Obamination: Continuing Defeat in Iraq

Fox News provided a transcript of  President Obama's remarks, click the link to read  the lies in context.  I will quote and refute the worst of the lies.

"I'd like to talk to you about the end of our combat mission in Iraq, the ongoing security challenges we face, and the need to rebuild our nation here at home."

end of our combat mission in Iraq

    We still have troops on the ground in theater, and they will be targeted by suicide bombers and IEDs. The casualties; waste of life and limb have moved into a new phase, they have not ended.  

ongoing security challenges

    Islamic terrorism, both home grown and international remains a serious threat to our security.  Iraq and Afghanistan remain members in good standing of the set of terrorist sponsoring states.  Iran continues on  the fast track to nuclear ascension, while China rapidly expands its military might.  North Korea continues to threaten renewed conflict.

rebuild our nation here at home

    That kind of malignant malarkey has no place in a message about national security.  President Obama is mixing domestic demagoguery with national security demagoguery.  We do not need to rebuild, we need to reverse the government policies & actions that have stifled  economic activity.

"But this milestone should serve as a reminder to all Americans that the future is ours to shape if we move forward with confidence and commitment."

confidence and commitment

    Insufficient confidence & commitment is what got us into this mess.  The war is lost precisely because Shrub lacked the confidence & commitment to accurately identify and engage the enemy.  He tried to do an invasion on the cheap, and it proved costly.

"A war to disarm a state became a fight against an insurgency. Terrorism and sectarian warfare threatened to tear Iraq apart."

war to disarm a state

    LibTards continue to  ignore the distinction between dynamic and static conditions.  If we disarm a state, it will eventually rearm  if we do not continually occupy and dominate it.  If we destroy a state, and completely eliminate it, it will not return to threaten us again.  LibTards just can't figure that out.

Terrorism and sectarian warfare

    Both were entirely predictable and were predicted.  Both could have been at least partially suppressed had we employed sufficient force from the outset.  Shrub, fearing both domestic and international criticism, tried to do it on the cheap and failed miserably.  Enemy assets fell into the hands of those most willing to use them against us because we failed to secure them in a timely manner.

"Because of our troops and civilians -and because of the resilience of the Iraqi people - Iraq has the opportunity to embrace a new destiny, even though many challenges remain."

opportunity to embrace a new destiny

    When you can't identify the enemy, you can't win the war.  Islam is the enemy.  The majority of Iraq's population  remains  Muslim. Iraq's new constitution makes Shari'ah the primary source of its law.  Iraq remains in the same rut, only the regime has changed.

"This completes a transition to Iraqi responsibility for their own security."

Iraqi responsibility

    That idiocy, a leftover from Shrub, would be comedic if it were not so tragic.  By some legerdemain of arrogance & conceit, Shrub set out to train the enemy to prevent terrorists from using Iraq as a staging ground. He set out to train Shi'ia & Sunni not to slaughter each other.  The Iraqui security forces are thoroughly infiltrated by terrorists.  Obama maintains Shrub's tradition of cognitive dissonance.

"Tonight, I encourage Iraq's leaders to move forward with a sense of urgency to form an inclusive government that is just, representative, and accountable to the Iraqi people."

just, representative,  accountable

    And Islamic?  The combination is impossible, and Obama knows it.  Corruption abounds, and there is great division and no will to compromise.

"...the Iraqi people will have a strong partner in the United States. Our combat mission is ending, but our commitment to Iraq's future is not."

strong partner

    They are Muslims, idiot. Allah explicitly commands them not to take Kuffar as partners.

"This new approach reflects our long-term partnership with Iraq-one based upon mutual interests, and mutual respect"

mutual interests

    We have no mutual interest with Islam. Islam's interest is total world conquest and domination, so that only Allah is worshiped altogether and everywhere; so that Shari'ah is enforced globally. Our interest is in liberty, security, prosperity & peace. There is no intersection, no convergence; nothing shared.

mutual respect

    There is no mutual respect and can be none.  Islam is contemptuous of everything un-Islamic. Islam hates our way of life without reservation and seeks to destroy it. It labels us Kuffar: rebells against Allah who must be defeated and gathered together into Hell.

"Ending this war is not only in Iraq's interest- it is in our own. The United States has paid a huge price to put the future of Iraq in the hands of its people. We have sent our young men and women to make enormous sacrifices in Iraq, and spent vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home. We have persevered because of a belief we share with the Iraqi people -a belief that out of the ashes of war, a new beginning could be born in this cradle of civilization. Through this remarkable chapter in the history of the United States and Iraq, we have met our responsibility. Now, it is time to turn the page."

our own interest

    Our interest is in victory, not ignominious defeat thinly disguised. We wasted blood and treasure because we were unwilling to name and engage the enemy.

belief we share with the Iraqi people

    How can anyone be stupid enough to believe that?  We got rid of Saddam and replaced him with Shi'ites. We gained nothing.

met our responsibility

    We failed to secure  Iraq's arsenals and ammunition dumps.  We failed to secure their banks, museums and oil infrastructure.  We failed to eliminate Islam from Iraq because we made no effort at all.

"The greatness of our democracy is grounded in our ability to move beyond our differences, and to learn from our experience as we confront the many challenges ahead. And no challenge is more essential to our security than our fight against Al Qaeda."

learn from our experience

    We did not learn from Vietnam. We should have learned to seize and hold territory 24/7. We should have learned to secure borders and eliminate sanctuaries & supply lines.   We did not learn from Tehran. We should have learned to use massive, disproportionate  force  early on.  We did not learn from Somalia either.  

fight against Al Qaeda

    Our enemy is Islam, not a sub set of Islam.  What part of 8:39 & 9:29 does President Obama not comprehend?  What part of "The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High..." does he not comprehend?

"Americans across the political spectrum supported the use of force against those who attacked us on 9/11. Now, as we approach our 10th year of combat in Afghanistan, there are those who are understandably asking tough questions about our mission there. But we must never lose sight of what's at stake. As we speak, Al Qaeda continues to plot against us, and its leadership remains anchored in the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan. We will disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda, while preventing Afghanistan from again serving as a base for terrorists."

those who attacked us on 9/11

    We were attacked by Muslims, motivated by the damnable doctrines of Islam which sanctify & mandate genocidal conquest  & terrorism.  Who has the courage to state the fact that security and peace are functions of eliminating Islam from the world?  Certainly not our President!

disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda

    Which availeth naught, because its parent organizations: al Ikhwan al-Muslimeen & Islam remain undaunted.

base for terrorists

    So long as the population and government of Afghanistan or any other nation remain Islamic, they will be a base for terrorists.

"Within Afghanistan, I have ordered the deployment of additional troops who-under the command of General David Petraeus -are fighting to break the Taliban's momentum."

break the Taliban's momentum

    Idiot!  We need to kill them!  When you go on the offensive, you kill the enemy and destroy their infrastructure.  Breaking their momentum is the wrong objective.

"A new push for peace in the Middle East will begin here tomorrow."

    They never learn. You can't push a piece of string.  You must put it around Islam's neck and pull it tight.  If you want peace anywhere  on the globe, eliminate Islam from that place.  Foundational Islamic doctrine requires the elimination of Israel and Jews.  No matter  what demands you make against Israel, she will never obtain peace and security without first eliminating Islam from the region.  Peace can only be obtained through victory, and victory by extinction of Islam.

 "America will do more than just defeat on the battlefield those who offer hatred and destruction -we will also lead among those who are willing to work together to expand freedom and opportunity for all people."

defeat on the battlefield

    Islam can not be defeated on the battlefield.  It must be destroyed by emancipating Allah's slaves.  We will have victory when they are all emancipated or dead, not before. Until that happy day there will be neither peace nor security.  Islam is perpetual war.   We must stop electing stupid people who can not recognize that fatal fact.

willing to work together

    The set of people willing to work together to expand freedom and opportunity and the set of Muslims are mutually exclusive.  There is no intersection of those sets. Islam is slavery, the polar opposite of freedom.  Islam is plunder, the polar opposite of productivity & opportunity.

"And the bedrock of that prosperity must be a growing middle class."

growing middle class

    How swiftly and smoothly president Obama segues from defense deception to domestic deception; from military warfare to class warfare. The imprudent spendthrift policies and economic meddling of Obama's party have brought us to our present low state.  Yes, Republicans who lacked the courage to resist aided them in their demolition of our economy.

    We need economic expansion, not redistribution! Get your boot off our necks!  Make Shrub's tax cuts permanent. Enact further tax cuts. Save the funds unspent in the imprudent "bail out"  & "stimulus".  Open all domestic oil fields to exploration and production both on and off shore.  And repeal  the potentially disastrous  "health care reform"!

"Part of that responsibility is making sure that we honor our commitments to those who have served our country with such valor. "

honor our commitments to veterans

The Obama administration plans to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for the treatment service related injuries of military personnel 

-Truth! - but Cancelled

    Is that any less than the ultimate arrogant demagoguery?  He blathers about commitments, expecting us to forget how he tried to screw the veterans!  We've got to impeach that creep!!!

"In an age without surrender ceremonies, we must earn victory through the success of our partners and the strength of our own nation."

age without surrender ceremonies

    There was a surrender ceremony the year before I was born.  Why should it be the last? 

Sphere: Related Content

Obamination: Wasting More Blood and Treasure in Afghanistan

In remarks at West Point, President Barack Hussein Obama laid out his plan for the surge in Afghanistan. As is my usual practice, I will present excerpts in block quote format interspersed with my comments.

To address these important issues, it's important to recall why America and our allies were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan in the first place. We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people. They struck at our military and economic nerve centers. They took the lives of innocent men, women, and children without regard to their faith or race or station. Were it not for the heroic actions of passengers onboard one of those flights, they could have also struck at one of the great symbols of our democracy in Washington, and killed many more.

In this paragraph, President Obama begins to set up his pretext, one shared by his predecessor. Any sentient American more than 17 years old must be very sheltered to be unaware of the fact that the abomination was planned by Muslims in Afghanistan. Sure, we needed to retaliate. But the next paragraph contains egregious deceptions which must be refuted in detail.

As we know, these men belonged to al Qaeda -- a group of extremists who have distorted and defiled Islam, one of the world’s great religions, to justify the slaughter of innocents. Al Qaeda’s base of operations was in Afghanistan, where they were harbored by the Taliban -- a ruthless, repressive and radical movement that seized control of that country after it was ravaged by years of Soviet occupation and civil war, and after the attention of America and our friends had turned elsewhere.

Al-Qaeda means "the base", it is equivalent to Ummah al Islamiyya: the set whose members are Muslims. Taliban means "students of the Qur'an". Those are Muslims. There is nothing special about them except the fact that they are believers who obey Allah and emulate Moe. They are normal, not exceptional. They have not "distorted and defiled Islam". Islam remains what it was when Moe died in 632, a damnable war cult, not a religion of peace. There is nothing great about Islam. It conquered half the known world. Is that greatness? In the process, it murdered 270*10⁶, what is great about that? Great slaughter, is desired by Allah, Islam's demon, who established it as a prerequisite for releasing hostages for ransom. That is genocide; if genocide defines greatness, then morality has been inverted.

Islam does not recognize "innocents" outside Ummah al;-Islamiyya. Only Muslims can be innocent, all others are rebels against Allah, who must be defeated and gathered together into Hell. Jihad against disbelievers is not an optional extra added by extremists; it is not bida, it is standard Islamic doctrine laid down in Surah Al-Anfal & Surah At-Taubah. 8:39 contains Allah's command to fight pagans until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped on a global scale. 9:29 contains Allah's command to fight Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until they are subjugated and extorted. Moe confirmed the command to Jihad, which continues until the last day. Islamic law requires a minimum of one military expedition against kufar in every year, failing only when there is insufficient strength. Doubters & dissenters should open Reliance of the Traveller to O9.0 and continue reading through O9.9. O9.1 is explicit about the communal obligation to attack disbelievers in their own countries in every year. O9.8 & 9.9 reveal what the caliph does as a regular practice, aggressively, not defensively: he makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians until they become Muslims or pay extortion, he fights all other people until they become Muslim or dead. How is it possible that a religion has such a law in its canon?

America, our allies and the world were acting as one to destroy al Qaeda’s terrorist network and to protect our common security.

The terrorist network is Islam. It consists of every Mosque, Madrassa & Muslim wheresoever dispersed over the face of the earth. Destroying al-Qaeda is not possible without destroying Islam! No effort is being made to accomplish that necessary objective. Both President G.W. Bush and President Obama deny the fact that Islam is at war against us. Our elected leaders will not acknowledge the fact that Islam is intrinsically inimical to life, liberty & representative government.

Under the banner of this domestic unity and international legitimacy -- and only after the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin Laden -- we sent our troops into Afghanistan. Within a matter of months, al Qaeda was scattered and many of its operatives were killed. The Taliban was driven from power and pushed back on its heels. A place that had known decades of fear now had reason to hope. At a conference convened by the U.N., a provisional government was established under President Hamid Karzai. And an International Security Assistance Force was established to help bring a lasting peace to a war-torn country.

You can not scatter what is dispersed globally: Islam. President Bush lacked the courage to attack Tora Bora with sufficient force to eliminate bin Laden. Even eliminating him would not end the Jihad.

Neither were Taliban driven from power. Taliban are only Muslims who study the Qur'an. Afghanistan's new constitution makes the Qur'an the source of its law. Umdat as-Salik O9.8, which requires warfare against us, is part of Afghanistan's law. This nation and the world are being misled by morons and traitors. It is not possible to bring peace to a nation whose culture is war. The only peace Afghanistan can have is the peace of the grave, when the graveyard is full and the surface is empty.

Today, after extraordinary costs, we are bringing the Iraq war to a responsible end. We will remove our combat brigades from Iraq by the end of next summer, and all of our troops by the end of 2011. That we are doing so is a testament to the character of the men and women in uniform.

There is no responsible end to the war in Iraq while it remains populated by Muslims, our sworn enemies. When our troops leave, Iraq will revert to war between Shiia & Sunni, when that warfare ends, it will resume status quo ante as a sponsor of terrorism. No other outcome is possible while its population remains Islamic. The pull out on a set timetable is a testimony to the stupidity and treachery of our elected leaders.

But while we've achieved hard-earned milestones in Iraq, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated. After escaping across the border into Pakistan in 2001 and 2002, al Qaeda’s leadership established a safe haven there. Although a legitimate government was elected by the Afghan people, it's been hampered by corruption, the drug trade, an under-developed economy, and insufficient security forces.

No legitimate government can be composed of Muslims! Islam requires theocracy, one man rule by the Qur'an, not man made legislation. While Afghanistan remains Islamic and tribal, it will be corrupt and violent, neither well governed, peaceful nor stable. The problems listed by President Obama are not members of the set of soluble problems. Even if they could be solved, Afghanistan would revert to status quo ante: a state sponsor of terrorism.

I set a goal that was narrowly defined as disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Qaeda and its extremist allies, and pledged to better coordinate our military and civilian efforts.

The "extremist allies" are every Muslim on the face of the earth. Will you kill them all? Will you convert them to a peaceful religion? No, you will do neither, and the terrorism will continue because you are a cowardly fool.

And our forces lack the full support they need to effectively train and partner with Afghan security forces and better secure the population.

"Afghan security forces" is an oxymoron. Those forces are composed of Muslims. Muslims are warriors, not security forces. To Muslims, peace is the condition of the world after they have completed their conquest of it. No matter how much you train them, they will shoot you in the back when given the opportunity, and they will betray your plans to the mujihideen.

I owe you a mission that is clearly defined, and worthy of your service. And that's why, after the Afghan voting was completed, I insisted on a thorough review of our strategy.

Any strategy that leaves live Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq is a total waste of blood and treasure, a fool's errand of the worst sort. No good outcome is possible.

After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. These are the resources that we need to seize the initiative, while building the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of Afghanistan.

When will our forces leave Bosnia? When will our forces leave Germany? When will our forces leave Japan? You have presented our enemy with a time line telling them how long they must wait before they can seize power and restore the status quo ante. I call it treason.

I do not make this decision lightly. I opposed the war in Iraq precisely because I believe that we must exercise restraint in the use of military force, and always consider the long-term consequences of our actions.

How do you win a war with restraint? How do you win a war without identifying and killing the enemy? What are the long term consequences of allowing Islam to continue to exist on the face of the earth, accruing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons which it will not long hesitate to use? What were the consequences of ignoring Hitler's military buildup, substituting appeasement for preemption?

Most of all, I know that this decision asks even more of you -- a military that, along with your families, has already borne the heaviest of all burdens.

You are asking them to die for a lie. You are sending them to defeat, wasting their blood and the taxpayer's treasure.

If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow.

Our security is at stake wherever Islam exists; wherever Zakat is collected and sent to Hamas, Hizbollah & al-Qaeda; wherever Muslim satrapies are stockpiling missiles and rushing to construct nuclear warheads.

So, no, I do not make this decision lightly. I make this decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by al Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak. This is no idle danger; no hypothetical threat. In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror. And this danger will only grow if the region slides backwards, and al Qaeda can operate with impunity. We must keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and to do that, we must increase the stability and capacity of our partners in the region.

Strike al-Qaeda, insert Islam. The danger will grow no matter what, unless you eliminate Islam from the region. Then, the danger will come from another region where Allah's writ runs and his slaves reside.

No Muslim is our partner! Muslims who claim to be our partners are practicing al-taqeyya and kitman; they are deceiving you. Allah explicitly forbids Muslims to be friends or partners of kuffar. Muslims must be in a dominant, not equal or subordinate relationship with kuffar.

To meet that goal, we will pursue the following objectives within Afghanistan. We must deny al Qaeda a safe haven. We must reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government. And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's security forces and government so that they can take lead responsibility for Afghanistan's future.

Islam has bases in Iran, Syria & Lebanon. There are Islamic bases and training camps right here in America. What will you do about them? You say "al-Qaeda" when the correct word is Islam. Why can't you name the enemy? How do you hope to defeat an enemy you can not identify? Weak or strong, Afghanistan's government, like that of Pakistan, is in the hands of Muslims, our enemies. In the end, they will attack us and our allies. There is no benefit in strengthening them.

We will meet these objectives in three ways. First, we will pursue a military strategy that will break the Taliban's momentum and increase Afghanistan's capacity over the next 18 months.

To win, you must seize and hold territory 24/7/365. You must kill enemy combatants. No more catch and release. You must deny sanctuary, both in Pakistan and Afghanistan. You must deny human shields. Your rules of engagement are costing our soldiers their lives. The word is treason. Like Lindon Johnson, you are murdering our service members for political gain. More troops is not a strategy, it is feeding the meat grinder, filling coffins.

They'll increase our ability to train competent Afghan security forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans.

Afghans are the enemy, idiot. They are not our allies nor partners, they are Muslims. You are training them to fight against us, just like Arafat's "security forces".

We will support efforts by the Afghan government to open the door to those Taliban who abandon violence and respect the human rights of their fellow citizens.

.Stupid statements like that make my blood boil! Muslims do not abandon violence without abandoning Islam! Muslims do not respect human rights! They never did and never will!! Allah does not, Moe did not and they will not. Being a Muslim, President Obama knows that. There is only one possibility: treason.

We're in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That's why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border.

Strike cancer, insert Islam. Otherwise the statement must remain false. No strategy can work unless it causes Islam to be eliminated from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Any outcome that leaves them Islamic is a defeat.

And there is no doubt that the United States and Pakistan share a common enemy.

Islam is the enemy of all mankind. Pakistan is our enemy. Is Obama too stupid to comprehend objective factual reality or a traitor. I don't believe its stupidity.

Moving forward, we are committed to a partnership with Pakistan that is built on a foundation of mutual interest, mutual respect, and mutual trust. We will strengthen Pakistan’s capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists whose location is known and whose intentions are clear.

Imbecility, maundery & treachery; what a combination! We have no mutual interest with Muslims. They do not respect us. We can not trust them. They support those groups, they do not combat them. Pakistan was, is now and will continue to be a safe haven for terrorists. Muslim and terrorist are synonymous terms.

To abandon this area now -- and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance -- would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.

A single drop of truth in a river of lies. It stands out like a carp swimming upstream in a sewer.

Second, there are those who acknowledge that we can't leave Afghanistan in its current state, but suggest that we go forward with the troops that we already have. But this would simply maintain a status quo in which we muddle through, and permit a slow deterioration of conditions there. It would ultimately prove more costly and prolong our stay in Afghanistan, because we would never be able to generate the conditions needed to train Afghan security forces and give them the space to take over.

The same is true of Obama's strategy.

Now, let me be clear: None of this will be easy. The struggle against violent extremism will not be finished quickly, and it extends well beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan. It will be an enduring test of our free society, and our leadership in the world. And unlike the great power conflicts and clear lines of division that defined the 20th century, our effort will involve disorderly regions, failed states, diffuse enemies.

Shrub failed the test. Obamination is failing the test. We need leaders who can measure up, men like Churchill, McArthur & Truman.

We will have to take away the tools of mass destruction. And that's why I've made it a central pillar of my foreign policy to secure loose nuclear materials from terrorists, to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and to pursue the goal of a world without them -- because every nation must understand that true security will never come from an endless race for ever more destructive weapons; true security will come for those who reject them.

Nukes are in the world. There is no possibility of ensuring that our enemies have eliminated their inventories and won't make more. The dream of a nuke free world is impossible. Continuing to harbor it is evidence of insanity, or is it treason?

Like Shrub, Obamination refuses to identify and accurately describe the enemy. He falsely ascribes to the enemy objectives that it does not have. He falsely characterizes our relationship with certain enemy powers as an alliance or partnership. He postulates a non-existent dichotomy between the enemy, which he calls a partner, and a subset of the enemy, which he mislabels as the enemy. Obamination's strategy is a house of cards founded on a lie. It can not stand in the storm of reality.

Sphere: Related Content

Obamination: Ramadan Treason

President Obama's Ramadan message includes the usual boiler plate treason. I have selected some exemplary dissembling for refutation.

• "These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common"

The implication is both overly broad and false. Islam does not share any principles with Western Civilization. Next time, list them and submit proof that Muslims share them. I won't hold my breath while I wait for that list and evidence.

• lslam's role in advancing justice, progress,. tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings

Nothing could be further from the truth. Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraphs 8 &9 charge the Caliph with the duty of attacking Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians & Pagans at least once in every year. Those laws are based on Surahs At-Taubah & Al-Anfal of the Qur'an. Exactly how does that advance justice, tolerance & dignity?

Chapter 11, Paragraph 5, says of dhimmis:

• 2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);

• 3- are not greeted with "as-Salamu 'alaykum";

• -4- must keep to the side of the street;

• -5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims' buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;

• -6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;

• -7- and are forbidden to build new churches.

Exactly how do those laws advance justice, tolerance & dignity?

• "For instance, fasting is a concept shared by many faiths - including my own Christian faith - as a
  way to bring; people closer to God, and to those among us who cannot take their next meal for
  granted. And the support that Muslims provide to others recalls our responsibility to advance
  opportunity and prosperity for people everywhere. For all of us must remember that the world we
  want to build - and the changes that we Want to make - must begin in our own hearts, and our
  own communities."

Note the clause which I emphasized: Islamic law forbids giving Zakat to Kufar. Refer to Reliance of the Traveller H8.24.

• It is not permissible to give zakat to a non-Muslim, or to someone whom one is obliged to support (def: m12.1), such as a wife or family member.

President Obama conflates charity & universal benevolence with Socialism and at the same time, mixing domestic policy with foreign.

• "Beyond America' borders. we are also committed to keeping our responsibility to build a world
  that is more peaceful and secure. That is why we are responsibly ending the war in Iraq."

The invasion of Iraq could only increase peace & security by rendering Iraq unIslamic. Iraq & Afghanistan will be threats to peace & security so long as their people and governments are Islamic. By leaving Iraq with Islam still in place, we decrease peace and security below the level pertaining before the invasion.

• 'That is why we are isolating violent extremists while empowering the people in places like Afghanistan
  and Pakistan."

"Violent extremists" is a shibboleth designed to draw our attention away from the fatal fact of intrinsic violence in Islam.. Islamic Jihad, terrorism & genocide result from intrinsic scriptural doctrines & traditional example, not from 'extremists'. The difference between 'extremists' and 'the people' is zeal. Violence is a function of intensity of belief & zealotry. We can't isolate them because we can't identify them. Besides, zealotry can increase spontaneously or as a result of aggressive sermons at the local Mosque.

• "That is why we are unyielding in our support for a two-state solution that
  recognizes the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security."

Israelis are Palestinians. Palestinians are Jews . The so called Palestinians President Obama refers to are undifferentiated Arabs seeking to reconquer Israel demographically and militarily. State or no state, so long as there are Muslims within rocket range of Israel, Israel will not obtain peace or security no matter what she does. Israel's existence is an offense to Muslims because her land was conquered by Caliph Umar in 638. Allah promised Muslims victory and dominance over the region. By reclaiming her land, Israel proves Allah to be an impotent idol. Muslims can't tolerate that! Muslims will continue to attack Israel until they are successfully in reconquest or Israel ushers them into hell. There is nothing we can do about it.

• " And that is why America will always stand for the universal rights of all people to speak their mind, practice their
  religion, contribute fully to society and have confidence in the rule of law."

I emphasized the problematic phrase in that sentence. Islam requires Jihad, genocide & terrorism. It is not possible to fully practice Islam without engaging in them until their world conquest is completed. If they have a right to practice Islam, then we have no right to live; no human dignity.

• All of these efforts are a part of America' commitment to engage Muslims and Muslim-majority
  nations on the basis of mutual interest and mutual respect.

Idiocy & treason are in the emphasized phrase. Islam has no respect for Kufar. To Muslims, we are rebels against Allah, and they are duty bound to defeat us and gather us together into Hell, the worst of living creatures. We have no mutual interest with Muslims! Their interest is world conquest, ours is peace, security and prosperity. We have nothing in common.

• "And at this time of renewal, I want to reiterate my commitment to a new beginning between America and Muslims around the world,"

How about a new beginning between lambs and lions? When will lions quit eating lambs? That is when Islam will quit Jihad. Two classes of people say otherwise: damned fools and traitors. Islam is a predatory institution; we need to call it what it is. We need to call those who deny that fatal fact what they are. Intellectual honesty and moral clarity require us to do that.

• From around the world, we have received an outpouring of feedback about how America can be a partner on behalf of peoples' aspirations.

Islam is about enrichment and empowerment through the profession of piracy. Islam seeks total world domination by conquest. That is their only aspiration. Any occidental who seeks to facilitate Islamic world conquest is a traitor! Why Jihad? Because that is how Moe derived his income! Read 8:1, 8:41 & 8:67 and get a clue. The fatal fact of mercenary motivation is confirmed by hadith: When Allah made the Prophet wealthy through conquests, while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand .

Sphere: Related Content

Those who forget history...

*cross-posted from Assoluta Tranquillita*

...are doomed to repeat it.

I have often reminded readers about Iran 1979, and pointed out that when the Ayatollah Khemeini returned to Iran from exile in Paris, the west really was not paying attention. That was so evident when "students" stormed the US embassy in Tehran and took American hostages. Those "students" were the forerunners - I believe - of our current problems with Islam.

Yes, it was thirty years ago today that the Shah of Iran, who some see as a puppet of the west, left Iran, and Iran began its overt journey to what we deal with globally today:

1979

January The ailing Shah leaves Iran. He dies in Cairo in 1980.

February Ayatollah Khomeini returns as leader of the revolution. The armed forces announce their neutrality and the monarchy collapses. The Ayatollah takes power with Mehdi Bazargan as his prime minister.

Ayatollah Khomeini returned to an ecstatic welcome

November Radical students occupy the American Embassy and hold 52 American diplomats hostage for 444 days.

December The new Islamic constitution is ratified by a referendum.

1980 The Iraqi forces attack Iran on 20 September beginning a war that lasts until 18 July 1988.

What I most remember about those days was the role of the Canadian Ambassador, Ken Taylor. Away from the media spotlight, he worked to help the Americans, and was later recognised for that. I also remember how the Iranians held the Americans until the very end of Jimmy Carter's time in office. There has been much written about those days, and as always, what I find most interesting are the first person accounts. Never mind the political rhetoric, and the congratulatory chest thumping, it is always those most intimately affected by the events of history, who share the most compelling stories. Within their reminiscences are the markers of history, which we would all do well to pay attention to. One man from Iran 1979 is Robert C. Ode. Quite apart from the typically bland retelling of events that I found on the Jimmy Carter Library and Musem site (yes, there really is such a thing, and you can find that here,) I found a synopsis about Mr Ode, and also links to some of his writings:

Robert C. Ode was one of the fifty-two American citizens taken hostage by Iranian students in November 1979 at the American embassy in Tehran. They were held for a total of 444 days and finally released, after lengthy negotiations, on January 20, 1981.

Ode (pronounced Odee) was the oldest of the hostages and was in fact retired from diplomatic service. He had taken a special assignment to go to Tehran and expected to be there only a few months when taken with the other embassy staff.

He was allowed to keep a diary after a few months as captive, when conditions under which the hostages lived were loosened, although the conditions were never good. The hostages were separated into small groups that were not allowed to communicate. They were cut off from outside news and contact with the American government, while letters to and from their families were delivered late or not at all. They were blindfolded when taken outside their rooms to take showers or exercise. Moreover, the students were very amateurish jailers, so that essential supplies frequently ran out, meals were often late and improvised and frequently inadequate, and onerous security restrictions far in excess of what was needed were arbitrarily applied. More serious was the problem that medical attention was extremely inadequate, while many of the hostages were senior embassy staff with serious health worries. Above all, there was the psychological pressure of never knowing when they would be released or what the American government was doing to help them.

Ode's journal consists of 115 pages. What is presented here are selected pages illustrating either significant changes or problems in the conditions of his captivity, along with some typical days where the main problems were boredom or food. The full diary is available to the public. For information, contact the Jimmy Carter Library in Atlanta at (404) 865-7100 or e-mail carter.library@nara.gov

Although many of their letters were not delivered to each other, a mainstay of Ode's captivity was the correspondence of his family and friends, especially his wife, Rita Muth Ode, who was under great strain herself but cheered Ode with accounts of the new home she was preparing for his retirement, occasionally receiving advice about the new house from her captive husband.

After months of negotiations, the Iranian government released the hostages in January 1981. The negotiations had been conducted by the Carter administration, while the release was made the first day of the Reagan administration. President Reagan asked Carter to fly to Germany to welcome the released hostages, while Reagan announced their return to Congress and the world.

Ode died on September 8, 1995 in Sun City West, Arizona, where he had lived in retirement with Rita in the home that she had described to him in her letters while he was captive in Iran....

Go here to find links to Mr. Ode's diary entries.

Also on this day? As the BBC puts it:

1991: 'Mother of all Battles' begins

The Gulf War Allies have sent hundreds of planes on bombing raids into Iraq, at the start of Operation Desert Storm.

The American, British, French, Saudi and Kuwaiti aircraft took off at 2330 GMT last night.

Their bombs were aimed at military and strategic targets, including an oil refinery and Baghdad airport.

At least 400 raids took place. Latest reports say all the Allied aircraft have returned home safely, although France says four of its planes were hit.

One Tornado was shot down
Read the navigator's story

US Defence Secretary, Dick Cheney, said the operation appeared to have gone "very well".

Two hours after the raids began, President George Bush made a televised address.

He said the military objectives were clear - force Iraqi troops out of Kuwait and restore the legitimate government.

In Baghdad, Saddam Hussein remained defiant. He said the "Mother of all Battles had begun". He urged the Iraqi people to "stand up to evil".

First news of the bombing came from reporters in Baghdad working for the American TV network, CNN. They reported hearing air raid sirens shortly before the bombs hit.

President Bush said: "Our operations are designed to best protect the lives of all the coalition forces by targeting Saddam's vast military arsenal.

"Initial reports from General Schwarzkopf are that our operations are proceeding according to plan."

The British Prime Minister, John Major, came out of Number Ten shortly before 0800 GMT to make a statement to reporters.

"No-one wanted this conflict. No-one can be pleased about the fact this conflict has been necessary," he said.

"I hope now it is clear to Iraq that the scale of the Allied operation is such that they cannot win....

Lots of interesting links to the events on the BBC here. There are a few first person accounts there, too. Some of the pictures from Desert Storm here:

A Kuwaiti soldier with a machine gun stands silhouetted on the skyline

British Army soldiers are given injections against the effects of a possible chemical atteck

British and US forces prepare to launch laser-guided bombs on Iraq

A US soldier examines the wreckage of a missile, believed to be a Scud, which landed in Saudi Arabia

A cow stands in front of burning oil wells, set alight by retreating Iraqi forces in the al-Ahmadi oil fields near Kuwait City

French soldiers patrol under a mural of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in Southern Iraq

An Egyptian soldier guards Iraqi prisoners in the Kuwaiti desert

A Kuwaiti raises his arms in celebration as Allied forces arrive in Kuwait City

Saddam Hussein speaks on television for the first time after Iraq's defeat

Kuwait City celebrates after the liberation

New Yorkers celebrate the end of the Gulf War

What did we learn from history? I suggest one was that when we go out to do a job, we better finish it. The historians will, no doubt, be pontificating for years about the success of the mission dubbed The "Mother of all Battles", and I don't need to add my two cents' worth. What was obvious to even this non military observer was that the job was unfinished. And so it was:

On 27 February, President George Bush declared victory. Kuwait was liberated but Saddam Hussein remained in power in Baghdad.

On 20 March 2003, President George Bush junior led a "coalition of the willing" on an invasion of Iraq with the aim of toppling the Bagdad regime....(here)

As history shows, the "coalition of the willing" DID give Baghdad - and Iraq - back to the Iraqi people. The history which still remains to be written is whether or not we managed to eradicate the scourge of Islam and their Religion of Death globally. Our battle against the madmen of Islam continues to this day. As a new President gets set to lead America, it will be interesting to see if the 44th President has learned anything from history. The evidence of all that Islam means to do on a worldwide scale has been writ large for many decades. Only time will tell if this next President will ignore all the signs. We ignore the lessons of history at our peril.

Sphere: Related Content

Iraq Fairy Tales

Front Page Magazine

By Ralph Peters
New York Post Tuesday, June 24, 2008

WORKING out last Monday, I heard a campaign flunky on TV insist that progress in Iraq is an illusion. "The war isn't over until all of the troops come home!" she grumped.
Guess we're still at war with Germany. And Japan. Even Italy. Oh, and let's not forget all of our military bases occupying the Confederacy.

The poor woman knew nothing about warfare, history - or Iraq. She just wanted to see her candidate win in November and wasn't going to let reality get in the way.
And one look told you she didn't even know any "troops."

But after my initial shrug (back to the bench for more crunches), it struck me how wrong I'd been on a point I'd argued for two decades: I claimed that Western societies have an advantage because of their insistence on factual data.

Yet, since 9/11, I've seen and heard no end of my fellow citizens' arguing from blind passion and utterly refusing to ingest facts that didn't match their prejudices (left or right). Since the turnabout in Iraq began a year and a half ago, the rejection of reality has become an outright pathology for the quit-Iraq-and-free-the-terrorists set.

I've watched millions of my countrymen and countrywomen insist that fantasies are real. In a classic through-the-looking-glass reversal last year, Sen. Hillary Clinton told Gen. David Petraeus, the man who turned Iraq around, that his reports of progress were fairy tales. It was the world turned upside down.

Since that woman on TV "explained" victory last Monday, I've thought about the different kinds of people who refuse either to accept that the situation in Iraq has improved remarkably or that quitting now would have serious consequences.

When I break down the "fairy tales can come true" crowd, the first division is into vendors and consumers. Determined to elect the president of its choice, the "mainstream" media has collapsed into outright lies and whopping distortions. And, of course, political hacks will do anything to get their candidate elected.

It's the consumers of fairy tales - those desperate to believe - who are more interesting. They come in several basic flavors, two of which we can quickly set aside:

Protesting university students. Don't worry about them. Once they graduate and get a dose of reality, most of the kids will do fine. The need for liberal-arts undergrads to prance to the left is virtually hormonal.

Hollywood stars and other celebrities. No worries there, either. Just check out the box-office receipts for the dozen or so self-righteous anti-war (anti-military) films. These folks are so far removed from reality that they believe the roles they play give them genuine expertise. Don't get irate - just laugh. (Coming soon: Susan Sarandon on quantum physics!)

But there's another sad bunch:

My generation. Those of us from our mid-50s into early 60s. The florid youth of yesteryear who declared they were going to change the world, made a mess others had to clean up - and the high point of whose lives came in a protest march down University Boulevard, chanting, "Ho-ho-ho Chi Minh! NLF is gonna win!"

The key to understanding the aging activists' bitterness toward the military (disguised as concern for the common soldier) and their obsession with the rights of terrorists is that this cobbled-together cause gives them one last chance to rise above their disappointing lives and to recapture, for one Viagra-assisted moment, their glory days of raised little fists and bell-bottoms.
Reality proved bitter for this bunch. In an infuriating turnabout, it was the nerds in the comp-science classes, the geeks with punch cards in their shirt pockets, who changed the world (and became billionaires). It just doesn't seem fair that the folks with multiple degrees in Comparative Literature ended up, at best, with tenure at an obscure college, serial divorces and a failed book or two.

My generation's sense of entitlement is, of course, legendary. But most of us got jobs and got on with our lives. Only a soured minority never got over that brief moment in the sun before the communes fell apart because someone had to do the dishes (and pay for the penicillin).

Just as no evidence was ever going to convince them that Communists might not all be virtuous, nothing is going to convince them that Iraq is emerging as a better place, for its own people and for us, than it was under Saddam Hussein. They need to believe that our country, having failed to recognize their innate greatness, is wrong.

I'd pity them, if the stakes weren't so high.

If aging activists really want to change the world for the better, facing reality would be a great first step. Magic beanstalks don't really grow into the clouds. That's still a minivan, pal, before and after midnight. Little Red Riding Hood doesn't always make it safely home to the Upper West Side.

And the United States isn't always evil.

Sphere: Related Content

An Apology To The Valiant American Soldier

From Jewish Odysseus blog.

Khudayr Taher: An Apology to the Valiant American Soldier

In an April 8, 2008 article titled "Apology to the Valiant American Soldier," Iraqi liberal Khudayr Taher bemoaned the ill treatment the U.S. army received from those it liberated:

"We forsook you and betrayed you – we, whose history is an expression of massacres, conflagrations, and ruin. We killed you, and we killed our dream and aspiration of reaching the sun, the moon, and the stars – [we killed our dream] of availing ourselves of the opportunity to live as true humans, thanks to your presence."

"My dear, brave American soldier, you noble individual who traversed land and sea in order to write the story of Iraqi freedom for the first time in its modern history – you believed, in accordance with logic, self-evident truths, and rational thought, that a people who had been subjected to repression, starvation, and killing would dance for joy, and would thank Allah who sent you to them as a liberating angel. [You believed that] they would strew flowers and break out in songs of joy that would smash the chains of slavery, ignominy, and humiliation."

Not even a writer of surrealistic [literature] or [theater of] the absurd would have imagined that the Iraqi people would revolt against their liberator and would rush ardently back to a new bondage of a different kind – that of the religious cleric, the tribal sheikh, and the gang leader. It was unthinkable that the people would go against logic, rational thought, and self-evident truths, in a mad rush towards the abyss and total ruin."

My beloved, brave American soldier, we apologize to you, and we are saddened at our wretched and miserable selves. Since we are a people that slaughters itself, and kills one another, cutting off heads, what can you expect from us other than ingratitude, perfidy, and stabbing you in the back for the benefit of Iranian and Syrian intelligence and Al-Qaeda?..."

Continue reading here. The full story here.

Sphere: Related Content

Good News From Iraq FINALLY Being Acknowledged

Via Wake up America, cross posted by request from Miss Beth.

Due to embedded journalists with combat units in Iraq, the American people were able to get the news, despite the reporting "boycott" the mainstream media had placed, and those reports by the embeds, as they filtered into the publics homes started a reversal of support for the our actions and the surge.

Not long ago we were treated to a rare glimpse into the reporting, or to state it better the non reporting, of news in the mainstream media, by Robin Wright from Wapo and Barbara Starr from CNN, when they told the world (caught on video for prosperity) that good news from Iraq should not be reported.

Certain news outlets are now starting to buck Ms. Wright and Barbara Starr's assertions that good news is not news, bad news is news and no news is good news.

One of the biggest surprises was (Hat Tip to QandO) the New York Times on November 16, 2007, where they printed two news articles that were not buried on page A-19, all of which showing the success of the surge and the counterinsurgency strategies implemented by General Petraeus.

Giving credit where it is due, Kudos to NYT.

Perhaps it was other countries media taking our media and politicians to task for refusing to acknowledge what is happening and has been for the last 6 months in Iraq.

Perhaps it was voices from the front, soldiers, in Iraq, using the ability of the internet to get word to America and calling our media out on their refusal to report the truth, or the amounts of embeds like Totten, Roggio and Yon, that have funded themselves and risked their lives to bring the truth from Iraq home to the American people.

Maybe it was some of the editorial writers from the very newspapers that refuse to print the actual news, calling them on their duplicity.

THE EVIDENCE is now overwhelming that the "surge" of U.S. military forces in Iraq this year has been, in purely military terms, a remarkable success. By every metric used to measure the war -- total attacks, U.S. casualties, Iraqi casualties, suicide bombings, roadside bombs -- there has been an enormous improvement since January. U.S. commanders report that al-Qaeda has been cleared from large areas it once controlled and that its remaining forces in Iraq are reeling. Markets in Baghdad are reopening, and the curfew is being eased; the huge refugee flow out of the country has begun to reverse itself. Credit for these achievements belongs in large part to U.S. soldiers in Iraq, who took on a tremendously challenging new counterterrorism strategy and made it work; to Gen. David H. Petraeus, the architect of that strategy; and to President Bush, for making the decision to launch the surge against the advice of most of Congress and the country's foreign policy elite.

Perhaps it was portions of our own media that refused to stay quiet and started calling their counterparts in the MSM, on their journalistic ethics.

News from Iraq gets better by the day, but the media have done their best to downplay the turnaround and congressional Democrats have basically pulled the covers over their heads and pretended it doesn't exist.


There's an eery silence out there about what's going on in Iraq. It's almost as if the silence is, well, intentional.

Perhaps it is more simple and self serving than all those possibilities.

They might just not want to be on the wrong side of victory now that the "trend" is undeniable.

Where the media goes, how long before the Democrats follow like good little lapdogs?

From the IBD editorial, linked above:

Stranger still is the Democratic Party's response, as reflected in its recent actions in Congress.


We expected a certain amount of sheepishness on their part. After all, wasn't it just Sept. 11 that Hillary Clinton told Gen. David Petraeus his progress report on Iraq required "a willing suspension of disbelief"? What we didn't expect was all the self-delusion and denial that now seems to mark Congressional Democrats' efforts on Iraq.


The Democrats are denying our troops the funds they need to finish their job by playing games like Friday's, when they tried to tie $50 billion in funding to massive troop withdrawals, beginning almost immediately.


The measure failed in the Senate by seven votes. But the question remains: Why would they do such a thing in a war America is on the verge of winning?


Meanwhile, as if that vote wasn't enough, Democrats ripped Iraq's government — apparently oblivious to what's going on in Baghdad.


"Every place you go you hear about no progress being made in Iraq," Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday. "The government is stalemated today, as it was six months ago, as it was two years ago. It is not getting better; it is getting worse."


Virtually nothing in those three sentences is true — unless you replace "Iraq" with "Congress." Yet, Reid speaks for his party.

Captain's Quarters shows just a small part of the political success Iraq is seeing now that the security situation is allowing for it:

Maliki just approved the trial of two high-ranking Health Ministry officials linked to Moqtada al-Sadr for hundreds of murders and abductions, some from hospitals. Maliki has also proposed an amnesty long demanded by Sunnis to release all but the most violent of the accused native insurgents as another step towards reconciliation. He has isolated Sadr politically and traveled to Sunni strongholds in the west to build trust for steps to come. All of this has occurred in the last three months as violence began to ebb throughout the country.

The depth of the Democrats denial regarding Iraq is shown by their most recent, 41st failed attempt to force America to surrender in Iraq, just as the media is finally telling the American people that we are winning without a doubt.

They are so invested in defeat and failure that to acknowledge the truth which is hitting them in the head with a shovel, would be political suicide.

The problem they now face is that denying the progress and success is also political suicide because every day Americans are being told.

The other day I stated that the Democratic politicians had 2 choices before them:

Choice #1: They can acknowledge what is right in front of them and risk the ire of their far left, liberal base, like MoveOn.org and Code pink and the liberal bloggers that have shown they will "go after" anyone that dares speak up and tell the truth. (As they have done with Brian Baird and what they call the Bush Dog Democrats)


Choice #2: They can continue to ignore the progress and success that is being seen in Iraq and mollify their far left, liberal base, while they alienate the moderates of their party and the independents.


Neither choice is enviable but I cannot feel any sympathy for them because this is a position they have placed themselves in by betting against America, betting against the Iraqi's, betting against our military and betting against General Petraeus and his counterinsurgencies strategies.

I also had a little note to Hillary Clinton, Dingy Harry Reid and the rest of the Democratic politicians:

Note to Hillary Clinton: Your continued statements about the policies in Iraq being "failed", requires us to have a "willing suspension of disbelief" that you are able to tell the truth and are qualified to be the commander in chief of our fine military which you have staked your political career on betting against. You owe General Petraeus a public apology Hillary.

(Click image to enlarge and read Hillary's words to General Petraeus, said for the whole world to hear)

Note To Harry Reid: Hows that "Iraq is lost" comment going for you now Dingy Harry?

The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.

Note to the rest of the Democratic politicians... eventually you are going to have to pick choice #1 or choice #2 from above because the days of ignoring it and hoping that things will go bad in Iraq are over, and it is time for you to either tell your moderates and the independents to go to hell or to tell MoveOn.org and the far left liberal, unhinged faction of your base to go to hell.


You have left yourself no middle ground. They will not let you have it both ways.

So, whats it to be Democrats?

We are waiting.

SPEAK UP, WE CANNOT HEAR YOU.

Sphere: Related Content

Come Home to Baghdad--Muslims to Christians

The post below was cross posted by my friend Spree. The BEGINNING of this story is here in Spree's post entitled "Why We Do What We Do" here and my post entitled "Hope, Thanks and Praise-Michael Yon" here.

A reminder from those posts--the incredible picture of a muslim man polishing and mounting the cross atop the church, St. John's Catholic Church (this picture gets my vote for the Pulitzer). THESE ARE THE STORIES WE NEED TO HEAR MORE OF AND THE MSM WILL NEVER PUBLISH--but we here in the blogosphere are delighted to bring them to you.



Cross posted from Wake up America

Michael Yon does it again. He captures in pictures and in words the mood of Baghdad. It isn't the Baghdad under a brutal dictator. It isn't the Baghdad that was suffering last year with violence.

It is a new Baghdad and the Muslims in Baghdad are telling their Christian friends and neighbors that it is time to come home.




(Click image to see the Democrats finally being honest about NOT supporting the troops)
(Today, Muslims mostly filled the front pews of St John’s. Muslims who want their Christian friends and neighbors to come home. The Christians who might see these photos likely will recognize their friends here. The Muslims in this neighborhood worry that other people will take the homes of their Christian neighbors, and that the Christians will never come back. And so they came to St John’s today in force, and they showed their faces, and they said, “Come back to Iraq. Come home.” They wanted the cameras to catch it. They wanted to spread the word: Come home. Muslims keep telling me to get it on the news. “Tell the Christians to come home to their country Iraq.”)

Michael Yon:

I can’t remember my last shootout: it’s been months. The nightmare is ending. Al Qaeda is being crushed. The Sunni tribes are awakening all across Iraq and foreswearing violence for negotiation. Many of the Shia are ready to stop the fighting that undermines their ability to forge and manage a new government. This is a complex and still delicate denouement, and the war may not be over yet. But the Muslims are saying it’s time to come home. And the Christians are saying it’s time to come home. They are weary, and there is much work to be done.

Go to Yon's site and see the whole wonderful piece, the pictures tell a story of a country rebuilding and what I have shown you here is but a small fraction of what he has there.

Remember, over 3,000 families have already returned to Baghdad, Iraq and they are encoraging the rest of Iraqi's to do the same.

Moving along here to what is left of al-Qaeda and the Strategy Page shows us that they are more worried about surviving now than they are about those "spectacular" attacks that get blasted across the news to make Americans think they are winning in Iraq:

As the surge offensive continued to tear apart the terrorist infrastructure, the leaders put the organization into survival mode. Planning and carrying out attacks became less important than keeping remaining leaders and key people out of jail, or a grave. This is why the number of terror attacks has plummeted. The remnants of al Qaeda have fled to northern Iraq, around Mosul and areas near the Iranian border. If worse comes to worse, the terrorists know they can flee into Iran, and have a chance of bargaining their way out of an Iranian jail. Within Iraq, however, capture is either a long jail sentence, or execution. Al Qaeda is the most hated organization in the country, and may have to abandon Iraq altogether if the pressure doesn't ease up.

[...]

If al Qaeda cannot go dark and rebuild, they will have to abandon Iraq. That is almost unthinkable, because al Qaeda has, since 2003, declared Iraq to be "the graveyard of the Crusaders." To admit defeat in Iraq would be a tremendous blow to al Qaeda operations elsewhere. The organization is already weakened by the failure to carry out any more operations in the United States since September 11, 2001. Al Qaeda has been shut down in so many other areas as well. But it looks like Iraq may be the last stand, and the last straw.

Note to al-Qaeda in Iraq: Rot in hell you bastards, despite the past 40 attempts, and yesterdays 41st attempt, from the Democrats in our country to hand you a victory in Iraq, you have failed, they have failed and the Iraqi people have won and want no more to do with you.

As news such as this finally gets reported to the American people, support is rising and after 6 months the number of people that believe the war is going "very" or "fairly" well has risen to 44%, according to Politico which quotes the newest Pew figures.

That said, 44 percent of Americans now believe the war is going “very” or “fairly” well, a high point in the past year, according to The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, a nonpartisan group.

At the same time, CBS News polling has found U.S. opposition to Bush’s troop surge softening a bit.

As for the Democrats (Pelosi, Reid and Company) that would like to abandon those Iraqi's shown above and all that are not shown, abandon them when things are going undeniably well, you can go to hell too and take your defeatist friends with you.

[UPDATE] The Democrats finally admit the truth: They DON'T support the troops.

B. Relevant is also spreading the truth about Iraq....check it out.

Sphere: Related Content