I Am Disappointed.

Hey folks,

Yes, I am truly disappointed. Remember back on Friday February 23, 2007, I said this.

This statement by Prince Harry himself, is absolutely honorable. While we have some in this country that jump out windows, run away like the cowards they are. Protest Bush every step of the way. Make statements about cutting the legs and arms off our soldiers while claiming to support them, Call our troops all kinds of names. Here is the Prince of England, third to the throne, saying,

"There is no way I am going to put myself through Sandhurst and then sit on my arse back home while my boys are out fighting for their country."

Now THAT is a true patriot. That is someone who, although does not have too, is willing to fight for his country. He could, if he chose, to sit in his nice comfy home, never a care in the world, and play armchair General, like so many cowards in this country.

He also will receive NO special protection. He DOESN’T want any.

Turns out I was wrong. Turns out that what some of you that told me, this is never going to happen, was right. As I was doing the "End of Day Roundup" last night, this came out. CNN Threats end Harry's Iraq mission

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Britain's Prince Harry will not serve in Iraq as a troop commander because of "a number of specific threats" against him, the UK's top general says.

A spokesperson for the 22-year-old prince says he is "very disappointed" by the decision.

Chief of the general staff Sir Richard Dannatt said Wednesday: "I have decided today that Prince Harry will not deploy as a troop commander with his squadron.

"I have come to this final decision following a further and wide round of consultation, including a visit to Iraq by myself at the end of last week," Dannatt said

"There have been a number of specific threats, some reported and some not reported. These threats exposed him and those around him to a degree of risk I considered unacceptable," he said.

REALLY? There has been threats in the middle of a war? I cannot believe that. People want to kill a big prize target of their enemy? REALLY? {Sigh}

They go on to say how disappointed he truly is. How sad. He is ROYALTY! If he truly wanted to go, he COULD force the issue. "NO, no, Pete. You cannot say that. Royalty is symbolism only today. He has no real power." I guarantee you he could shame the Government into letting him go if he chose to. If the Queen got involved? Well, maybe she did.

The AP put it this way. AP -Prince Harry will not serve in Iraq

Britain's army reversed course Wednesday and announced that Prince Harry will not be sent to Iraq with his regiment due to "specific threats" from insurgents that expose the third in line to the throne to an unacceptable degree of risk.

Harry had been expected to deploy to southern Iraq in the next few weeks but Army Chief of Staff Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt, who recently traveled to Iraq, said the situation there had become too dangerous and media scrutiny of the plans had exacerbated the situation.

OK, I’ll give them that one. The media probably did exacerbated the situation. They are constantly telling our enemy what we are planning on doing.

Media reports have said Iraqi insurgents planned to kill or kidnap the prince, and have circulated his photograph among militants in the southern city of Basra. One newspaper report quoted a militia leader saying he planned to take the prince hostage and to send him back to his grandmother — Queen Elizabeth II — "without his ears."

I believe this one hundred percent. Get this.

The decision to keep Harry out of Iraq could have a devastating impact on the morale of the British troops in the field, said Charles Heyman, a former British soldier and the editor of the book, "Armed Forces of the UK."

"Soldiers will say: 'If it's too dangerous for Prince Harry, then it's too dangerous for me. Is his life worth more than mine?' Well, from a political point of view, yes. But from a morale point of view the answer is no," Heyman said.

Imagine all through history, if some of our greatest Kings chose that it was too dangerous for them to fight? The greatest Kings in history held the sword in battle right next to their armies. Some became Kings through battle. They were warriors. Not just someone giving orders. Prince Harry was to follow in their foot steps. This would have solidified him as a warrior King to be. Who knows, it may have even jumped him up closer to the crown. The British would have fought like never before having Prince Harry leading the way. But now? The boy who would be King, is once again, just a boy.

I also said back on February 23.

There are quite a few people here in this country that could take lessons from this young Prince. Even some of our "so called" leaders would benefit from Prince Harry’s actions. He wants no special treatment on the battle field for fear of hurting troop moral. They want to cut funding to our troops, call our troops a failure, attack the Commander and Chief, and then turn around and say, "but we support you."

I have to say, I’m more proud of Prince Harry, than I am of some in my own country. I respect him greatly for doing this. While at the same time, some of our own make me sick with their cowardly ways.

I guest they learned from us, instead of the other way around. I am truly disappointed.
Peter


Source;
ME -So British Are Leaving? Two Words, Prince Harry
CNN Threats end Harry's Iraq mission
AP -Prince Harry will not serve in Iraq

End of Day Round Up 051607

Hey folks,

I had to do an end of day round up today. First, God speed to Mr Falwell. Like him or not, he did do a lot of good for a lot of people durring his time here on earth. I pray his family can rest in the comfort of the fact, it is a far better place to that of which he went, then this of which he left.

Second, the debate last night. Much more of a debate than the one on MSNBC. A lot more interesting questions also. According to CBS yesterday, CBS -Pure Horserace: All Eyes On Rudy, Romney

Most eyes will be on Rudy Giuliani, who has been under a microscope of late on issues ranging from his consulting business connections to his evolving and sometimes confusing position on abortion.

They go on to talk about his Pro-Choice stance. Then they say.

When Giuliani is not on the hot seat, Mitt Romney is likely to attract the attention of the Fox News debate moderators and maybe some of his rivals. As Giuliani has gotten intense scrutiny of late, Romney has enjoyed something of a media boomlet. He is on the current issue of Time magazine, was featured on 60 Minutes last Sunday night and has raised his profile through cable ads that are also running in Iowa and New Hampshire.

While both men came to the race with similar weaknesses on social issues near and dear to many Republicans who vote in the primary process, Romney has thus far handled the questions better. Whereas Giuliani has sought to walk a very narrow line on abortion, Romney simply changed his position altogether. Formerly a supporter of abortion rights, the former Massachusetts governor is now a staunch opponent of abortion. He has taken a similar approach to other social issues, such as gun control.

Interesting note. When a Democrat flip flops, like Hillary, she has a right to change her mind. She is seen as bold, to be honest, and change her position. The magic words for the LWL and the Mass Media Drones is "I apologize." They say, "I was wrong, I have seen the light, I changed my mind." All is forgiven and forgotten by all. But a Republican does it? It’s exploited, dissected, twisted, and thrown back in their face.

Romney was wrong on his stance. He learned more of the truth of what abortion is, he looked at the evidence, he changed his position. I did also. I was very pro-Death Penalty until a friend of mine, Rev. Jim Bridges, convinced me to take another look at my position. I looked at it. I listened to him. I saw it as it is. The truth. I have changed my position. I am now VERY much against the Death Penalty in it’s current form. I truly believe that Romney doing this, showed a strength, not a weakness.

Now the AP -GOP hopefuls debate abortion, tax cuts. By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer.

Under pressure from their rivals, the leading Republican presidential contenders defended their conservative credentials on abortion, gun control and tax cuts in a feisty debate Tuesday night.

"Republicans should be uniting" to defeat the Democrats, implored former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, rather than stressing their differences with one another.

Giuliani, pressed repeatedly on his support for abortion rights, wasn't the only contender to field pointed questions.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney conceded he had signed legislation banning assault weapons but said, "Let's get the record straight." He said he is a supporter of the rights of gun owners under the Second Amendment.

This is why I highlighted these two first in the "Closer Look" article. I truly believe that these are the two that stand the best chance of getting the nod. To tell you the truth, if I were to bet? I would put my money, at this point, on Romney. {STILL WAY TOO EARLY} I am starting to just get a feeling.

Some highlights,

Giuliani called for "Reagan-like budget cuts across the board" of between 5 percent and 20 percent, and Tommy Thompson said he had cast many vetoes while governor of Wisconsin to hold down spending.

Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore bore in, as well. "Some of the people on this stage were very liberal in characterizing themselves as conservatives, particularly on the issues of abortion and taxes and health care," he said.

He singled out Giuliani for his position on abortion and said another rival, Mike Huckabee, had raised taxes while serving as governor of Arkansas.

Huckabee responded that the state raised taxes in response to a court order and said he had cut taxes repeatedly.

On defense for much of the evening, Giuliani switched gears nearly an hour into the debate, challenging Rep. Ron Paul suggestion that the U.S. bombing of Iraq had contributed to the terrorist attacks of 2001.

As mayor of New York at the time of the attacks, Giuliani said sternly, "I don't think I've ever heard that before, and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations."

Ron Paul basically blamed America for being attacked on 9-11. I truly believe he damned himself with a Dean holler velocity with that statement. I truly believe that Paul is out. He just doesn’t know it yet.

Of course the line of the day that has the MMD and the LWL going completely nuts right now?

"We've had a Congress that's spent money like John Edwards at a beauty shop," Huckabee said, mocking the Democratic presidential hopeful's penchant for $400 haircuts.

It is STILL way too early to say who I like enough to vote for. But, the feeling is growing. There is just something about Romney. Never underestimate the simplicity of this simple fact. He LOOKS like a President. Just keep that in mind.

Other news of the day? Frances new President has been sworn in. AP -Sarkozy inaugurated as French president

PARIS - Nicolas Sarkozy took over France's helm Wednesday in a hurry to make good on pledges to restore order to violence-wracked housing projects, to rev up the economy and to bring political enemies into a dramatically different government — expected to be half women.

Along with mending friendship with us. Should be interesting to watch. He just named Francois Fillon as prime minister.

This one is just funny to me. AP- Senate Dems fail to cut off war funds

The 67-29 vote against the Democrats' measure left it far short of the 60 needed to advance. But more than half the Senate's Democrats supported the move, a marked change from last summer when only a dozen members of the rank and file backed a troop withdrawal deadline.

{Laughing} Hillary and Obama voted for this as well folks. They knew it would never pass. Just more idiocies. If this is really what the American people want, then why did it not pass? {Sigh} Oh yeah, no pork.

Reuters -Wolfowitz will not resign from World Bank: lawyer

"Mr. Wolfowitz will not resign under this cloud and he will rather put this matter to a full vote," Wolfowitz's lawyer, Robert Bennett, told Reuters.

Seemed like a witch hunt to me the whole time. We’ll have to see what his next step is.

THIS JUST IN!!! Prince Henry will NOT serve in Iraq. According to, well, seems like EVERYBODY, but CNN Threats end Harry's Iraq mission

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Britain's Prince Harry will not serve in Iraq as a troop commander because of "a number of specific threats" against him, the UK's top general says.

A spokesperson for the 22-year-old prince says he is "very disappointed" by the decision.

More on this one in the AM. That’s it for now folks. Got to go. See you tomorrow.
Peter

Sources;
CBS -Pure Horserace: All Eyes On Rudy, Romney
AP -GOP hopefuls debate abortion, tax cuts
AP- Senate Dems fail to cut off war funds
AP -Sarkozy inaugurated as French president
Reuters -Wolfowitz will not resign from World Bank: lawyer
CNN Threats end Harry's Iraq mission

So British Are Leaving? Two Words, Prince Harry

Hey folks,

You KNEW I had to do it. That’s right, I have to point out the simple truth. Remember what we talked about yesterday? How the Mass Media jumped the gun saying that the British were pulling out of Iraq. Remember these quotes?

Joe Scarborough of MSNBC "Scarborough Country" said,

"Breaking news out of Great Britain, Tony Blair will be announcing tomorrow that the United Kingdom is abandoning Iraq and President Bush."

Brian Williams and Meredith Vieira of NBC, jumped in to the fray. Brian said,

"The United States may be starting to lose a big ally in the fight in Iraq. This may be the beginning of the end of British involvement in the Iraq war."

Meredith said,

"The British on the march home from Iraq."

Then, I love this one, Robin Roberts of ABC, said,

" Breaking news overnight, the British are leaving."

So they wanted you to believe that even Bush’s biggest ally was abandoning him. They wanted you to believe that the British believed we could not win, so they were pulling their troops from harms way. If they can pull out, then Bush should as well. Right? But then the big news yesterday was what?

Prince Harry, third in line to the British throne, is to join troops serving in Iraq, defense officials confirmed Thursday.

Ending weeks of speculation on the young royal's future, the Ministry of Defense said Harry, 22, will be deployed with his Blues and Royals regiment in May or June this year.

The prince will become the first royal to serve in a war zone since his uncle, the Duke of York, piloted helicopters in the Falklands conflict 25 years ago.

Officials said Harry, who graduated as an officer last year, will serve as a troop commander in charge of several light tank reconnaissance vehicles.

This statement by Prince Harry himself, is absolutely honorable. While we have some in this country that jump out windows, run away like the cowards they are. Protest Bush every step of the way. Make statements about cutting the legs and arms off our soldiers while claiming to support them, Call our troops all kinds of names. Here is the Prince of England, third to the throne, saying,

"There is no way I am going to put myself through Sandhurst and then sit on my arse back home while my boys are out fighting for their country."

Now THAT is a true patriot. That is someone who, although does not have too, is willing to fight for his country. He could, if he chose, to sit in his nice comfy home, never a care in the world, and play armchair General, like so many cowards in this country.

He also will receive NO special protection. He DOESN’T want any. One of the reasons? The USA Today put it this way,

The statement did say, however, that Harry would "undertake a normal tour of duty."

British defense expert, Eric Grove said that Harry should serve in a regular fashion. To be held back from normal operational duty would hurt the morale of the rest of the prince's regiment, he said.

Yes folks, the third in line for the crown of England, going into war, without special protection, without special treatment, and without a complaint. He is doing his duty, and will take NO part in hurting the moral of their troops there.

There are quite a few people here in this country that could take lessons from this young Prince. Even some of our "so called" leaders would benefit from Prince Harry’s actions. He wants no special treatment on the battle field for fear of hurting troop moral. They want to cut funding to our troops, call our troops a failure, attack the Commander and Chief, and then turn around and say, "but we support you."

I have to say, I’m more proud of Prince Harry, than I am of some in my own country. I respect him greatly for doing this. While at the same time, some of our own make me sick with their cowardly ways.

As for the British, "abandoning Iraq and President Bush," "The United States may be starting to lose a big ally in the fight in Iraq. This may be the beginning of the end of British involvement in the Iraq war," and, "the British are leaving?" Interestingly enough, as they are suppose to be abandoning us and Iraq, Prince Harry is preparing to go to war.
Peter


Sources;
CNN-Iraq tank command for Prince Harry
USA Today-Prince Harry off to Iraq