Follow by Email

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Hillary And Others Running For The Hills

Hey folks,

I do not have much time today, this is why I wrote the daily article last night. But then I just saw this. That was fast. But this SHOULD be far from over. According to AP-Clinton to give away fundraiser's cash By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer Wed Aug 29, 11:22 PM ET

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton will give to charity the $23,000 in donations she has received from a fundraiser who is wanted in California for failing to appear for sentencing on a 1991 grand theft charge.

$23,000? That’s it? What about all the other money that Hsu “arranged” to be given to her? The money given to her by those that CLEARLY could not have afforded the “gifts?”

The decision came Wednesday as other Democrats began distancing themselves from Norman Hsu, whose legal encounters and links to other Democratic donors have drawn public scrutiny in the past two days.

Sens. Edward Kennedy and John Kerry, both of Massachusetts, also planned to turn over Hsu's contributions to charity. Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein of California; Al Franken, a Senate candidate in Minnesota; Reps. Michael Honda and Doris Matsui of California; and Rep. Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania also said they would divest Hsu's contributions.

Hsu is a fundraiser for Clinton and is described as a devoted fan of the presidential candidate and New York senator. He had planned to co-host a money event for Clinton on Sept. 30. In a statement Wednesday, Hsu said he believed he had resolved his legal issues, but said he would halt his work raising political money.

"I would not consciously subject any of the candidates and causes in which I believe to any harm through my actions," he said. "Therefore, until this matter is resolved, I intend to refrain from all fundraising activities on behalf of all candidates and causes."

“I intend to refrain from all fundraising activities on behalf of all candidates and causes."
You should be going to JAIL.

Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer said the $23,000 included contributions from Hsu to Clinton's presidential campaign, her Senate re-election and her political action committee. The campaign did not plan to return any money Hsu raised from other donors, Singer said.

Of Course. {Laughing} That may change though.

"In light of the information regarding Mr. Hsu's outstanding warrant in California, we will be giving his contribution to charity," Singer said.

Reports in The Wall Street Journal and The Los Angeles Times this week caused numerous Democratic candidates and organizations that have benefited from Hsu's contributions to reconsider the donations.

Hsu gave Kennedy $4,000 in 2004 and gave his political action committee $5,000 this year, according to Federal Election Commission records. He also gave Kerry's presidential campaign $4,000 and donated $2,000 to a separate Kerry legal compliance fund. Boxer's campaign received $2,000 from Hsu in 2004, and her political action committee received $2,000 in 2005. Feinstein received $1,000. Franken received $2,300 this year from Hsu, Matsui received $6,100 since 2004 and Sestak and Honda each received $1,000 for their re-election efforts.

FEC records show that Hsu has donated $260,000 to Democratic Party groups and federal candidates since 2004. Though a fundraiser for Clinton, he also donated to Sen. Barack Obama's Senate campaign in 2004 and to Obama's political action committee.

What about Obama?

In 1991, Hsu pleaded no contest to a single felony count of grand theft but failed to appear in court for sentencing, according to Ronald Smetana, a California deputy attorney general who prosecuted the case.

Smetana said there is an outstanding warrant for Hsu's arrest. A clerk at the San Mateo County courthouse where Hsu was prosecuted said the warrant was issued in 1992 and orders were for $2 million bail for Hsu if he were arrested.

Smetana said Hsu collected about $1 million from investors by falsely claiming he had a contract to import latex gloves. Smetana said he planned to ask a judge to sentence Hsu to prison.

"We would obviously like Mr. Hsu to return and face justice," said Smetana, who said he had assumed Hsu, a Hong Kong native, had fled the country.

In a statement Wednesday, Hsu said:

"I believe I properly resolved all of the legal issues related to my bankruptcy in the early 1990s. Therefore, I was surprised to learn that there appears to be an outstanding warrant — as demonstrated by the fact that I have and do live a public life. I have not sought to evade any of my obligations and certainly not the law."

He went BANKRUPT? Where did all this money come from then?

On Tuesday, Hsu's Washington attorney, E. Lawrence Barcella Jr., disputed any suggestion that Hsu had any hand in improperly directing contributions from other donors. The Journal reported that six members of the family of William Paw, a San Francisco mail carrier, donated a total of $45,000 to Clinton since 2005. The Journal reported that the donations closely track Hsu's contributions.

That’s because THAT is illegal. Not that he would do anything illegal. Right?

While the Journal created a stir in Democratic circles, the final straw for some candidates seemed to be Hsu's legal troubles in California, first reported by the Times on Wednesday.

"Congressman Sestak is always grateful for the support of people who contribute to him, but in light of the new criminal charges revealed today, the Sestak Campaign decided to return Norman Hsu's campaign contribution."

Honda, however, planned to donate to charity $5,000 received from Hsu as well as members of the Paw family and one other donor whom his staff could not immediately identify.

THERE you go. Hillary?

Spokeswoman Gloria Chan said the money would go to local community organizations but that Honda hadn't yet decided which ones. Matsui's office said she also would return money from the Paw family.

"While there's no information that we have or evidence showing that the contributions were illegal in any way, we have a campaign policy that if we have information that a contributor or someone directing contributions to the campaign has or may have committed a felony, then it's the policy to either return the funds or make a charitable donation," said Chan.

THAT is the right thing to do. But Hillary will be given the “Legal limit” of contributions given to her by Hsu himself. We are talking a LOT of money from “other” donors.

This is going to be interesting to see how it plays out. Right now, this is an attempt to plead ignorant and the MMD will probably say things like, “Well, she didn’t know. {You know how ignorant she is} But as soon as she found out, like the rest of those involved, she gave the money back. Let’s move on. The President is evil and the War is lost.”
Peter
Hillary Taking Laundered Money From a Fugitive

Hey folks,

This story is not going away. I knew that it wouldn’t. But like I said, Idaho Sen. Larry Craig is stepping down. I truly believe that he will leave all together. This is the difference between the LWL and those with morals. According to the AP -GOP senators say Craig should resign By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent

Idaho Sen. Larry Craig's political support eroded by the hour on Wednesday as fellow Republicans in Congress called for him to resign and party leaders pushed him unceremoniously from senior committee posts.

The White House expressed disappointment, too — and nary a word of support for the 62-year-old lawmaker, who pleaded guilty earlier this month to a charge stemming from an undercover police operation in an airport men's room.

Craig represents the Republican Party, said Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, the first in a steadily lengthening list of GOP members of Congress to urge a resignation.

That’s right, URGED him to resign. Others?

Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Norm Coleman of Minnesota joined Hoekstra in urging Craig to step down, as did Rep. Jeff Miller of Florida — and others who joined them as the day wore on.

McCain spoke out in an interview with CNN. My opinion is that when you plead guilty to a crime, you shouldn't serve. That's not a moral stand. That's not a holier-than-thou. It's just a factual situation.

Coleman said in a written statement, Senator Craig pled guilty to a crime involving conduct unbecoming a senator.

For a second consecutive day, GOP Senate leaders stepped in, issuing a statement that said Craig had agreed to comply with leadership's request to temporarily give up his posts on important committees. He has been the top Republican on the Veterans Affairs Committee as well as on subcommittees for two other panels.

This is not a decision we take lightly, but we believe this is in the best interest of the Senate until this situation is resolved by the ethics committee, said the statement, issued in the name of Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the party leader, and others.

What about the President?

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said, We are disappointed in the matter, without specifying exactly what was causing the discomfort.

He said he hoped the ethics committee would do its work swiftly, as that would be in the best interests of the Senate and the people of Idaho.

So unlike the Democrats, when a Republican does something wrong, they get them out. The LWL? They ignore, defend, and surround theirs with support. No matter what.

Then you have this discriminatory statement.

Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., said his party stood to gain. All of these people who (are) holier than thou are now under investigations. ... I think the Republican Party will find itself in a great peril next year, he said.

THESE people? Holier than thou? These are hateful and discriminatory statements. Will anything be said about them? Nope. But they are.

Then you have the joke that is CREW. Soros funded and LWL controlled hit group, NOW calling for others. Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said the following in a statement yesterday.

"Senator Ted Stevens maintains his position on the Appropriations Committee despite being the subject of a major criminal investigation, including an FBI raid on his Alaska home and Senator David Vitter maintains his assignments despite admitting to the crime of soliciting a prostitute.

A disorderly conduct plea requires a member to give up his committee assignment, but a full-fledged bribery investigation does not. Apparently, in the view of the Republican conference there is almost nothing more serious than a member attempting to engage in gay sex. For consistency's sake, Senators Stevens and Vitter should both be forced to give up their committee assignments as well."


What about Jefferson? You know, the $90, 000 grand in the freezer? What about Murtha caught on tape talking about taking bribes? What about Hillary accepting money from a Convicted Felon and a fugitive from justice? Are you calling for them to resign?

What am I talking about? This, from the LA Times -Democratic fundraiser is a fugitive in plain sight By Chuck Neubauer and Robin Fields, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
August 29, 2007

California authorities have sought businessman Norman Hsu for 15 years. Since 2004, he has carved out a place of honor raising cash for such candidates as Hillary Rodham Clinton.

WASHINGTON -- For the last 15 years, California authorities have been trying to figure out what happened to a businessman named Norman Hsu, who pleaded no contest to grand theft, agreed to serve up to three years in prison and then seemed to vanish.

He is a fugitive, Ronald Smetana, who handled the case for the state attorney general, said in an interview. Do you know where he is?

Hsu, it seems, has been hiding in plain sight, at least for the last three years.

Since 2004, one Norman Hsu has been carving out a prominent place of honor among Democratic fundraisers. He has funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into party coffers, much of it earmarked for presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

In addition to making his own contributions, Hsu has honed the practice of assembling packets of checks from contributors who bear little resemblance to the usual Democratic deep pockets: A self-described apparel executive with a variety of business interests, Hsu has focused on delivering hefty contributions from citizens who live modest lives and are neophytes in the world of campaign giving.

On Tuesday, E. Lawrence Barcella Jr. -- a Washington lawyer who represents the Democratic fundraiser -- confirmed that Hsu was the same man who was involved in the California case. Barcella said his client did not remember pleading to a criminal charge and facing the prospect of jail time. Hsu remembers the episode as part of a settlement with creditors when he also went through bankruptcy, Barcella said.

This get’s better.

The bulk of the campaign dollars raised by major parties comes from the same sources: business groups, labor unions and other well-heeled interests with a long-term need to win friends in the political arena.

But the appetite for cash has grown so great that politicians are constantly pressured to find new sources of contributions. Hsu's case illustrates the sometimes-bizarre results of that tendency to push the envelope, often in ways the candidates know nothing about.

As a Democratic rainmaker, Hsu -- who graduated from UC Berkeley and the Wharton School of Business -- is credited with donating nearly $500,000 to national and local party candidates and their political committees in the last three years. He earned a place in the Clinton campaign's HillRaiser group by pledging to raise more than $100,000 for her presidential bid.

Records show that Hsu helped raise an additional $500,000 from other sources for Clinton and other Democrats.

Norman Hsu is a longtime and generous supporter of the Democratic Party and its candidates, including Sen. Clinton, Howard Wolfson, a spokesman for the campaign, said Tuesday.

"During Mr. Hsu's many years of active participation in the political process, there has been no question about his integrity or his commitment to playing by the rules, and we have absolutely no reason to call his contributions into question or to return them."

STOP Read that again.

"During Mr. Hsu's many years of active participation in the political process, there has been no question about his integrity or his commitment to playing by the rules, and we have absolutely no reason to call his contributions into question or to return them. "

HE”S A FUGITIVE He was to serve JAIL TIME He is GUILTY of Grand theft. Uh, just a question here, ever wonder where the money CAME from?

Wolfson did not immediately respond Tuesday night to questions about Hsu's legal problems.

Working on a spin.

Though he is a fugitive, Hsu has hardly kept a low profile. The website camerarts.com, which sells photographs taken at political events, features shots of Hsu at several fundraisers he hosted at Manhattan's elegant St. Regis hotel -- including a June 2005 luncheon for Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Sacramento).

Hsu lives in New York City. Efforts to contact him were unsuccessful. Barcella said Hsu chose to respond through his lawyer.

Records show that Hsu has emerged as one of the Democrats' most successful bundlers, rounding up groups of contributors and packaging their checks together before delivering the funds to campaign officials. Individuals can give a total of $4,600 to a single candidate during an election cycle, $2,300 for the primaries and $2,300 for the general election.

One example of the kind of first-time donors Hsu has worked with is the Paw family of Daly City, Calif., which is headed by William Paw, a mail carrier, and his wife, Alice, who is listed as a homemaker.

The Paws -- seven adults, most of whom live together in a small house near San Francisco International Airport -- apparently had never donated to national candidates until 2004. Over a three-year period, they gave $213,000, including $55,000 to Clinton and $14,000 to candidates for state-level offices in New York.

The family includes a son, Winkle Paw, who Barcella said was in business with Hsu. Another son works for a Bay Area school board, while one daughter works for a hospital and another for a computer company.

That’s because the do not have the money. Hsu was basically laundering it through them, even though it is being denied.

"They have the financial wherewithal to make their own donations," Barcella said. "It didn't come from Norman."

Really? Where did they get it?

He said that Hsu had known the Paws for a decade.

"Norman never reimbursed anyone for their contribution," Barcella said. "It is a violation of federal law for one person to reimburse donors for campaign contributions."

No REALLY? Idiot. Of course Hsu would NEVER break the law. {Laughing}

Hsu's bundling of contributions from the Paws and others was first reported Tuesday in the Wall Street Journal.

Records show Hsu also solicited funds from three members of a New York family that helps run a plastics packaging plant in Pennsylvania. They have given more than $200,000 in the last three years.

Danny Lee, a manager at the packaging firm, has given $95,000 to federal Democratic campaigns -- $19,500 of which went to Clinton. Yu Fen Huang, who shares a New York house with Lee, has given $52,200 to Democrats, $8,800 to Clinton. Soe Lee has contributed $54,000 to Democrats, $8,800 to Clinton.

The Paws, the Lees and Huang did not return telephone calls seeking comment on their donations.

Over the years, Hsu and his associates have given to Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware. Obama and Biden, like Clinton, are seeking the presidential nomination.

WAIT CREW, are you taking notes? ALL these people took illegal contributions.

Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California,
Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts,
Barack Obama of Illinois
Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware

Are you calling for them to resign?

Hsu's legal troubles date back almost 20 years.

Beginning in 1989, court records show, he began raising what added up to more than $1 million from investors, purportedly to buy latex gloves; investors were told Hsu had a contract to resell the gloves to a major American business.

In 1991, Hsu was charged with grand theft. Prosecutors said there were no latex gloves and no contract to sell them.


Hsu pleaded no contest to one grand theft charge and agreed to accept up to three years in prison. He disappeared, Smetana said, after failing to show up for a sentencing hearing. Bench warrants were issued for his arrest but he was never found, Smetana said.

This is not going away folks. More on this breaking news to come. Let’s see if any of the other news agencies out there pick this up. I know if I were a Democratic Candidate running for the nomination, I would be making noise about this.

This is just another example of why I call them the LWL, and the Mainstream Press, the MMD. Craig is BIG news. This about the Clintons accepting money from a fugitive, and laundered money at that? “Well, let’s just hope it goes away.”

Peter

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

All This and Iran Too

Hey folks,

{Sigh} Yes, we have yet another Republican caught up in a sex scandal. What is it with Republicans and kinky or weird sex? From sexually explicit emails to underage, same sex interns, to looking for sex in public restrooms? Sen. Larry Craig, just like Foley, should resign.

But THIS is all you will most likely hear about for the next few days, in between attacking the President on Iraq that is. Here’s my take on this. Really quick, then we move on. According to the AP -Craig says 'I am not gay,' did no wrong By TODD DVORAK, Associated Press Writer

A defiant Sen. Larry Craig denied any wrongdoing Tuesday despite his guilty plea this summer in a men's room police sting, emphatically adding, "I am not gay. I have never been gay."

Why were you playing footsy with a guy in another stall? If you did nothing wrong, then why plead GUILTY?

From what we can see so far, he got caught. He should resign. Plain and simple. Unlike Democrats that get caught doing things that are illegal, immoral, or just plain wrong, getting a free pass from the Mass Media, and staying in power, he probably WILL resign or be forced out. OK, enough of that.

Have you noticed a full court press by the press and the LWL against President Bush on Iraq? Just in the little box on the front page of one of my search engines?

AP-U.S. military deaths in Iraq at 3,731
Reuters -The price of a pizza in Iraq: an eye and a leg
US News and World Report -A Sobering Outlook on Iraq
Washington Post -U.S. Falters In Bid to Boost Iraqi Business


Traitor and LWL member Pelosi said this.

"The President's assertion that his escalation has been fully operational for two and a half months misses the point. American men and women have been fighting and dying in Iraq for nearly four and a half years. After all that time, and despite the 30,000 additional troops the President added this year, the new National Intelligence Estimate concludes that security improvements have been 'uneven' and that the level of overall violence in Iraq 'remains high.' In fact, the death toll from sectarian attacks is double last year's level, according to news reports. The purpose of the surge was to provide the Iraqis 'breathing room' for political reconciliation -- and the Maliki government has utterly failed.

Rather than reducing the threat of terrorism and promoting stability in the Middle East, the President's Iraq policy is making each worse. Until that policy is changed, the dire risks described by the President will not diminish.

The President's speech comes on a day when thousands of Americans are participating in town hall meetings and candlelight vigils across the country to demand a new direction in Iraq. It is time to begin a responsible redeployment to bring our troops home safely."

Blah, blah, blah. Howard Dean said this.

"President Bush couldn't be more wrong. Last week, our own intelligence agencies reported that after Bush's escalation of the war in Iraq six months ago, violence remains high, sectarian conflict is raging, and the Iraqi government is failing to make political progress. American troops are doing their jobs honorably but it's up to the Iraqis, not the U.S. military, to achieve political progress in Iraq.

"The fact of the matter is the war in Iraq has diverted attention from the real war on terror, making America less safe and giving Al Qaeda time to rebuild. It is time for President Bush and his Republican allies to take a hard look at the situation in Iraq, listen to the will of the American people, and change course. But if they refuse to do so, electing a Democratic President next year will be the only way to end the Republicans' failed Iraq policy."

Let’s see, the surge is working. Even Supreme Leader Wannabe Hillary admits that. Everyone that goes there and comes back, HAS to admit that. Now this past Sunday, they had MAJOR Political progress made, with the potential of even more coming soon. NOTHING but good news and great things happening. SO?

The LWL and their accomplices, the Mass Media Drones have been forced to step up their attacks on President Bush, and step up their campaign to convince you that the war is lost and that we cannot win, Iraq is a lost cause and we just need to leave. All they really do is sound pathetic.

So with all this good happening, in the middle of us WINNING in Iraq, the LWL and MMD either ignoring it, or coming right out and lying about it, another ally of their’s is sitting back and watching. As a matter of fact, HE is stepping up now to “help.”

According to the AP-Iran ready to fill any vacuum in Iraq By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boldly declared Tuesday that U.S. political influence in Iraq is "collapsing rapidly" and said his government is ready to help fill any power vacuum.

OF course he is. I’ve been telling you that for a long time now. He WANTS Iraq. Some in this country want to GIVE it to him.

The hard-line leader also defended Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a fellow Shiite Muslim who has been harshly criticized by American politicians for his unsuccessful efforts to reconcile Iraq's Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.

"The political power of the occupiers is collapsing rapidly," Ahmadinejad said at a news conference, referring to U.S. troops in Iraq. "Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region. Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap, with the help of neighbors and regional friends like Saudi Arabia, and with the help of the Iraqi nation."

What he is saying? “You hate Bush, I hate Bush. You do your part and pull the American troops out and I will take care of Iraq. You get your political victory over the devil {Bush} and I get Iraq. It’s a win, win, for everyone.” What he is REALLY saying. “I hate you too. Just get out. I will take over Iraq. I will increase my power and numbers. Later, I will kill you along with the Republicans and all the rest of the evil Americans. I will start with controlling your precious oil, then I will just bomb you as soon as I can.”

Ahmadinejad did not elaborate on his remarks, an unusual declaration of Iran's interest in influencing its neighbor's future. The mention of a Saudi role appeared aimed at allaying the fears of Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Muslim nations that Iran wants to dominate in Iraq. Even though Saudi Arabia and Iran have not cooperated in the past, it "doesn't mean it can't happen," Ahmadinejad said.

Iran fought a brutal eight-year war with Saddam Hussein's regime and welcomed the elimination of a deeply hated enemy. But Iran also strongly objects to the presence of America, another rival, over its eastern and western borders in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"Occupation is the root of all problems in Iraq," Ahmadinejad said. "It has become clear that occupiers are not able to resolve regional issues."

President Bush defended the Iraq war in a speech at the American Legion's national convention and accused Iran of violating human rights and trying to destabilize Iraq, Afghanistan and the wider region.

"Iran is sending arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan to be used to attack American and NATO troops," Bush said. "Iran has arrested visiting American scholars who have committed no crimes and impose no threat to their regime. And Iran's active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust. Iran's actions threaten the security of nations everywhere."

Yet, the LWL would gladly hand him Iraq, if it means they can secure an American loss. They do not care about Iraq, it’s people, or the very bloody future both there and here. They will simply blame Bush for it. Even though the blood will be CLEARLY on THEIR hands.

Bush and the U.S. ambassador in Iraq have given blunt assessments of political stagnation in Baghdad, and Bush has said it is up to the Iraqi people to decide if their government deserved to be replaced.

But key Democratic politicians, including Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, have called for al-Maliki to be replaced because his Shiite-dominated government has been unable to forge national unity.

Al-Maliki has shrugged off the gloomy assessments of Iraq's future, saying he would "pay no attention" to American critics and if necessary "find friends elsewhere."

"They rudely say (the Iraqi) prime minister and the constitution must change," Ahmadinejad said of U.S. critics. "Who are you? Who has given you the right" to ask for such a change, he added.

On this, we agree.

Ousting al-Maliki, a longtime Shiite political activist, would require a majority vote in the 275-member Iraqi parliament. As long as the Kurdish parties and the main Shiite bloc back al-Maliki, his opponents lack the votes for that.

But do you see what they, the LWL, is doing? They are attempting to do there what they are doing here. Divide the country. Turn Iraqis against their own Prime Minister. Convince them he is a failure and that he needs to leave. He called them out on it. It is not their job to run this country, it’s the Presidents job. It sure as hell is not their job to run Iraq.

In a move that could further strain U.S.-Iranian relations, U.S. troops raided a Baghdad hotel Tuesday night and detained about 10 people, including six whom a U.S.-funded radio station described as members of an Iranian delegation visiting to negotiate contracts with the Iraqis.

The Iranian Embassy said seven Iranians — an embassy employee and six members of a delegation from Iran's Electricity Ministry — were staying at the Sheraton Ishtar Hotel.

Iran has been vehemently protesting the detention of five Iranians by U.S. troops in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil in January. U.S. authorities have said the five included the operations chief and other members of Iran's elite Quds Force, which is accused of arming and training Iraqi militants.

Iran describes the five, who remain in U.S. custody, as diplomats.

Washington has accused Tehran of being behind attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq — a claim al-Maliki's government has only partially backed, saying Iran could have a role in the attacks. Iran has denied the charges.

Of course they are.

Ahmadinejad dismissed the possibility of any U.S. military action against Iran, saying Washington has no plan and is not in a position to take such action.

As Ahmadinejad spoke, fighting between rival Shiite factions in southern Iraq raised new fears that a pullout by British troops there could lead to chaos. The clashes appeared to be part of a struggle for power of southern Iraqi Shia heartland, which includes the bulk of the country's vast oil wealth.

Folks, it really is simple. Little Hitler is rising. We are appeasing him, and even worse than the original, some in this country WANT to GIVE him more power. They are either too ignorant to be in power, or they are truly that obsessed with getting Bush, they do not care. Either way, remember this in 08. I cannot emphasize this enough. America itself could very well be at stake here.
Peter

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Iraq Reaches Benchmarks Dems Silent

Hey folks,

Iraq's top political leaders representing the Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish communities announced Sunday that a compromise had been struck on several key elements of outstanding concern. According to Reuters, the deal includes an agreement on the outlines of a draft oil law, a statement on the powers of Iraq's provinces relative to the central government, and other important concessions vital to Political Progress.

Yup, Political Progress. What the LWL have been calling for. Saying isn’t happening. Saying is a failure

President Bush, at the Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, yesterday, said this.

“I congratulate Iraq's leaders on the agreement reached yesterday in Baghdad. I've been briefed on the agreement, and this morning I spoke to Iraq's elected leaders. These leaders represent all the Iraqi communities. These leaders -- Prime Minister Maliki, President Talabani, Vice President Hashimi, Vice President Abd al-Mahdi, President Barzani -- recognize the true and meaningful reconciliation that needs to take place, and they recognize this is a process. Yesterday's agreement reflects their commitment to work together for the benefit of all Iraqis to further the process.

The agreement begins to establish new power-sharing agreements, commits to supporting bottom-up security and political initiatives, and advances agreement among Iraq's leadership on several key legislative benchmarks.

While yesterday's agreement is an important step, I reminded them, and they understand, much more needs to be done. The Iraqi parliament will convene again in early September, and it will need to act to codify this political progress.

It's in our interests that we help the Iraqi people succeed. Success in Iraq will be a major blow to the extremists and radicals who would like to attack America again. And that's why the United States will continue to support Iraq's leaders and all the Iraqi people in their efforts to overcome the forces of terror that seek to overthrow a nascent democracy.

In this regard, I welcome and accept the expressed desire of the Iraqi leadership to develop a long-term relationship with the United States based on common interests. The United States is committed to developing this relationship and to strengthening diplomatic, economic and security ties with the Iraqi government and its people.”

The Mainstream Media Drones? They say this.

--------------------------

Of course their big news was and still is the resigning of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. They love reporting what the usual suspects have to say. The LWL, “it’s about time, it proves he was incompetent, who is next,” ETC. But this GREAT news out of Iraq?

House Republican Whip Roy Blunt said this about the new development in Iraq.

"The broad political agreement struck by Iraq's leaders this weekend represents an important moment in the country's social and political reconstruction, and a potential breakthrough for its future security and political stability.

This consensus is also great news for American support forces in the area -- whose continued success on the ground is helping create the conditions for political reconciliation to take place. I remain deeply grateful for the ongoing efforts of our men and women in the field, and hopeful that the Iraqi political leadership will seize this important moment to move forward with real solutions for the future of its nation.

Real leadership involves making difficult decisions, and then having the courage to act on them. It's now up to the leaders in Iraq to fill in the details of this agreement, and work
openly and honestly with one another to deliver a sustainable, long-term strategy for success."

The Democratic Senators responded this way. They said this.

---------------------------

I guess they are too busy gloating over Gonzales. After all, you do have to give them credit. They accomplished what they wanted. You do not have to like it. You can understand that the separation of powers means they could actually do NOTHING to him. He works for the President, NOT Congress. They have no power. But he caved in. So now they will feel they won. In essence, they did.

But what about this great news in Iraq? What cannot be done? The benchmarks that were just MET?

You see, this is NOT good for them or their accomplices in the MMD. They are invested in the defeat of this country. They cannot and will not politically survive a victory in Iraq. They just can’t.

So first it was “The War is lost.” “The surge has failed.” “Bring our troops home NOW.” No, wait, we are winning. “Well, OK, OK, uh, it doesn’t matter that the surge is working. The Iraq government is incompetent. They have failed. They have not met benchmarks. Bring our troops home now.” Now that the deal, which includes the agreement on the outlines of a draft oil law, a statement on the powers of Iraq's provinces relative to the central government, and other important concessions vital to Political Progress?

----------------------------

They are thinking folks. They are working hard to find a way to raise the bar higher. They are looking for some other talking points to put out there. They MUST find a new line to call for our troops coming home before we do win. They will NOT give up on this. They cannot let it go. They cannot support the troops. They MOST DEFINITELY cannot support the President. They have to find a new way to attempt to fool YOU into thinking all is lost.

Some in the media will be attempting to down play this deal. Of course you have some saying it won’t work, it’s doomed. They will never come together. What was that? Oh yeah, the surge can’t work. The war is lost. You know, same old same old.

One major problem they face? YOU are not that stupid.
Peter

Monday, August 27, 2007

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales announcing his resignation

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales :



"Thirteen years ago, I entered public service to make a positive difference in the lives of others. During this time, I have traveled a remarkable journey from my home state of Texas to Washington, D.C., supported by the unwavering love and encouragement of my wife Rebecca and our sons Jared, Graham, and Gabriel. Yesterday, I met with President Bush and informed him of my decision to conclude my government service as Attorney General of the United States, effective as of September 17, 2007.

Let me say that it has been one of my greatest privileges to lead the Department of Justice. I have great admiration and respect for the men and women who work here. I have made a point as Attorney General to personally meet as many of them as possible and today I want to again thank them for their service to our nation. It is through their continued work that our country and our communities remain safe, that the rights and civil liberties of our citizens are protected and the hopes and dreams of all of our children are secured.

I often remind our fellow citizens that we live in the greatest country in the world and that I have lived the American dream. Even my worst days as Attorney General have been better than my father's best days. Public service is honorable and noble, and I am profoundly grateful to President Bush for his friendship and for the many opportunities he has given me to serve the American people.

Thank you and God bless America."


President Bush: "This morning, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announced that he will leave the Department of Justice, after two and a half years of service to the department. Al Gonzales is a man of integrity, decency and principle. And I have reluctantly accepted his resignation, with great appreciation for the service that he has provided for our country.

As Attorney General and before that, as White House counsel, Al Gonzales has played a role in shaping our policies in the war on terror, and has worked tirelessly to make this country safer. The Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act and other important laws bear his imprint. Under his leadership, the Justice Department has made a priority of protecting children from Internet predators, and made enforcement of civil rights laws a top priority. He aggressively and successfully pursued public corruption and effectively combated gang violence.

As Attorney General he played an important role in helping to confirm two fine jurists in Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. He did an outstanding job as White House Counsel, identifying and recommending the best nominees to fill critically important federal court vacancies.

Alberto Gonzales's tenure as Attorney General and White House Counsel is only part of a long history of distinguished public service that began as a young man when, after high school, he enlisted in the United States Air Force. When I became governor of Texas in 1995, I recruited him from one of Texas's most prestigious law firms to be my general counsel. He went on to become Texas's 100th secretary of state and to serve on our state's supreme court. In the long course of our work together this trusted advisor became a close friend.

These various positions have required sacrifice from Al, his wife Becky, their sons Jared, Graham and Gabriel, and I thank them for their service to the country.

After months of unfair treatment that has created a harmful distraction at the Justice Department, Judge Gonzales decided to resign his position, and I accept his decision. It's sad that we live in a time when a talented and honorable person like Alberto Gonzales is impeded from doing important work because his good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons.

I've asked Solicitor General Paul Clement to serve as Acting Attorney General upon Alberto Gonzales's departure and until a nominee has been confirmed by the Senate. He's agreed to do so. Paul is one of the finest lawyers in America. As Solicitor General, Paul has developed a reputation for excellence and fairness, and earned the respect and confidence of the entire Justice Department.

Thank you."
To Democrats, Do Not Count On Florida Vote

Hey folks,

Someone asked me what I thought of this. Since I was not here yesterday, I did not see it. But now I do. They seem to think that this is a big deal. I don’t. I really do not care if they try this bonehead move. It really is simple where I sit.

According to the AP -Florida Dems could lose say in 2008 race By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer Sun Aug 26, 12:33 AM ET

Florida Democrats would forfeit their votes in selecting a presidential nominee unless they delay their state election by at least a week, the national party said in a stern action Saturday meant to discourage others from leapfrogging ahead to earlier dates.

The Florida party has 30 days to submit an alternative to its planned Jan. 29 primary or lose its 210 delegates to the nominating convention in Denver next summer.

The state party chairwoman, Karen Thurman, said she would confer with state officials about the ultimatum. "It's going to be a difficult discussion," she said, because Floridians are wary of having their votes taken away.

The LWL HATE Florida. They still blame Florida for 2000. It really is that simple. AP goes on to say.

Elected officials in Florida have said they would consider legal action and a protest at the convention if the national party barred the state's delegates.

There is general agreement that the eventual nominee will seat Florida's delegates rather than allow a fight at a convention intended to show party unity. But the decision by the Democratic National Committee's rules panel could reduce Florida's influence because candidates may want to campaign in states where the votes are counted.

Florida party officials said they originally opposed the early primary date, which covers both the Democratic and Republican primaries. The Republican-controlled Legislature passed the change and the GOP governor signed it into law in an effort to give the state a more prominent voice in national politics.

But Florida Democratic leaders now are committed to the state-run election because voter participation would drop drastically if Democrats held an alternative contest.

Members of the DNC rules committee expressed skepticism that Florida Democrats did enough to stop the change and they approved the harshest penalty. Florida's representative on the panel, Allan Katz, was the only vote against the penalty.

Refusing to seat the delegates would set a "terrible situation for Florida and a very bad situation for the Democratic Party," Katz said.

Absolutely. It will be WORSE for the Democrats than it will be for Florida. These people, The LWL, and the DNC, cannot be this completely ignorant. Can they? Get this.

Party rules say states cannot hold their 2008 primary contests before Feb. 5, except for Iowa on Jan. 14, Nevada on Jan. 19, New Hampshire on Jan. 22 and South Carolina on Jan. 29.

The calendar was designed to preserve the traditional role that Iowa and New Hampshire have played in selecting the nominee, while adding two states with more racial and geographic diversity to influential early slots.

So they only want those states that are either LWL, or brainwashable. Easily lead.

Several DNC officials said before the vote that they wanted to take the strong action against Florida to discourage Michigan, New Hampshire and other states that were considering advancing their contests in violation of party rules.

Garry Shay, a rules committee member from California, said allowing Florida to move forward "would open the door to chaos."

{Laughing} I told you, they HATE Florida. They NEED Florida. But they hate it.

DNC committee member Donna Brazile also argued for a strong penalty, saying, "I hesitate to see what happens if we show somehow some wiggle room in our process."

The shifting dates have added uncertainty to the presidential candidates' campaign plans with the first votes to be cast in less than five months.

Advisers to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has a wide lead in Florida polls, said she will go wherever elections are held. Sen. Barack Obama, who was campaigning in Miami on Saturday, said: "The national party has a difficult task, which is to try to create some order out of chaos. My job is really not to speculate on how to make it all work. I'm a candidate, I'm like a player on the field. I shouldn't be setting up the rules."

Campaigning in New Hampshire, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico Democrat said it is important that the leadoff roles of Iowa and New Hampshire "not be usurped."

"As a candidate, I just want to get this settled and just appeal to all parties to get their act together and have some definitive roles," Richardson said. "Let's have an orderly process instead of states trying to outdo each other."

Well, I can agree with that. Makes sense. But Once you allow one? You know.

Florida's congressional delegation has raised the possibility of a voting rights investigation in response to the punishment.

National Democratic officials insist there is no legal basis to force the party to seat delegates in violation of its rules. Florida officials could not say what law the DNC would have violated or where the case could be pursued.

Jon Ausman, a DNC member from Florida, pleaded for a role in what could turn out to be a historic election, with the potential of the first woman, black or Hispanic nominee, even if the state were the "black sheep" of the primary season.

"We're asking you for mercy, not judgment," he told the rules committee meeting in a hotel conference room.

The party's action comes seven years after Florida was at the center of an unprecedented dispute over presidential vote counting. In 2000, the election between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore was held up for a recount in Florida. The Supreme Court stopped the recount, and Bush won the state by 537 votes.

THERE YOU GO FOLKS!!!!

Terrie Brady, a DNC member who helped present Florida's case, said the party's denial of delegates disenfranchises voters. Rules committee members objected to the term, saying Florida's votes would be counted if they followed the rules.

Yup. This is just complete fact. It WILL disenfranchise voters.

"I find your use of the word disenfranchisement to be an overstatement," said committee member David McDonald, who is from Washington state.

Because he is smarter than you. The people will do what they are told to do. Right?

New Hampshire's secretary of state says he may move up the state's primary, but for now the party has submitted a plan for Jan. 22, with the notation that the date is subject to change. Michigan's Legislature has taken up a bill that would move its contest to Jan. 15, but the state party submitted a proposal that for now describes a caucus on Feb. 9.

Michigan Democratic Party chairman Mark Brewer said he hopes the ruling against Florida keeps the DNC calendar in place. "If it doesn't, we're going to move," he said.

Look, it’s really this simple, the DNC doesn’t want Florida to help elect their party's nominee, they should simply NOT expect Florida to vote Democrat in the General Election. Period. These people really need mental help. They truly feel they can do whatever they want and YOU will just sit back and take it. Sad thing is, some LWL members, and some Democrats, will.
Peter

Saturday, August 25, 2007

IWA For Sunday 082607

Hey folks,

This weeks winner had everything. Fortune and fame. A promising long term career in what he loved. Big houses, great cars, everything. Now? As NFL commissioner, Roger Goodell said,

"You are now justifiably facing consequences for the decisions you made and the conduct in which you engaged. Your career, freedom and public standing are now in the most serious jeopardy," Goodell wrote. "I hope that you will be able to learn from this difficult experience and emerge from it better prepared to act responsibly and to make the kinds of choices that are expected of a conscientious and law abiding citizen."

That’s right folks, I’m talking about Michael Vick, Atlanta Falcons quarterback . Turns out that Goodell suspended Vick indefinitely without pay Friday, just hours after Vick filed a plea agreement that portrayed him as less involved than three co-defendants and guilty mainly of poor judgment for associating with them.

According to the AP

Vick acknowledged bankrolling gambling on the dogfights, but denied placing bets himself or taking any of the winnings. He admitted that dogs not worthy of the pit were killed "as a result of the collective efforts" of himself and two co-defendants.

Yeah they were killed by being tortured to death.

Goodell decided not to wait until Monday, when U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson in Richmond, Va., formally receives the plea and schedules a sentencing likely to land Vick in prison for one to five years.

The commissioner said Vick's admitted conduct was "not only illegal but also cruel and reprehensible." Even if he didn't personally place bets, Goodell said, "your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL player contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player."

Goodell freed the Falcons to "assert any claims or remedies" to recover $22 million of Vick's signing bonus from the 10-year, $130 million contract he signed in 2004.

I hope they get EVERY dime back.

The commissioner didn't speak to Vick but based his decision on the court filings. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Goodell might meet with Vick in the future, and Goodell said he would review the suspension after all the legal proceedings.

"You have engaged in conduct detrimental to the welfare of the NFL and have violated the league's personal conduct policy," Goodell told Vick in a letter after meeting in New York with Falcons president and general manager Rich McKay.

Falcons owner Arthur Blank supported Goodell's decision.

"We hope that Michael will use this time, not only to further address his legal matters, but to take positive steps to improve his personal life," Blank said.

Nike, meanwhile, terminated its contract with Vick.

Good.

Earlier Friday, a "summary of facts" signed by Vick and his lawyers was filed along with his written plea agreement on a federal dogfighting conspiracy charge.

"While Mr. Vick is not personally charged with or responsible for committing all of the acts alleged in the indictment, as with any conspiracy charge, he is taking full responsibility for his actions and the actions of the others involved," the defense team said in a written statement after the plea agreement was filed.

"Mr. Vick apologizes for his poor judgment in associating himself with those involved in dog fighting and realizes he should never have been involved in this conduct," the statement said.

Congratulations Mikey, you had everything most dream of, you decided to throw it all away on this completely sickening cruelty to animals. I concur with Goodell. You are getting what you deserve. You ARE the Idiot of the Week.
Peter
H.S. For Sunday 082607

Genetic Factor in Taste?

Hey folks,

This is interesting. I do not know how true it is but interesting non-the-less. According to the AP -Study: Fear of new foods mostly genetic By MARIA CHENG, AP Medical Writer

Having trouble persuading your child to eat broccoli or spinach? You may have only yourself to blame. According to a study of twins, neophobia — or the fear of new foods — is mostly in the genes.

"Children could actually blame their mothers for this," said Jane Wardle, director of the Health Behavior Unit at University College London, one of the authors of the study in this month's American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Wardle and colleagues asked the parents of 5,390 pairs of identical and non-identical twins to complete a questionnaire on their children's' willingness to try new foods.

Identical twins, who share all genes, were much more likely to respond the same way to new foods than non-identical twins, who like other siblings only share about half their genes. Researchers concluded that genetics played a greater role in determining eating preferences than environment, since the twins lived in the same household.

Wardle said food preferences appear to be "as inheritable a physical characteristic as height."

So in essence, you could be responsible for having short kids that hate Brussel Sprouts. {Laughing}

Unlike nearly every other phobia, neophobia is a normal stage of human development.

Scientists theorize that it was originally an evolutionary mechanism designed to protect children from accidentally eating dangerous things — like poisonous berries or mushrooms.

Back to Evolution. Got to love that. Just like Anxiety. According to the experts that is.

Neophobia typically kicks in at age 2 or 3, when children are newly mobile and capable of disappearing from their parents' sight within seconds. Being unwilling to eat new things they stumble upon may turn out to be a lifesaver.

While most children grow out of the food fussiness by age 5, not all do. For parents of particularly picky eaters, experts encourage them not to cave in when their children throw food tantrums.

"Parents should not feel like they're doing something wrong if they keep trying but their child is not overjoyed to be eating Brussels sprouts," said Marlene Schwartz, deputy director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, who is not connected to the study.

While most people will eventually like any food — even one they initially disliked — after trying it about 10 times, more persistence may be needed when trying to convert a neophobic child.

So force them to eat it? It thought that was a bad thing. Sorry, but I could eat Popcorn ten times and I would hate it ten times. You like what you like and dislike what you dislike.

"It's like learning to ride a bike," Schwartz said. "Some children have a harder time learning and it takes longer, but it's still worthwhile to teach them."

Other taste-related traits — like the ability to taste bitterness — are also inherited. Scientists have already identified the gene responsible, and have found that approximately 30 percent of Caucasians lack the gene and cannot taste bitterness.

Really?

Some experts think that neophobia is essentially a reflection of personality. People known as "sensation seekers," or those in search of new and intense experiences, tend to be willing to eat anything. Conversely, shy people tend to be reluctant to experiment with their palate.

So it’s mental also?

"Food is just one kind of stimulus in the environment that people either approach or avoid," said Patricia Pliner, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto.

Still, experts say that the environment parents create is crucial to determining their children's eating habits.

"It can't all be genetics," said Marcy Goldsmith, a nutrition and behavior specialist at Tufts University. "Parents need to offer their children new foods so they at least have a chance to try it."

You think? Like I said, I do not know how true it is, but I did find this interesting. See you soon.
Peter
Off Day Tomorrow Sunday 082607

Hey folks,

Quick note, I will not be in tomorrow, Sunday, 082607. I have a very special little girl's 4th Birthday to go to. Since she requested that Joshua to be there, we are making that happen.

But fret not. I’m coming right back with all the Sunday stuff, TODAY.


See you soon.
Peter
Presidential Radio Address For 082507

President Bush:

Good morning. This week I traveled to Kansas City to address the annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. I spoke about the ideological struggle that our Nation faces in the 21st century, and the lessons we can draw from the advance of freedom in Asia in the 20th century. America's enduring presence and perseverance on that continent aided the rise of democracy, helped transform American enemies into American allies, and made our country safer.

Next week I will address the members of the American Legion at their annual convention in Reno. In that speech, I will focus on the Middle East and why the rise of a free and democratic Iraq is critical to the future of this vital region and to our Nation's security.

I will also provide an update on the developments we are seeing from our new strategy in Iraq. Every month since January, U.S. forces have killed or captured an average of more than 1,500 al Qaeda terrorists and other extremists. And in June our troops launched a surge of operations that is helping bring former Sunni insurgents into the fight against al Qaeda, clear the terrorists out of population centers, and give families in liberated Iraqi cities a safer and more normal life.

As security improves, more Iraqis are stepping forward to defend their democracy. Young Iraqi men are signing up for the army. Iraqi police are now patrolling the streets. Coalition and Iraqi forces have doubled the number of joint operations. As the Iraqi people feel more secure, they are also forming neighborhood watch groups. They're volunteering important information about the terrorists and extremists hiding in their midst. And the increase in tips helps account for the marked reduction in sectarian murders.

By driving out the terrorists from cities and neighborhoods, we're creating the conditions for reconciliation -- especially at the local level. In communities across Iraq, citizens are seeing their local and provincial governments return to operation. Despite continuing violence, leaders in places like Anbar, Najaf, and Ninewah are now working through local provincial councils to approve funds to finance the rebuilding of homes and neighborhoods, to fight corruption, and to create new jobs.

Here at home, it can be easy to overlook the bravery shown by Iraqi troops and Iraqi civilians who are in the fight for freedom. But our troops on the ground see it every day. Last week, a team of American soldiers was meeting with an Iraqi citizens group near Baghdad. Suddenly, a suicide bomber came running around a corner and headed straight for our soldiers and the Iraqi civilians.

One Iraqi man saw what was happening and ran to intercept the bomber. As he pushed the terrorist away, the bomb detonated -- killing both men, but sparing four American soldiers and eight Iraqi civilians. Army Staff Sergeant Sean Kane is one of those who says he owes his life to this brave Iraqi. Sergeant Kane says, "He could have run behind us or away from us, but he made the decision to sacrifice himself to protect everyone." Sergeant Kane spoke to the Iraqi man's father, who said that even if his son had known the outcome beforehand, he "would not have acted differently."

The story does not end there. Later that same night, the citizens group contacted the local director of the National Police and told him the location of the al Qaeda cell believed to be responsible for the attack. The National Police immediately conducted a raid that resulted in four arrests.

We are still in the early stages of our new operations. But the success of the past couple of months have shown that conditions on the ground can change -- and they are changing. We cannot expect the new strategy we are carrying out to bring success overnight. But by standing with the Iraqi people as they build their democracy, we will deliver a devastating blow to al Qaeda, we will help provide new hope for millions of people throughout the Middle East, we will gain a friend and ally in the war on terror, and we will make the American people safer.

Thank you for listening.

Friday, August 24, 2007

A New Conspiracy?

Hey folks,

Here we go again. There is a new conspiracy brewing. According to the AP -Iraq report may bolster surge policy By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press WriterThu Aug 23, 5:33 PM ET

Intentionally or not, a new assessment of Iraq's political and military prospects landed just in time to bolster President Bush's case that the United States should maintain its troop buildup in the country and stand by its beleaguered government.

Intentionally or not.” So it may have been?

The consensus report by U.S. spy agencies contained a veiled warning: Any move to shift U.S. troops out of their role directly combating insurgents could squander the modest security gains secured by the troop surge.

"A change of mission ... would place security improvements at risk," the report concluded.

That conclusion, coming unanimously from the nation's 16 intelligence agencies, will likely help the administration and its ground commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, argue for patience from a skeptical Congress and public. Petraeus has overseen a U.S. troop buildup and a more aggressive counterinsurgency effort that Bush announced in January.

Coming unanimously from the nation's 16 intelligence agencies.” Remember that.

Anthony Cordesman, an Iraq expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said intelligence assessments aren't meant as policy arguments, but the warning in the new National Intelligence Estimate, revealed Thursday, may be seen as just that.

"I don't mean that the timing of the release may not have something to do with a campaign for supporting the president's position," he said.

What? The timing is done to support the President and the Troops? So I guess ALL 16 inelegance agencies are working together to support Bush?

Colin Kahl, a former Pentagon analyst and now an assistant professor of national security studies at Georgetown University, said the intelligence community is aware that the timing of the new report — just nine months after the last intelligence estimate on Iraq — looks political. It was dropped this week into the dead calm of an official Washington in the middle of summer vacation.

"I think those working on the NIE were well aware that it would be politically controversial, but I don't get the sense that this was done in the service of helping Petraeus or the administration," said Kahl. "I get the sense that some within the (intelligence community) thought it was unnecessary, and unprecedented, to do another Iraq NIE so close on the heels of the last one."


Could THIS be the reason? Look at this statement released by Traitor and LWL member Pelosi.

"In today's National Intelligence Estimate, the American people were presented with yet more evidence that the Iraqi government has failed to take the necessary steps to reach political reconciliation. Our military has performed their duties excellently, but the purpose of the escalation in Iraq was to create a secure environment in which political change could occur, and it is clear that the Iraqi leaders have failed to make progress.

"We need a New Direction to bring our troops home from Iraq so that America can refocus its efforts against terrorism worldwide."

Key Quotes From the New NIE on Iraq:

Is This What The Bush Administration Calls Progress?

"It appears to me ... there is some progress being made." - President Bush, August 21, 2007

Today, the National Intelligence Council released an unclassified summary of the most recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. The report paints a grim picture of the political and security situation in Iraqand is at odds with the President's assessment.

-- "[T]he level of overall violence, including attacks on and casualties among civilians, remains high; Iraq's sectarian groups remain unreconciled; AQI [al Qaeda in Iraq] retains the ability to conduct high-profile attacks; and to date, Iraqi political leaders remain unable to govern effectively." (pg. 1)

-- "Broadly accepted political compromises required for sustained security, long-term political progress, and economic development are unlikely to emerge unless there is a fundamental shift in the factors driving Iraqi political and security developments." (pg. 1)

-- "Intra-Shia conflict involving factions competing for power and resources probably will intensify as Iraqis assume control of provincial security... The Sunni Arab community remains politically fragmented, and we see no prospective leaders that might engage in meaningful dialogue and deliver on national agreements... Kurdish leaders remain focused on protecting the autonomy of the Kurdish region and reluctant to compromise on key issues." (pg. 2)

-- "[W]e judge that the ISF [Iraqi Security Forces] have not improved enough to conduct major operations independent of the Coalition on a sustained basis in multiple locations and that the ISF remain reliant on the Coalition for important aspects of logistics and combat support." (pg. 2)

-- "The IC [Intelligence Community] assesses that the Iraqi Government will become more precarious over the next six to 12 months because of criticism by other members of the major Shia coalition (the Unified Iraqi Alliance, UIA), Grand Ayatollah Sistani, and other Sunni and Kurdish parties." (pg. 3)

-- "Population displacement resulting from sectarian violence continues, imposing burdens on provincial governments and some neighboring states and increasing the danger of destabilizing influences spreading across Iraq's borders over the next six to 12 months." (pg. 3)

It was really easy for her to pick out the negatives. Without reading the whole thing, I really do not take this spin on face value. According to the other AP report yesterday, it showed progress being made, positive signs, good news. This AP article is attempting to spin this as a conspiracy to HELP Bush. So? Which is it? Back to AP.

One senior intelligence official said, however, that the timing was intentional — designed to inform decisions to be made about Iraq strategy this summer and fall. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the issue more candidly.

Of course.

Kahl said the report itself amounts to an "honest, somewhat grim, 'damned if we do, damned if we don't' assessment."

The warning against any change in Iraq tactics comes as Capitol Hill and the White House are showing fresh interest in the 2006 bipartisan Iraq Study Group report. That report recommended, among other things, that U.S. forces pull back from the front lines and focus on providing logistical support and training to Iraqi forces, along with conducting targeted counterterror operations.

Yes and Bush has always said he was open to this, as long as we won militarily. We are winning.

In June, a bipartisan group of senators introduced legislation to adopt the Iraq Study Group's 79 recommendations, with the goal to begin withdrawing combat troops not needed for force protection as early as March 2008. And on Thursday, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., called for starting troop withdrawals by Christmas.

Bush, who politely dismissed much of the Iraq Study Group's report last year, told an audience in Michigan on April 20 that he liked some of its ideas.

"Embedding troops and training troops makes sense for me. I like the idea of having our troops on the over-horizon presence, to be able to help bail out extreme situations. I really want to make sure that our special ops stays on the hunt for al-Qaida in Iraq," he said.

Pentagon officials say it will put severe strains on the military to sustain the additional 30,000 surge troops in Iraq beyond April 2008.

They are looking for ways to continue surge missions — protecting the population while pursuing al-Qaida and militia extremists — while transferring more day-to-day responsibility for operations to Iraqi forces. A senior military official in Iraq said Thursday that process is already under way.

"It has never been an either-or proposition," said a second top military officer. "We have to both protect the population and develop the Iraqi security forces. It's a matter of how."

Which is what they have been saying all along. It is the Press and people like Pelosi that have twisted it. But that is not working out so well. More and more American are starting to get tire of the games that Pelosi, Reid and others beholden to the Looneys out there. The moron.org {Moveon.org} types out there. More on that in part two.

Get ready folks, this is FAR from over. Be right back.
Peter
WND -Finally! Combating the anti-victory crowd, I concur.

Hey folks,

This one comes from our friends at World Net Daily. Melanie Morgan to be exact. I have been telling you for sometime now, that if the LWL keep playing games with our troops lives, you will see more and more people start seeing them for what and who they are. The news coming from Iraq is so good lately that the press, anti-war folks, and even some LWL members themselves have been forced to admittedly re-calibrate their message.

Now they are attacking the political progress, the Iraqi Government and they are attempting to back pedal as fast as they can to a position where they want you to believe that they have ALWAYS supported the troops and the surge. That is just not the case. It will not fly here. They OWN defeat. They bought it, fought for it, are STILL fighting for it, and more and more people have had it with them.

According to WND -Finally! Combating the anti-victory crowd by Melanie Morgan

In the largest effort of its kind since Operation Iraqi Freedom began, pro-troop supporters are now working together to beat back the voices of defeat and surrender. This week, we saw the first public display of behind-the-scenes activities that have gone under radar for the past several weeks.

Finally!

Dozens of groups, opinion shapers, talk-show hosts, grass-roots conservatives and others are getting it – al-Qaida isn't the enemy we have to worry about the most; our troops can handle those guys with their lethal determination.

The most dangerous enemies are here at home, those deliberately plotting to undermine support for the missions of our troops. This fifth column in America has engaged in the psychological warfare of defeatism in a way we have not seen since the Vietnam War. Even President Bush is now acknowledging that fact.

Amen!!!

The pro-victory group Freedom's Watch unveiled a $15 million television and radio ad campaign featuring compelling first-hand testimonials from people who understand quite clearly that "SURRENDER IS NOT AN OPTION." Watch the Videos here.

It's not as much as George Soros and the Hollywood liberals who contribute to the network of left-wing extremists, but it's a good start.

I've been working with a broad array of pro-troop advocates to help make such efforts as the "Freedom's Watch" ad buy a reality. As the chairman of Move America Foreword, the nation's largest pro-troop organization, I've been honored to work (conspire, if you are a anti-war liberal reading this column) with a coalition of pro-troop and veterans organizations that believe in peace through strength, and who also support victory for our troops.

{Laughing}

During our planning meetings of this [cabal of supporters of this supposed illegal war based on lies], I've been impressed by the determination of the pro-troop movement to not cede any battlefield in the war for hearts and minds.

For too long we were unhappily silent while the likes of MoveOn.org, Americans Against Escalation in Iraq and CodePink were grabbing media headlines for their antics.

George Soros, and the LWL.

Perhaps that's why I can report to you (with absolute moral authority) that unlike those in the anti-victory movement, who have been mired with dissension and infighting, there's been very little discord in the ranks of the pro-troop camp. Oh sure, there's an occasional clash of personalities and those individuals who want it their way or no way, but these instances have been the rare exception, not the rule.

That's because at the end of the day our egos stop where our national security begins. We understand the importance of our troops' missions in Iraq. We recognize the consequences of handing al-Qaida a victory in Iraq, and letting the Middle East become a playground for terrorists.

“Politics Stop at the Waters Edge”. This principle recognized that no matter what our political differences, our survival and the survival of our Armed Forces on the battlefield depended on our presenting a unified front to our enemies. This principle “Politics Stop at the Waters Edge” has little sway with Left Wing Looneys. It’s too bad. I still believe that if we were united, and stayed united from 9-11 on, we would probably have won by now and our troops would be home.

We really are fighting two enemies. One over there, and one here. The one here IS more dangerous. Sorry for the interruption, back to Melanie.

We know that if al-Qaida wins, we'll be hit with deadly terrorist attacks in this country, and the countries of our allies, over and over again.

Like during the Clinton years. Sorry again.

The anti-victory/anti-military/anti-American/anti-everything coalition of liberal Democrats and Green Party members do not have a unifying theme other than what they're against. That's led to vicious infighting between the leaders of the anti-victory organizations that has spilled out into public view.

As Ann Coulter recently noted there's a colorful recent history of anti-war activists eating their own for, what else, political gain.

Another example: Cindy Sheehan, grieving mother turned professional America-basher is transforming yet again. Having previously earned the marquee role as the star of the left's anti-war movement and leading candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize, she's now been recast. Today Democratic Party activists deride Sheehan as a has-been, the object of so much derision after she announced plans to run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Sheehan's legacy, Camp Casey in Crawford, Texas, is as forlorn and pitiful as the two lone anti-war protesters who are all that remain of the once formidable army of activists. As the Washington Post points out, one of the last holdouts is Sonny, the dog. Including the dog in their counts allow the anti-war crowd to claim their numbers have doubled!

Contrast that to what you'll see next month when an array of pro-troop and veterans organizations fight back like you've never seen before. We're putting America on notice that victory is the only option. But the anti-war politicians are already starting to come up with mealy-mouth "compromise" solutions. You cannot compromise with terrorists. Their negotiation strategies usually end with human body parts flying through the air as a result of an IED explosion or the self-detonation of a suicide bomber in a hotel or restaurant.

EXACTLY what I have been saying. You cannot negociate with someone who’s starting point is your death. If you want more information in joining in on any of these, check out the list at the WND website.

Approval numbers in the tank. More and more LWL members telling the truth, the surge is working, simply because they cannot hind the truth any longer. The MMD actually reporting good news out of Iraq, for the same reason. The fact that most Americans CAN see right through this shift of attack by the LWL, and now this?

Yet, if you listen to them, they will tell you, they are doing all this FOR the American people. YOU want the troops home now. YOU want the President held accountable for this illegal and immoral war. YOU do not care what happens AFTER we leave. They are doing this ALL for YOU because this is what YOU want.

Really?
Peter
The Warner Situation

Hey folks,

Yup, it’s STILL Friday. I have to address this. Some of you, and you know who you are, have let me know that I was wrong. The MMD {Mass Media Drones} have been having a field day with this one.

I said that Warner was not just another Senator pumping his fist in the air and demanding President Bush bring the troops home now. I pointed out why. He stated he was never for a full pull out. He voted against timetables. He was simply advising the press that the President was planning on bring some of the troops home.

Well, well, well, the MMD have been saying the exact opposite. He IS another Republican Senator that is distancing himself from Bush and he DOES want the troops home now. We cannot win, ETC.

Even the White House was saying what I said and urged him to clarify his comments. So the AP asked him to do just that. According to the AP -Warner's Iraq proposal roils White House By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer

Sen. John Warner's suggestion that some troops leave Iraq by the end of the year has roiled the White House, with administration officials saying they've asked the influential Republican to clarify that he has not broken politically with President Bush.

But Warner said Friday he stands by his remarks and that he took no issue with how his views have been characterized.

"I'm not going to issue any clarification," Warner, R-Va., said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I don't think any clarification is needed."

This is just bizarre folks. You have one set of comments, two completely different interpretations, and he says "I don't think any clarification is needed."

Following his trip to Iraq this month, which included a two-hour meeting with Petraeus, Warner said time has run out on the Baghdad government and Bush should make good on his word that the U.S. commitment was not open-ended by announcing a pullout of troops this fall.

Not exactly what he said, but let’s go with that.

The symbolic gesture, he said, could amount to as few as 5,000 of the 160,000 troops in Iraq brought home by Christmas. The goal would be to pressure the Iraqi leaders to make the political compromises necessary to tamp down sectarian violence.

Warner's remarks were significant. While he said he would still oppose Democratic legislation ordering troop withdrawals, it was the first time he had embraced pulling troops out by a certain date. It also put him at odds with the president by rejecting Bush's long-held assertion that only security conditions on the ground should dictate deployments and that any announced redeployments would be an unhelpful broadcast of war plans to the enemy.

Before stepping before the television cameras, Warner met with Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the president's chief adviser on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

After Warner made his ideas public — and attracted headlines suggesting he had effectively broken with the president on the war — White House officials said they reached out to Warner's staff and asked him to clarify his position.

Told you so.

According to an administration official, Warner's staff agreed that the story was being portrayed incorrectly as Warner splitting with the president.

"They said they'd take steps to deal with it," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details of the private conversations.

Of course {Sigh}

However, in the AP interview, Warner said he personally had not been asked to revise his comments and he took no issue with how his views were reported. When asked whether he had indeed split with Bush on Iraq, he declined to say and noted his remarks speak for themselves.

"You have to surmise that on your own," he said.

What in the Blue Hell does THAT mean?

Warner's comments also prompted pushback Friday from GOP colleagues known for their steadfast allegiance to Bush on the war.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., issued a statement saying that efforts to pre-empt Petraeus' September review was "premature and irresponsible." Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said "it's a little curious to me that people are proposing a change in strategy when in fact the current strategy appears now to be working."

Likewise, the U.S. military commander in one of the more troubled areas of Iraq said Friday that embracing Warner's call to begin withdrawing troops before the end of the year would be "a giant step backward." Army Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of troops south of Baghdad, said that in such a scenario, militants pushed from his sector in recent operations would quickly return.

The swift pushback undercuts any suggestion that Warner — known for his caution and party loyalty, as well as his expertise on national security issues — might have been paving the way for Bush to announce his own plan to withdraw troops.

Warner, who has not announced whether he will run for re-election next year, said he spoke on his own behalf. He also said he was unconcerned about any political fallout and didn't want to wait until mid-September to speak out because by then Bush may have made up his mind.

WAIT!!! Read that again. Not a quote, but worth noting. He also said he was unconcerned about any political fallout and didn't want to wait until mid-September to speak out because by then Bush may have made up his mind. So perhaps he WAS calling on Bush to pull out troops. Then he said this.

"I've always said politics be damned," he said. "This thing is too important. . . . I simply view my effort as a way of putting out one option that could — I repeat could — help the situation."

Well, there you go. I guess. Now we are fully and completely clear on what Warner was saying. I think.
Peter
Iran Not Cooperating

Hey folks,

Why is this news. I have been following Little Hitler for years now. I have been warning you about his rise to power. I have printed what he is SAYING. I have been warning people that they need to listen to him.

Some in congress wants to TALK to him. Some in Congress and around this country want to ask him for his help in Iraq. Many in the country want to appease him. Just like the rise of the first and original Hitler.

Well, there is a new report out that talks about Iran. According to AP -Draft report logs bleak outlook for Iran By PAULINE JELINEK and KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writers

A draft intelligence report on Iran suggests a change in the Tehran regime appears unlikely any time soon despite growing public anger over the country's economic woes, U.S. officials said Thursday.

Really? When everyone was saying that Little Hitler {President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad} was going to lose power after the Iranian elections, I said this. December 21, 2006,
Update on Little Hitler

“I think that the AP is making a mistake here though. Even more who read this, run the risk of making the same mistake. Iran is NOT America. Their political system is not the same as ours. Hitler {The original} rose to power through their political system. While the world appeased and ignored, Hitler became bigger than the system. He just took power and control. It then no longer mattered what the Germans "wanted." It was too late.

So far it doesn’t seem that he {Little Hitler} cares what the people want already. Yesterday we will be gone. Today, Bush "the most hated." Still, some here, you know who you are, want to GIVE Iraq to President Ahmadinejad. They want to "talk" to him. They truly think that they can change his mind.

But here’s the problem. His mind is set on world domination. He TRULY believes that he is on a mission from his god. He truly believes that the end is near, and that it is HIS destiny to lead Muslims into the World powers. He TRULY wants you and anyone else non-Muslim, dead. Let’s hope that the people DO have some kind of voice. Sadly, I have my doubts.”

I was right then, I am right now.

The report also anticipates little progress in getting Iran to halt its nuclear program or stop supporting militant groups in the region, officials familiar with the draft said on condition of anonymity because the report has not been released.

Really? Back on May 26, 2007 I said this. Iran Heating Up Yet Again, Talks On Monday

“Little Hitler and the "Supreme Leader" will NOT back down from their Nuclear ambitions. They WANT bombs. They WANT to use the bombs. They want us dead. Israel wiped off the map. I do not understand how some see what the paper printed as a "good sign." It’s a little amazing, the boldness. But unlike the way we do things sometimes here, they do not run their policies per the Press there.

Yes folks, Iran is heating up yet again. This time though, I’m not so sure that it will, or SHOULD cool off anytime soon. They cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear bomb. If President Bush does nothing before he leaves the office in 08, and we get a spineless, gutless, pawn in there who is beholden to the likes of MORON.org or Soros. They {Little Hitler, Iran}WILL not only have, but will use them in due time. Time is ticking.”


Back to the Article

The latest in a series of reports from the nation's 16 intelligence agencies, the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran is nearly complete and could be shared with President Bush and other policymakers within weeks, said the officials. One said it is expected to be completed as soon as next week.

It is one of four reports the intelligence community is wrapping up on the Persian Gulf. Two others look at Iran's nuclear program and its military and conventional threat.

And an update on the situation in Iraq was released Thursday.

The report on Iran's political situation looks at issues ranging from the economy to its weapons programs, the officials said.

It says that Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will continue in power despite rising discontent with the worsening economy, the officials said.

With the backing of the unelected clerical leadership that controls Iran, hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected on a populist agenda in 2005, promising to bring oil revenues to every family, eradicate poverty and tackle unemployment. His failure to keep those promises has provoked increasingly fierce criticism over recent months from both conservatives and reformists, who point to rising housing, food and oil prices, including the recent decision to ration fuel.

The new intelligence report also says Iran will continue to pursue a nuclear program that the United States and others believe is aimed at developing nuclear weapons, the officials said. Tehran denies that and says the program is for power generation.

Addressing another dispute between Washington and Tehran, the report also says Iran will continue to cause problems in Iraq, the officials said.

They want us DEAD. Do you really think they are going to stop helping anyone that is killing American Soldiers? If you do, you are complete ignorant of the threat Little Hitler poses.

The U.S. government alleges that elements of Tehran's military are equipping and training militias involved in sectarian killings, roadside bombings of U.S. troops and other violence in Iraq — allegations that Iran denies.

Of course they do. But WAIT. Read that again. “The U.S. government alleges that elements of Tehran's military are equipping and training militias involved in sectarian killings

I thought it was a civil war. When did Iran become Iraqi citizens?

U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker met in Baghdad early this month with his counterpart from Iran, Hassan Kazemi Qomi, on the subject. Though it was the third round of U.S.-Iranian security talks in just over two months, officials have reported no progress.

There will not be any. You cannot negociate with someone whos starting point is you being dead.
U.S. officials and others also have criticized Iran for supplying money and weapons to the Shiite Muslim extremist group Hezbollah, which is on the U.S. government list of terrorist organizations.

The new intelligence estimate foresees that Iran will continue as a main backer of the group, along with Syria, the officials said.

The U.S. broke diplomatic relations with Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the hostage crisis at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.

The lingering poor relations have been exacerbated in recent years by rising tensions over Iran's nuclear program and U.S. allegations that Tehran is supporting armed groups in Iraq.

Iran said it had uncovered spy rings organized by the U.S. and its Western allies and has detained a number of Iranian-Americans.

The United States in recent months warned U.S. citizens against traveling to Iran, accusing Islamic authorities there of a "disturbing pattern" of harassment after the detention of a fourth Iranian-American for alleged espionage.

Folks, do not be surprised by this. I have been telling you these things for years. Little Hitler is rising. Iraq is slowly becoming the new Germany and all you have to do to KNOW what their intentions are, is LISTEN to them.
Peter