sparta recalled him, and now he was secretly plotting with the
always dissatisfied Spartan slaves, the ever rebellious Helots, promising them
their freedom and the rights of Spartan citizens if they would rise up and
overthrow the government of Sparta; but once again actual proof could not be
found against him. Argilius, his servant, however, being sent to Persia with a
letter, began to think that no messenger who had been previously snet on such an
errand by Pausanias, had ever returned alive; so he secretly opened the letter
and found therein directions that the Persians were to slay him as soon as he
arrived. Therefore he delivered the message to the ephors of Sparta instead of
to the Persians, revealing all his masters plots.
Pausanias fled for refuge
to the temple of Athene; but the people, in their anger, hearing of his
treachery, blocked up the door with stones, and the aged mother of the traitor,
with the spirit of a true Spartan, laid the very first stone. So Pausanias was
left to die of hunger and thirst in the temple, and the allies refused to
receive another Spartan admiral as commander of the fleet. Thereupon Sparta,
sulking, withdrew from the Persian War.
Themistocles
And now it
was found that Themistocles had likewise been involved in these base intrigues
of Pausanias. He was not just then at Athens, for he had been ostracized because
the people now favored his rival, Aristides, who had returned from exile. His
plots with Pausanias were doubtless concerned with nothing more than the
uprising of the Helots; for Themistocles would have liked to embarrass the
jealous Sparta by a rebellion of her slaves; but the people assumed that he,
too, had been intriguing with Persia. He was accused of high treason, and men
were sent to arrest him. He fled across to Asia, pursued by Athenian officers,
and seeking an asylum in the quaint and simple castle of Admetus, King of
Molosia. The King was away from home, but the Queen with old fashion simplicity,
was sitting by the hearth with her child. The queen bade Themistocles take the
infant in his arms as he made his appeal to the King. So when the King returned
and found the stranger holding his babe, he refused to give up his guest, and
saved him from his pursuers.
For years Themistocles hid in towns on the
coast of Asia, but at last he went to Persia, and became governor of Magnesia
under the Kings of Kings! Thus the heroes of Plataea and Salamis both ended
their days in the service of that great power whom they had given all their best
energies to destroy, a curious twist of character which has besmirched so much
of the brilliant history of Greece.
Jews fabricated Sparta. Didn't happen. Never existed. Persia actually won. Spartans were filthy Jews. Long live leisure suit man.
“The primary military lesson of Vietnam was that you could win a war on
the battlefield, but lose it at home,” he said in an e-mail to Stars and
Stripes. “We feel that although there are still tough days ahead, we are going
to win the war in Iraq as long as we are allowed to stay until our job is
done.”
...KSM delivered a closing statement in broken English that contains
eloquent statements about the nature of war and America’s predisposition to
define.
KSM makes a statement that many in a liberal arts college would find
familiar; that it is often the winner of a war that dictates its history. If
Britain had beaten out the colonies in the Revolutionary War, he insinuates,
George Washington would not be a hero, but an ‘enemy combatant:’ a
terrorist...
He is saddened by the deaths of the 3000 civilians in Sept. 11,
especially the lives of children, but points out that America too, when pursuing
a target, will knowingly bomb houses with children and innocents inside.
...
Now we are calling killing terrorism, he says, whereas centuries
earlier we called it “manifest destiny” as America wiped out Indian populations.
A shrewd point. ...
He is likewise preoccupied by making the point that Islam is not a
bloodthirsty religion. ...there are exceptions to injunctions against violence
found in the Qur’an. It is our “bad luck,” he says, to be included in that
exception. ...
Killing is killing, and we need to stop defining our actions as noble
and holy and the terrorists’ as evil and inhuman. KSM seems as saddened by the
seeming inevitability of war as any pacifist.
He just wants us to admit that there are victims on both sides - that,
to some suffering communities who have been on the wrong end of American bombs, Americans are the inhuman ‘enemy combatants.’(emphasis mine)
Oh . . SPAAAAARRRRRRRRE ME this bullshit. He did 9/11 and the 1993 WTC
attacks?
Really? I spoke to Sadat's military bodyguard *directly* in 1993 in
Manhattan, who, full of fear and horror and about to leave the USA, told me
*directly* that he was involved with the 1993 attacks in conjunction with the
FBI. He was told by the FBI that what he was doing was a practice sting. It
wasn't. It was real.
This Mohammed guy's been tortured in Guantanamo to come up with a story
ignorant Americans will buy. Bullshit baffles brains.
By: midtown on March 14, 2007 at 08:18pm Flag: [abusive]
So what?When will our former president, and current unremoved
traitor George W. Bush confess to misleading America into an unnecessary war on
false pretenses, solely to profit the war cartels and the oil cartel?
When will the worst president since Andrew Johnson be impeached for his
High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and convicted of Treason for sending our soldiers
and marines to their deaths on a lie?
By: DocTwain on March 14, 2007 at 08:19pm Flag: [abusive]
This guy is a Sunni and part of the Muslim Brotherhood out of Kuwait
and Egypt aka Mujahideen. The mujahideen were significantly financed, armed, and
trained by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the Carter
and Reagan administrations, Saudi Arabia, the People's Republic of China,
several European countries and Pakistan (during the Zia-ul-Haq military regime).
The Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was the interagent used in the
majority of these activities to disguise the sources of support for the
resistance in Afghanistan.
This is very bad news for the Bush/Cheney swine herd and the current
leadership in Pakistan.
Are the 9/11 Conspiracy nuts not so insane after all?
By: getoffmedz on March 14, 2007 at 08:19pm Flag: [abusive]
If you individually pulled the hairs out of my ass and nailed me with a
frozen cactus, I'd admit to inventing the magnolia tree too.
By: afraidtoland on March 14, 2007 at 08:10pm Flag: [abusive]

Climate change blamed for cockroach migration
Climate change is being blamed for a changing of the guard among Sydney's cockroach population.
Researchers say the most common sub-species in city households was the german cockroach, until it disappeared about seven years ago.
Martyn Robinson from the Australian Museum says the Australian house cockroach, methana marginalus, which likes warmer climates, has begun moving in.
"It's most likely to be the...warmer climate," he said.
"They certainly have appeared for many many years just on little spot occurrences
where somebody will find this funny little cockroach that's probably come in on
their suitcase from a trip up to Queensland."Quite likely these ones have also arrived down the same way but they are now breeding."

Of course, being the LA Times they had to put some digs in on our President. If they didn't, well, that would tear a hole in reality, because they are the LA Times after all.
EDITORIAL
Do we really need a Gen. Pelosi?
Congress can cut funding for Iraq, but it shouldn't micromanage the war.
March 12, 2007
AFTER WEEKS OF internal strife, House Democrats have brought forth their proposal for forcing President Bush to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq by 2008. The plan is an unruly mess: bad public policy, bad precedent and bad politics. If the
legislation passes, Bush says he'll veto it, as well he should.
It was one thing for the House to pass a nonbinding vote of disapproval.
It's quite another for it to set out a detailed timetable with specific
benchmarks and conditions for the continuation of the conflict. Imagine if
Dwight Eisenhower had been forced to adhere to a congressional war plan in
scheduling the Normandy landings or if, in 1863, President Lincoln had been
forced by Congress to conclude the Civil War the following year. This is the
worst kind of congressional meddling in military strategy.
Do Democrats actually believe voters have forgotten?
NASCAR Nation Fires Back at Left Coast Lawmakers
Last Edited: Friday,
02 Mar 2007, 5:55 PM EST
Created: Friday, 02 Mar 2007, 5:55 PM ESTBy ERIC WHITE
FOX8
NewsFOX8 WGHP -- To no one's surprise (in this newsroom anyway),
NASCAR fans in the Piedmont don’t like being stereotyped as toothless, white
trash rednecks.The remarks were made after a group including Richard Petty and
Darrell Waltrip went before Washington state lawmakers about wanting to build a race track in the Evergreen State.Washington state representative Larry Seaquist made this comment about NASCAR fans with southern roots: “These people are not the kind of people you would want living next door to you. They’d be the ones with the junky cars in the front yard and would try to slip around the law.”
Local NASCAR fans we talked with agreed to disagree with the stereotype.
"I do take tremendous offense at that negative response," said Helen Brooks.
"It is part of the cultural heritage here,” said fellow fan Bill
Schilling. “It's not something people probably would appreciate being made
fun of."At Richard Childress Vineyards, we ran into some non-race fans, who also
think the stereotypes of the sport and the south are unfair.“I don’t think this man has ever been to North Carolina to see what we're really like,” said Bert Wood. “He (Rep. Seaquist) has no taste either and he's obviously not very intelligent."
What does NASCAR team owner and wine expert Richard Childress think
about all of this? “Evidently he knows absolutely nothing about what he's
talking about,” said Childress. “I was always brought up to say if you
can't say something good about someone, don't say it, but I'm going to brake
this rule. This guy is full of _____" (you can fill in the
blank).Another Washington state lawmaker made some nasty comments toward Richard Petty. Speaker of the House Frank Chopp implied the King of NASCAR looked
like a drunken felon, saying “You mean the guy who got picked up for DUI?"For the record, Mr. Petty does not drink alcohol. A spokesperson for Petty
said Chopp later apologized and the team owner considers the issue over and done with.= = =Note: Here is how you can contact Rep. Larry Seaquist
E-mail: seaquist.larry@leg.wa.gov
Phone: (360) 786-7802
Snail mail:Rep. Larry Seaquist
P.O. Box 40600317 John L. O’Brien
Bldg.Olympia, WA 98504-0600
WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI improperly and, in some cases, illegally used the
USA Patriot Act to secretly obtain personal information about people in the
United States, underreporting for three years how often it forced businesses to
turn over customer data, a Justice Department audit concluded Friday.
[...]
The audit blames agent error and shoddy record-keeping for the bulk of the
problems and did not find any indication of criminal misconduct.(emp. mine)
Hello from Baghdad.
I and a Vietnam vet friend of mine have launched a new site, AppealForCourage.org which allows
active duty military to (legally) tell Congress and the media that they should
support our mission, and that their criticism does hurt our morale while
emboldening our enemies.
This site is partly in response to the leftist site AppealForRedress [edit:
Grayhawk has more about this over at the Mudville Gazette]. It was created by a big money group and given a free pass by the media. I don’t have any money for advertising, and I don’t expect the media to help.
If you folks could help publicize it in other websites and to your military
friends, I think we could get thousands of signatures and have an impact at this
crucial juncture in the war. Thank-you for your help.
V/r,LT Jason Nichols, USN
MNF-I, Baghdad
Murtha shames those in uniform.
h/t Signaleer
Hi everyone. I'm still alive but freezing my tail off. We got 8 inches of
snow last week and it reached 5 degrees below zero that night. That's not
why I'm e-mailing though.
You may have heard about a suicide car bomb attack in Kabul last Thursday.
It was at one of our FOB's (Forward Observation Bases) about 27 miles from
here.
But the real story is why no one was killed. We employ several thousand
Afghans on our various bases. Not to mention the economy that is fed by the
money these locals are making. Some are laborers and builders, but some are
skilled workers. We even have one Afghan that just became OSHA qualified, the
first ever. Some are skilled HVAC workers.
Anyway, there is this one Afghan that we call Rambo. We have actually given
him a couple of sets of the new ACU uniforms (the new Army digital camouflage)
with the name tag RAMBO on it. His entire family was killed by the Taliban and
his home was where our base currently resides. So this guy really had nowhere
else to go.
He has reached such a level of trust with US Forces that his job is to
stand at the front gate and basically be the first security screening. Since he
can't have a weapon, he found a big red pipe. So he stands there at the front
gate in his US Army ACU uniform with his red pipe. If a vehicle approaches the
gate too fast or fails to stop he slams his pipe down on their hood... He's like
the first line of defense.
Last Thursday at 0930 hrs a Toyota Corolla packed with explosives and some
Jack Ass that thinks he has 72 Virgins waiting for him approached the gate. When
he saw Rambo he must have recognized him and known the gig was up. But he needed to get to the gate to detonate and take American lives. So he slams his foot on the gas which almost causes the metal gate to go up but mostly catches on the
now broken windshield.
Rambo fearlessly ran to the vehicle, reached thru the window and jerked
the suicide bomber out of the vehicle before he could detonate and commenced
to putting some red pipe to his heathen ass. He detained the guy until the
MP got there. The vehicle only exploded when they tried to push it off base
with a robot but know one was hurt.
I'm still waiting for someone to give this guy a medal or something.
Nothing less than instant US citizenship or something. A hat was passed around
and a lot of money was given to him in thanks by both soldiers and civilians
that are working over here.
I guess I just wanted to share this because I want people to know that it's
working over here. They have tasted freedom. This makes it worth it to me.

THE MOBBING OF THE CRISIS
by EUGENE H. ROSEBOOM
Professor of History, Ohio
State University
On the night of March 5, 1863, in the midst of the Civil
War, the capital city of Ohio was the scene of a species of violence
that had more than local significance. The office of Samuel
Medary's Crisis, a weekly newspaper that had won both national
acclaim and condemnation for its opposition to the war, was
wrecked by a crowd of armed men. Some writers have
attributed the act to soldiers, others to soldiers and civilians; nearly
all explain it as the work of a mob. A bit of contemporary evidence
has come to light which reveals clearly who the participants were
and which raises doubts as to the accuracy of the use of the word
"mob" in describing the attack.
[...]
Military arrests of allegedly disloyal editors and the more
illegal destruction of their presses in the years 1862-64 were
practices that became far too common in a nation that had prided
itself on the complete freedom of its press.2 The stresses of a
great civil war loosed passions Americans had never felt before,
and the term "Copperhead" became synonymous with
"Confederate" to those who believed that the Union could be saved
only by victory on the field of battle. The soldiers in particular
were incensed at the peace advocates. They blamed Copperheadism
for prolonging the war by encouraging the belief in the South
that the North was divided and that an armed uprising might
occur which would bring about the overthrow of the Lincoln
administration and make possible a Confederate victory.
Mayor Fernando Wood denounced the Lincoln administration and
contemplated New York secession, proposing a separate republic on Manhattan
island. Two years later, amid the horrific racial violence of the draft
riots, Governor Horatio Seymour openly sympathized with white rioters,
voicing an unrepentant Copperhead vision of the war.
As the Pulitzer-Prize winning book, Gotham described, “in the fall 1862
elections, after the Preliminary Proclamation, Peace Democrats bid for power.
In the city, ex-mayor Wood and his supporters denounced the administration
as ‘fanatical, imbecile, and corrupt’ and openly urged resistance to
emancipation. At the state level, Peace Democrat Horatio Seymour (allied to
New York Central Railroad interests) adopted a similar stance, favoring
restoration of the Union by granting all possible concessions to the South.
Both resorted to a shrill racism, protesting that emancipation substituted
‘niggerism for nationality.’ In the context of growing unhappiness with the
costs of war, Democrats carried every ward in the city, Wood won a
congressional seat, and Seymour captured the governorship.
Pamphleteers attacked the rising war debt, the government’s military
strategy, and the Republican Party’s centralizing project and agitated for a
negotiated peace and a revocation of emancipation. Belmont also promoted
these ideas in the New York World, a newspaper edited by
twenty-seven-year-old Manton Marble, which he, Tilden, and other rich
Democrats underwrote.
In addition, in his capacity as Democratic Party national chairman, Belmont
began grooming the cashiered General George McClellan to challenge Lincoln in
1864. After being fired, McClellan moved to New York City and began working
with Chairman Belmont on building a presidential candidacy. He took with him
as his aide Lieutenant George Armstrong Custer, who now received his first
introduction to the financial, political, and journalistic elite of the
metropolis.
While the Society for the Diffusion of Political Knowledge took the
(relatively) high road, the popular press launched a gloves-off campaign that
mixed racism, solidarity with labor, attacks on war profiteers, and,
increasingly, calls for peace. At various points the Lincoln administration
banned “Copperhead” papers from the mails. Republican infringements of civil
liberties generated more support for Peace Democrats. The Lincoln
administration suspended habeas corpus and arrested or detained hundreds. In
New York City political prisoners were housed in Fort Lafayette, just off the
Brooklyn shore from Fort Hamilton. When Ohio Democrat Clement L. Valandigham
was indicted for seditious oratory, Fernando Wood chaired a meeting at Cooper
Institute in his support.
June 1863 was the high point of antiwar activism in the city. Wood held a
massive Peace Convention at Cooper Union on June 3-of which James
Gordon Bennett’s Herald approved, auguring a new respectability-and orators
pounded home the ideas that the war was a rich man’s fight, that it was
undermining the Constitution, and that it would flood the North with southern
blacks.”
On our side we suffered heavy losses both of officers and troops, and about
200 wounded, a regrettable loss but small if one considers the strong position
of the enemy and its kind. The former insult which we have received has been
avenged. His Excellency the President made a beautiful speech to all of the
divisions inside the Alamo in view of the dead enemies, and is pleased with everyone's behavior.
anonymous Mexican soldier
They were even raised on the points of the enemy's lances, let down and raised
again and again, whilst invoking as a favor, instantaneous death to terminate
their anguish, till they were at last too weak to speak, and then expired in
convulsion. Susanna Dickinson
Santa Anna took much notice of him, and questioned him about Texas and the state
of the army.-Among other things, he asked if there were many soldiers from the
United States in the army, and if more were expected? On being answered in the
affirmative, he sneeringly said he had men enough to march to the city of
Washington if he chose. Joe.
This was the fate of poor Crockett, and in which there can be no mistake.
Who the five others were, I have not been able to learn. Three other wounded
prisoners were discovered and brought before "His Excellency," and were ordered
to be instantly shot. There are certain reasons why the name of the narrator of
these events should not be made known. I will only repeat that he was an
eye-witness. anonymous Source: Morning Courier and New York Enquirer on July 9, 1836
Sixty-two Texans who sallied from the east side of the fort, were received
by the Lancers and all killed. Only one of these made resistance; a very active
man, armed with a double barrel gun and a single-barrel pistol, with which he
killed a corporal of the Lancers named Eugenio. These were all killed by the
lance, except one, who ensconced himself under a bush and it was necessary to
shoot him. Manuel Loranca (Mexican Sergeant)
So there was not a man left. Even a cat that was soon after seen running
through the fort, was shot, as the soldiers exclaimed: "It is not a cat, but an
American."
The slain were collected in a pile and burnt.Fernando Urriza (Mexican Colonel)
The French Constitutional Council has approved a law that criminalizes the
filming or broadcasting of acts of violence by people other than professional journalists.

| You Are a Smart American |
'I've often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of
scientists on the global warming issue, that humans are causing a catastrophic
change to the climate system,' says John Christy, Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center, NSSTC University of Alabama. 'Well I am one scientist, and there are many, that simply think that is not true.'
Guardian article misrepresents the advisers' view
Today’s Guardian article (“Military Chiefs Give US Six Months to Win
Iraq War”) misrepresents the Baghdad advisers. So much so, it makes me doubt the
reliability of the single, unidentified source responsible for much of the
article’s reporting.
I hope SWJ colleagues will forgive this more "personal" post than usual,
but as Senior Counterinsurgency Adviser I have a duty to set the record straight
on this.
There is a real country called Iraq, where a real war is going on, with
real progress but very real challenges. We are not going to "win the war" in six
months -- nor would anyone expect to. But the Guardian seems to be describing
some completely different, (possibly mythical) country, and some imaginary group
of harried and depressed advisers bearing no resemblance to reality. As
counterinsurgency professionals, we take an evidence-based approach and we are
well aware of the extremely demanding task we face. That makes us cautious
realists -- but we are far from pessimists, as the Guardian's anonymous source
seems to imply.
The article is littered with inaccuracies:• the “advisers” are not bunkered
down in the Green Zone, but in another location, and frequently out on the
ground.
• the article (incorrectly) describes me as a serving military officer
– I’m a civilian diplomat, as any source truly familiar with the team's thinking
would be well aware.
• while recognizing the severity of the challenge, the team's mood is far from pessimistic. Success will take months or years, not weeks or days, and although early signs are somewhat encouraging it's really far too early to say how things will play out. The war has been going for four years, the new strategy for less than four weeks. Give it time.
• the State department is not failing to meet its personnel targets. On the contrary, more than 90 % of civilian positions in Iraq are filled, and we will grow to 20
Provincial Reconstruction Teams soon.
• the coalition is far from disintegrating – British redeployment from the South reflects improved security, not lack of will, and the same day the British announced their move the Australians announced a force increase in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
• The plan is not “unclear” or “constantly changing” – we all know exactly what the
plan is. The article seems to be mistaking the freedom and agility which have
been granted to us, allowing us to respond dynamically to a dynamic situation,
for vacillation.