Tag: muslim

Ramsey Clark is Defending Saddam

H/T to Jay over at Stop the ACLU for the good word early this morning. Too bad I’m a lazy ass, posting 13 hours after the fact. We (errr, I) should for sure be back into the swing of things by tomorrow around here.

Ramsey Clark, the guy that defended ole Slobodan Milosevic, AKA “Sloppy-Joe Missle-Bitch”, will be seated next to Saddam Hussein through the rest of his trial. That is, assuming he doesn’t get whacked, which wouldn’t be all bad. From the BBC:

Former US attorney general Ramsey Clark, an outspoken critic of the trial, was seated alongside the defence team.

Mr Clark, 77, who flew in from the Jordanian capital Amman on Sunday, said he wanted to protect Saddam Hussein’s rights.

“A fair trial in this case is absolutely imperative for historical truth,” he told Reuters news agency.

The left-wing activist, who held office in the 1960s under President Lyndon Johnson, has previously described the special tribunal as a creation of the US military occupation.


What the fuck Clark? Saddam murdered thousands of people, and you want to make sure his rights, of all peoples, aren’t violated. I think Ramsey Clark just qualified himself for the “Douche Bag of the Year – 2006” award. Clark shouldn’t be allowed back into the U.S. He’s a freakin “enemy combatant” as far as I can tell. Jay has some to add:

Mr. Clark doesn’t have that great of a success record, but he has a long history as an international lawyer practicing his favorite pastime, America bashing, and defending America’s enemies. In 1985, the former Chairman of the National Advisory Counsel of the ACLU, filed a multimillion dollar lawsuit against his own country while defending Libya’s dictator, Qadaffi. In 1980, in the midst of the Iranian Hostage Crisis Ramsey flew to Tehran not to help the US hostages but to take part in a “Crimes in America” symposium.

Who the hell would sue their own country on behalf of another country? Stupid question I guess. The Washington Post has an article about Saddam’s defiance today. Other blogs on the subject:
Michelle Malkin
Protein Wisdom (w/ Original Content)
California Conservative
Evil Conservative
Thinklings
Donkey Stomp
Oblogatory Anecdotes

0

Murtha Unaware of Consequences

Congressman John Murtha (D-PA) is calling for an immediate withdrawal of American forces from Iraq. All the talk about Iraq deadlines and withdrawal dates recently must have the white flag industry here in the U.S. in a frenzy.

Murtha isn’t just some generic liberal hippie douche bag speaking of what he doesn’t know. Murtha served as a Marine and he’s a combat veteran of the Korean War and Vietnam. He’s served our country more than most people ever will.

The comments by the Pennsylvania lawmaker, who has spent three decades in the House, hold particular weight because he is close to many military commanders and has enormous credibility with his colleagues on defense issues. He voted for the war in 2002, and remains the top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.


Now, being such a highly respected member of the defense community, I’d expect him to put some thought into the consequences of our leaving Iraq immediately. Maybe he’s perfectly aware of possible consequences, but if he was I don’t think he’d have made that speech.

How would the troops serving in Iraq feel if we left immediately and in 3 months there’s another Saddam in place? Or even worse, one of the various radical muslim groups could take total control of the country. In either case, say buh-bye to the Kurds as an ethnic group.

Democrats will keep on pressuring the Bush administration to set deadlines until we’re totally out of Iraq. The entire world is in for a hell of a trip when democrats take control of congress and the white house again. I just hope they’re bright enough to realize what they’ve done shortly after they decide to let the islamo-nutjobs reign free. This isn’t a war in Iraq, it’s a war against an idea that growing numbers of muslims worldwide adhere to. That’s it, no way around it. I realize that it’ll take four or five different administrations before some democrats will acknowledge that.

I’m not sure we need to worry about these speeches encouraging the likes of Bin Laden and Zarqawi. I think we should worry more about this sort of thing getting really popular among Democrats and those who oppose the war on terror. Hopefully it won’t encourage the other lefties to really start whining and actually get something done in terms of some sort of troop pullout.

James Joyner of Outside The Beltway has a freakin huge post about Murtha’s speech. He’s got clips from major news outlets. He’s got clips from bloggers. Probably won’t get much better than his post if you’re looking for a roundup.

Professor Bainbridge thinks Iraq is a huge mistake and that leaving now would only compound that error. I can relate to that mentality somewhat though. I’ve come to the conclusion for myself though that going into Iraq was for the good of everyone. Waiting would have just provided more opportunity for attacks in the U.S. If we’re successful in establishing a totally self-contained, self-supported democracy in Iraq, it’ll be a key country in attacking radical muslim terrorists throughout the middle east.

Confederate Yankee has an update stating that Murtha said pretty much the same thing last year. Well, these statements are more likely to encourage a possibly damaging upheaval from Democrats. Maybe they’ll take a hostage. heh.

Brian over at Iowa Voice is noticing this theme too:

Seems like a theme of late, really. A so-called “party leader” comes out and says we must withdraw from Iraq “NOW!”, or face certain defeat. It must have been Representative John Murtha’s turn with the memo

Oh, and Mudville Gazette says the numbers Murtha used in his speech are misleading, sorta:

There have indeed been over 15,500 wounded. But of those, 8375 returned to duty within 72 hours – so although those wounds weren’t funny perhaps those wounds weren’t quite serious either. Still, 7347 troops have been wounded severely enough to require over 72 hours recuperation.

A lot of unscrupulous types who just want to pretend to “support the troops” ignore these facts in favor of the less correct (and more impressive) claim that 15,500 troops have been seriously wounded, or maimed, or mutilated. The real numbers are big enough – I just can’t understand why some feel the need to pad them.

Others currently blogging on this subject:
The Mahablog
Lorie Byrd @ Michelle Malkin
California Conservative
Don Surber
The Counterterrorism Blog
Blogs for Bush
Sister Toldjah
A Blog for All

Again, the key here is simply the fact that the war is against an idea, not Iraq or any specific geographic location.

Oh, in a related update, Dr. Rusty Shackleford is back to blogging. I think he doesn’t remember the nation being so “wobbly” a couple months ago. The amount of wobbly is the same, it’s just being screamed now, where it was shouted previously.

0

War, Not Candyland

Some Republican senators are calling “for Iraqi forces to take the lead next year in securing the nation and for the Bush administration to lay out its strategy for ending the war.” WHAT!?!

WASHINGTON, Nov. 14 – In a sign of increasing unease among Congressional Republicans over the war in Iraq, the Senate is to consider on Tuesday a Republican proposal that calls for Iraqi forces to take the lead next year in securing the nation and for the Bush administration to lay out its strategy for ending the war.

The Senate is also scheduled to vote Tuesday on a compromise, announced Monday night, that would allow terror detainees some access to federal courts. The Senate had voted last week to prohibit those being held from challenging their detentions in federal court, despite a Supreme Court ruling to the contrary.

Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who is the author of the initial plan, said Monday that he had negotiated a compromise that would allow detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to challenge their designation as enemy combatants in federal courts and also allow automatic appeals of any convictions handed down by the military where detainees receive prison terms of 10 years or more or a death sentence.

Well, it just doesn’t get any stupider than that. Why do we need legislation to tell the Iraqis what to do? Bush laying out the stragety is just retarted anyway. I mean, sure, a general overview is nice and has been given time and time again without much notice from those who should take notice.

It seems like congress is all about letting our enemy get one up on us. You don’t tell your enemy what your plans are in a war, that’s just how it works. Do they expect our enemy not to act on this information? “Now, we’re going to set a withdrawl strategy, but you can’t use this information against us.” I don’t think that’ll work, though they may believe that’s how it’ll work. Since when are our senators flat out pussies willing to cop-out so easily? And those detainees are not american citizens. They should not be allowed access to our federal court system. They should be held until it’s proven they hold no threat the the U.S. and our allies. We’re at war, this isn’t a fucking game of candyland.

Scott at ScrappleFace feels basically the same way. Zarqawi is gonna be happy about this! Scott is right, I mean, we might as well ask for Zarqawi’s input on this. While we’re at it we should probably just let the paris riots continue un-hindered. What do we gotta lose?

Others blogging include Michelle Malkin, Right Wing Nuthouse and Hugh Hewitt. Donklephant says this is a good thing, basically how Kerry said he would have handled the situation, minus the U.N. and quarterly senate reports. I’m all for letting the Iraqi citizens take total control of their country, just not yet. We have to make sure they’re 100% ready or we’ll be right back in the same place we were 5 years ago. We’ve started down this line and we need to follow through, there’s no going back.

UPDATE: Looks like Bush won’t be forced to divulge future war plans. Instead, 2006 “should be a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty.” From the AP via Yahoo News:

On the question of a timetable for troop withdrawal, senators rejected the Democrats’ proposal by 58-40. Democratic leaders had advanced the measure in the wake of declining public support for a conflict that has claimed more than 2,000 U.S. lives and cost more than $200 billion.

Republicans countered with their own nonbinding alternative that the Senate approved on a 79-19 vote. Five Democrats sided with the majority party.

Instead of calling for a withdrawal timetable, the GOP provision urged that 2006 “should be a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty,” with Iraqi forces taking the lead in providing security to create the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces.

0

Muslim Riots Continue

What a surprise! Lastnight saw the 18th consecutive night of muslim riots in Paris. 284 cars were set ablaze and 115 people were arrested. Since October 27th, 2,652 total arrests have been made. As usual, the Brussels Journal has a good roundup:

Hurrah! Last night was even “quieter” than the night before. According to French police statistics in the 18th consecutive night of rioting, there were violent incidents in 120 municipalities. In the whole of France 284 cars were set alight and 115 people were arrested, which brings the total number of arrests since the beginning of the riots on October 27 to 2,652. Five policemen were injured in Grenoble when a gas canister exploded in a dustbin that had been set alight. Paris was said to be “calm,” though other sources reported that a gas station had been set ablaze. The police announced that 68 cars were torched in Paris, compared to 76 the previous night. Michel Gaudin, the head of French police, said earlier that 86 vehicles burned in a single night is “about normal” in Paris. That, apparently, was more or less the pre-riot level in the capital of multicultural France.

Lyons was calm too: last night 15 cars were torched in France’s second largest city, one school was arsoned and another school was rammed with a car. Later today the French government is going to prolong the state of emergency until 21 February. The European Union will donate France 50 million euros to help recover from the damage, as if rioting is a kind of natural catastrophe, the French equivalent of Hurricane Katrina.


There’s really no major news outlets covering this anymore. I don’t think I saw anything on FoxNews about the paris riots over the weekend. CNN had a few minutes of video on their Headline News channel, but that was it. Maybe if they just ignore it the threat will just go away. Bird’s Eye View discusses a more general concept: Society before State. Good read.

The Dread Pundit Bluto has figured out the cause of the rioting, with the help of some lowly journalists . It’s caused by infants and their unwillingness to speak or learn any language at all. When will the wee ones learn?

0

The Imploding French Model

Curt at Flopping Aces linked to an interesting opinion piece discussing the Paris riots and the economic policies that caused them.

Through a combination of socialism at home and appeasement abroad, the French believed they had found a viable alternative to, in former Prime Minister Lionel Jospin’s phrase, “jungle capitalism,” as practiced by you know who. Jacques Chirac was more direct, condemning “ultra liberal Anglo-Saxon” economic policies, while also famously boasting that France would anchor a European pole in a “multipolar” world, with American influence vastly reduced. With 300 French cities in flames, French pretensions lie singed and shriveled.


The article places most of the blame soley on economic factors and Frances willingness to accept immigrants. Economic factors do play a factor, no doubt. I don’t think that’s the root of the problem though, it all goes back to radical Islam. Curt gets it:

While I agree that the French economic policies are a factor in the Paris riots, how do you explain the rioting in Germany and Belgium? You let Muslims take over neighborhoods in your country, almost giving them autonomy, then as soon as they get strong enough they will let you know that Islam has no borders and they will take the land by force. Radical Islam has no other goal then the destruction of the west, get it through your thick skulls liberals.

0