Friday, November 02, 2007

Blackwater Smuggles an Illegal Kind of Silence into Iraq



So today bloggers get to chow down on reports that Blackwater smuggled silencers into Iraq and other countries without the permission of the State Department. Yes, that means the kind of smuggling that's illegal. The particular issue seems to have arisen from the broader investigations of illegal arms smuggling being investigated by the BATF and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Raleigh, N.C. Experts are of course puzzeled as to why Blackwater would need silencers in escort missions for diplomats and kitchen equipment. While there's dim hope that trials brought by non-violent protesters arrested outside Blackwater's home camp will bring forth any paperwork, the effect of protesters against Blackwater has shown to produce a valuable freak-out effect in the war contractors. Meanwhile, two cars from the Blackwater massacre at Nisour Square are coming to the USA curtosy of the FBI. The labs at Quantico VA plan to use the cars to match bullets to bullet holes and create a virtual crime scene.

My dear readers can go here for an amusing story about Blackwater on vacation in Mexico... and drunk. Elsewhere, the story of Blackwater in New Orleans continues to find people who hadn't heard that the mercenaries were there. Not invited per se, they just showed up and insisted that Homeland Security pay them, which they did to a tune of $950 a day per hot gun. The math means that Blackwater made a sheer profit of $600 a day per bloke. Along those lines, Blackwater is trying to buy goodwill for a new Blackwater training camp in California by providing a tent city for those displaced by recent wildfires.

Meanwhile, CodePink punked Blackwater!! Read on:

Within minutes of Code Pink's emailing out a press conference invitation in the name of Blackwater's new Department of Corporate Integrity, Blackwater was on the phone to the Code Pink D.C. house. We hadn't sent them the invitation, but they got it right away, anyway.

“We're Blackwater and we don't know anything about this,” our confused caller said.

“Well if you're Blackwater, how come don't you know anything about this?...” a Code Pinker replied.

Code Pinkers stayed in character as Kitty Laver of Blackwater while our phones rang off the hook from Blackwater and the press, confused because the mercenary firm was claiming they didn't know anything about this and the press couldn't find any information on a Kitty Laver [aka Medea Benjamin]. A television network called us to schedule Blackwater president Eric Prince for their morning talk show. We accepted, and arranged for a friend to show up as Prince, but that appointment soon fell through, given the growing questions about this press conference. Through Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning, no one admitted we were not Blackwater, though the occasional irrepressible whoop of glee in the background might have raised suspicions. Code Pinkers planned the Wednesday press conference in three hours of late-night brainstorming Tuesday.

The next morning we headed over to the Phoenix Hotel, Medea and Des all in black as Kitty Laver and her assistant... We also had a “disgraced Blackwater employee” in an orange prisoner's jumpsuit, and his plain clothes guard. The rest of us wore white coveralls with (paper) Blackwater logos, logo hats, and white rubber gloves as we gathered in front of the hotel, while hefty security men in suits and ties blocked the hotel's entrance and watched us, unsmiling.

The press was gathered, waiting to find out who we really were. As we walked up, someone said, “Oh, it's Code Pink!” But we stayed in character.

Medea as Kitty explained that while Blackwater had not had corporate integrity before now, we were here to take on the task of cleaning up its tarnished image, starting with a generous gift to the disadvantaged of the next generation. As Des displayed some macho fighting man action toys bearing the fierce Blackwater logo, Kitty said the new corporate cleanup crew would be distributing them to disadvantaged youth in the city's homeless shelters during the holidays, “to help them on the road to growing up to be mercenaries themselves!”


The hilarity hardly dispells the growing public outrage over the grant of immunity to the Blackwater mercenaries who slaughtered unarmed civilians at Nisour Square in September. The exact wording of the immunity reads: "I understand this statement is being given in furtherance of an official administrative inquiry...I further understand that neither my statements nor any information or evidence gained by reason of my statements can be used against me in a criminal proceeding, except that if I knowingly and willfully provide false statements or information, I may be criminally prosecuted for that action under 18 United States Code, Section 1001." Which means that it allows them to be prosecuted for lying about killing innocent civilians in cold blood but not for the actual act of murder. If the FBI wants to make a case against the mercenaries, it will have to be based entirely on the forensic evidence of the scene and Iraqi testimony. Which means that they will be unable to point out that Blackwater lied on the character issue. Of course, if Blackwater presents the same pack of lies at trial, and are not convicted, they will be able to use that to escape being prosecuted for lying on those statements. The immunity is bushshit. Moonbat doesn't get immunity for the statements that she provides in her work as a government employee!!

Technorati Tags:
, , , , ,

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Open Call to Boycott China's "Genocide Olympics"

So today we will take a cold-hearted look at the 63% of Americans who would boycott China over product saftey and the fact that they eat dogs and cats. Moonbat herself flirts off and on with doing her best to avoid buying in China over the plight of Tibet, in homage to the fact that reading Tibetan Buddhism has done wonders for her temper. Yet the time has come for a concerted and public, liberal and conservative, all-American push to boycott funding China through our purchases, policies, and misplaced attempts to protect "the free market." Somewhere along the line, we fought a near fourty year Cold War to halt the global expansion of communism and the totalitarian states which embraced it's doctrine. Our White House takes a different view towards "the red scourge" these days because "It's not appropriate to interfere in the private decisions of Americans..."



Capitalism funding the expansion of the communist police state, funding by the capitalistic greed of US investors and the Republican Party Leadership. Say it ain't so! And yet, we have the bewildering knowledge before us that under the name of fighing terrorism, China is openly reaping hedge fund investments on Wall Street, in new forms of public surveillance that will allow it to hunt down democratic protestors at it's leisure... and anyone who stops to watch. China faces no threat of terrorism, let's be clear. But China does find itself:

...subject to strikes of workers who don't get paid; to revolts over deadly environmental conditions; to religious activists who worship gods other than mammon and the state (the two that are officially sanctioned); to Web surfers enamored of a free exchange of ideas; to Tibetans seeking autonomy; and maybe, someday, to another outburst of Tiananmen Square-like, pro-democracy agitation.



An authoritarian government can never be sure how many of its citizens would relish its demise, which means the Chinese Communist Party has 1.3 billion potential targets for surveillance. Bradsher reports that 660 Chinese cities have begun installing high-tech surveillance systems. By one estimate, high-end surveillance will expand from a $500 million industry in 2003 to a $43 billion industry by 2010.


Of course, workers who don't get paid, people sickened by industrial pollutants, people who pray to foreign gods, liberal web-surfers, Iraqis seeking independence, and CodePink, are all foes of the White House as well. Perhaps it's not so unusual to find the Leader of the Free World playing footsie with the World Communist Regime. In the end, all radical Islamic terrorists have ever managed is to blow up a few buildings or airplanes. What could China do, when it's survelliance abilities we have paid for completely shut out our own CIA operatives and quash the last murmurs of democratic dissent? Given the spectacular web war launched against Estonia last spring that shut down its newspapers, banks, and government for days? Given that we are creating the worst border disaster of all with our open embrace of spammers and ad-ware programmers, who turn hordes of our own computers into digital zombie soldiers for sale? To the highest bidder? How can we defeat the enemy we arm to destroy us?

China's love for the world should be apparent, from their open funding of the genocidal regime of Sudan, to their conquest and brutal subjegation of the Tibetan people. China happens to be Sudan's largest oil customer. After the UN Security Council moved forward to with plans to deploy the largest peace-keeping force in the world to Darfur, China began it's manuverings to use it's suddenly enthusiasitc involvement to ward off high profile threats to boycott the 2008 Beijing Olympics. With this slight of hand, China continues it's own version of a Marshal Plan, buying into the regimes of other African nations, while the US remains bogged down in Iraq. China hurries its efforts to place it's troops inside Darfur before the rest of the UN peacekeeping force reaches Sudan. A force significantly larger than the few soldiers China has lent elsewhere, and likely they plan to outstay the UN.

And as for poor Tibet and her people? Richard Gere and the International Campaign for Tibet have called for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics, but received little press. China just finished a train right through the center of Tibet to it's old capital, linking it to the communist state in a way that claims permanent ownership even to satellites in space.




Sacrifice is hardly popular anymore unless it's happenstance or something you were going to do anyways. China's grip on the lowest segments of America's economy makes it a formidle political opponent, as proven through it's growing alliance with Wal-Mart. Yet how impossible? How close do how many people have to be to create a watershed affect? What outcome do we seek? The answer: Tibet must be free, democracy must become something more than a means to inrease oil exploration, democracies must never again become hostage to the economic production of communism police states. Moonbat started with shopping at Target for her nephew's birthday party, buying Crayola "MadeintheUSA" art supplies over RoseArt's "MadeinChina." A few minutes effort also produced a means to hang pictures using supertape also "MadeintheUSA." And organic chocolate grown in Belize and melted into bars in Italy. So good.

Democracy finds itself too weakened by the siren call of profits and revenue to take heed of the warning signs. China will use American investors to create the means to survey and control it's urban polulations in a way only a global dark age could end. The arguement that allowing China into the World Trade Organization to use economic advancement to induce democratic change will have been defeated, under the combined efforts of communism and it's new capitalist backers. Green Fertility gives a compelling argument to still boycott over China's own internal human rights abuses. Yet liberals need to find a way to light a fire under the entire of our country, and it will not be to the cause of foreign gods or Chinese food.



We have in our favor the deciding point: things with China have gotten to the point where either democracy will decide the future of humanity in the world... or we will continue to sell away every part of our inhereitance to the resurgence of communism. When last democracy contested with communism, the USSR fell. Now there is no open contest, and our greed may yet fire the eternal shine of China.


Technorati Tags:
, , , , , , , ,

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Moonbat Takes On Idiot Private Security Force

So today found moonbat off to do her volunteer work at her favorite Museum, all up in her girlie clothes and girlie heels. Of course, just beyond the front door lies the private security force and their little amateur screening area, which impresses a real Transportation Security Officer not in the least bit. One key difference between TSA and this gaggle of guards, is that unlike an airport there is no same-gender screening, which means that they have a group of 30-40 year old men waiting around to screen women who set off the alarm because they were high heels. As moonbat prefers and has done for the past two years, she yanked hers off and tossed them on the x-ray belt. One of the male officers immediately jumped forward and insisted that she had to wear them through the walk-through metal detector.

Oh yeah? There might be glass. Really? Now, if all passengers who fly on airplanes are required to remove their shoes to pass through airport security at the decision of the Department of Homeland Security, one can reasonably conclude that there are no realistic legal or saftey concerns, especially since liability rests with the Museum and not the security force. So why the eager insistance? Well... moonbat could trip. What, into your waiting arms? So, moonbat insists on a supervisor, and after it becomes apparent that no one else will be allowed to enter until one is summoned, behold, when it was insisted that none were in the building, one can be found. After listening to the presented case, and looking at the growing line of scowling visitors, the supervisor relents.

Moonbat prances shoe-free through the walk-through metal detector. She slings her now x-rayed purse up onto her shoulder and begins to put on her heels. Supervisor insists that she come with him because he is going to have to file an incident report about her behavior, so that her supervisor can councel her on cooperating with security in the future. Sure. Glad to put things on paper. Not a problem. Moonbat reaches for her other heel.

Oh no, that won't do. Even though so many concerns were sighted to prevent moonbat from removing her heels for screening, it suddenly is okay for her to walk through the museum in bare feet.... because the supervisor seizes moonbat via her purse and attempt to haul her physically across the museum whilst she puts her other heel back on her foot. Oh now it was on. A good measure of steel in "take your hands off me" and he let go, all full of apologies, and made a quick retreat to his office. Another guard waddled up and with almost 300 lbs of authority told me there was no need to have an "attitude" and took down moonbat's information on a napkin. Moonbat found great amusement in forcing a choice between allowed to use her cell phone in the security area to listen to her voicemail (which even TSA allows) and being able to give the extention of her boss. Hah! So the guard had to waddle back off to look up the correct number. Now of course, for moonbat's chance to file a grievance. Only after twice insisting that complaint forms be provided for her, were such forms produced, and she was assured she could fill them out at her station and drop them off on her way out of the Museum later. Likely there was some hope moonbat would cool off and forget. Fat chance!!

Flew through the paperwork, scanned off a copy for her dear readers and also for the head cheese, and pranced right back down to drop them off. Of course, the real sticker is that this will likely result in absolutely no discipline measures against the guard, or any productive change in screening policies, like same gender or the right to remove your heels. Though people might love to whine and complain about the security screening procedures for airports done by TSA, few consider the alternatives of using private security firms to whom politicians have to curry favor in order to get campaign contributions. If Lockheed Martin did airport screening, you can be assured that your local Congressmen could never afford to investigate any real offense that occurred... but since it's all in house, it's safe to wack away at any infraction on the part of TSA. So for all those of you who like to complain that you got screened because the wire in your bra set off the walk-through metal detector, imagine instead of a female screener, an eager 30-year-old and 6 ft tall slobering hulk. And oh, yes, moonbat always wears her Victoria Secret... even today. Cheers!!

Technorati Tags:
, , , , , , , , ,

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, March 30, 2007

TalkLeft Learns to Say "Yes, Mistress!!"

So today marks the day when moonbat addresses an unfortunate incident when she was addressed as "SIR." Given gender and a stunning photo of my lavish red hair, this was very wrong, wasn't it??

TalkLeft: Yes, Mistress.

Let's choose a "safe word" for today. I know, that self-described "service" for busy progressives who want their own voice heard inside the legislative and electoral progress in an age of big money... Move On.

So, why is the anti-war movement so sick at heart? Why do the turn outs to the marches and rallies still suck even after a few thousand pairs of feet are argued one way or another? 2% turnout of a city so liberal the Democratic winner of the primary for Mayor orders his stationary the next day with city funds is piss poor. Especially since the march got infusions from around the country. Where was this majority of the country that disapproves of the Iraq War and elected a Democratic Congress, and why does nobody talk about Iraq?

"Now that this atrocity has moved into its fifth year, I don't overhear any street-corner, café, or waiting-room debate about what is being done in my name and yours. Of course, the war and endless war are the main topics when I'm with my friends and fellow members of the different peace organizations....Perhaps, soon, more and more of our young will awaken, throw off that blanket of apathy, examine the crimes committed by this administration against the people of Iraq and the people of the United States, and emerge as defenders of justice who will not allow the peace baton to ever be dropped again."


But it's not the anti-war movement's fault!! Oh no. Never let that cross your mind. Despite the fact that at the Pentagon, the only way they came up with that crowd was to give microphone time to causes that had nothing to do with Iraq. Like immigrants. Save the cheap lettuce, and all, but you are standing outside the Pentagon. Despite the fact that they spent more time denouncing the crimes of the Democratic Party than they actually spent denouncing the Iraq War of the polices of Bush. Despite the fact that so many of the protesters showed up to put pressure on the elected members of their government while waving the face of Hugo Chavez. But don't say it's the anti-war movement's fault they couldn't come up with the numbers to actually surround the Pentagon.

The anti-war movement explains that the Iraq War is the liberal anti-Iraq War voting public's fault: they have an imperial mindset, the fact that a majority of Americans don't support a phased redeployment is kept from them, and they've been duped into believing that the only way they can fight injustice is to shop. You see:

Let's remember, by the way, that, unlike mainstream Democratic "withdrawal" plans, the American public is talking about actually leaving Iraq, as in that old, straightforward slogan of the Vietnam era: Out now! In other words, there is a hardly noted but growing gap -- call it, in Vietnam-era-speak, a "credibility gap" -- between the Washington consensus and what the American people believe should be done when it comes to Iraq.


What I love about the anti-war movement is the whole "planting the seeds of your own destruction part." Yes, after cutting your teeth on movements to tell a whole lot of people what they can and can't do (save the rain forest, save the whales, dolphin-free tuna, stop violence against women, yadda yadda), you are told that all your skills are imperialistic. Right. Yes, because if you follow the links the anti-war movement provides to prove that the American public no longer backs the Iraq War, you find out that the answer to the question "Which of the following comes closest to your view? The U.S. should immediately begin to withdraw all its troops from Iraq. The U.S. should withdraw all its troops from Iraq within a year. The U.S. should keep its troops in Iraq as long as is needed to turn control over to the Iraqi government." is not something the anti-war movement wants to have anyone talk about. The numbers? Oh yeah. Only 21% support an immediate withdrawal, 37% in one year, 39% to stay as long as necessary for peace, 4% unsure. RightAnd I sure have noticed all the "spend your money here" payment links at the bottom of the only anti-war emails moonbat is privileged to receive. Right.

Heh. Right. If ill people need it explained to them that it's stupid to quote sources that disprove your own agenda, then yeah, that makes you an "idiot." The cameras of FOX News and the blogs of the gung-ho are just waiting to use such idiocy to feed the process of internal sectarian strife in the land of liberal, so that all out civil war will justify their having to remain in occupation until the job is done and liberals have stopped shedding each other's blood and learned to live in peace and share their toys. And back to Iraq.

Technorati Tags:
, , , , , , , ,

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

The Most Dangerous Game Over Iraq

So today I will first thank my mother who introduced me to CSPAN RADIO which for the Maryland D.C. area is 90.1 on the dial. Via this sudden bright spot on my daily commute to actually defend our country from terrorists, I got to listen to a news conference given by MoveAmericaForward. Besides copycatting MoveOn and incorrectly identifying Cindy Sheehan as a foreigner, they announced the debut of an ad campaign "Choice is Clear" which promises the American people that if we "win" in Iraq, America will never suffer a nuclear attack. By implication, if we fail to win in Iraq, whatever that means on any given day, the very next day some Iraqi terrorists will get a nuke through customs and level some never before heard of town in Alabama. Even more, the ad promises that the mere unquestioning support somehow generates magical energies called "patriotism" that form a complete barrier around our country so that terrorists outside of Iraq are unable to even think about further attacks on America. Like say, al-Qaeda hanging out in northern Pakistan. If you put a flag sticker on your car, you freeze the brain of a terrorist!!

We are of course waiting for the same jokers to insist Congress fund this magical shield around America by making all those Made-in-China flag stickers free. While we wait, let us delve a little into this secret circle of magicians. What are the underlying implications of this campaign, whose commercial shows outdated photos of anti-war protesters and ends in a nuclear mushroom cloud? These jokers promise that all of al-Qaeda will be defeated and America will be safe if we "win" in Iraq, which in the news conference they equated with believing in and doing everything the "commander-in-chief" says. Without question. These jokers also have no confidence in the abilities of General Petraeus or Bush's recently enacted surge plan in Iraq. A strange paradox indeed. How many of us really believe that the "war on terror" hinges on Iraq, in a once and for all scenario? How many of us believe that our presence in Iraq prevents terrorist plots, despite the continued evidence that other active cells exist around the world? Evidence like Madrid and London?

More importantly, why do those who believe in Bush's strategies for Iraq have no faith in either the surge or in Petraeus? To say that we cannot set a date for withdrawal now for we will embolden the terrorists is to say that Petraeus will fail and the surge is yet another one of Bush's mistakes. To say that we can set a date for withdrawal is to say that we believe Petraeus will succeed and the insurgency will fail. To not support a defined conclusion at this time itself emboldens the terrorists because it shows a complete lack of faith in the ability of the U.S. military to bring a conclusion to their presence in Iraq sometime in this decade. To call Pelosi "Madame Terrorist" as they are want to do because she and the Democratic leadership in Congress are taking Bush at his word that Patraeus and this surge will finally bring success in Iraq, merely masks an underlying fear that America will never find a way to exit Iraq with some shred of honor.

Who are these jokers who profess blind faith in America's military strength, and whose main page campaigns to send our troops the much needed .... cookies they need to defend themselves from insurgents? Who are these people whose primary and sole complaint about the provisioning of our soldiers in their press conference is that we don't hand every individual solider unaccountable cash to bribe the locals to support the presence of the American military? Again and again, they don't ask for better intelligence, better satellite support, better body armor, better humvees, more translators. Just cash they never have to tell anyone how they spent. Uh huh. So why doesn't anyone give me ready cash to support my daily mission in defending America from terrorist attacks right here at home?

Yes, who are these jokers? Big surprise: they are not a grassroots organization but a Republican election tool built by the public relations firm Russo Marsh & Rogers. Moola cash cow. (5 Republicans paid RM&R $2,475,223 for the 2001/2002 election cycle, during which time no Democrat likewise purchased services.) For a chairman: Melaine Morgan, a conservative talk-show host who gained notoriety in 2006 for advocating the gas-chamber death of a New York Times editor who approved a story detailing domestic spying on Americans by the Bush administration. Even while Bush has admitted publicly that the intelligence supporting the idea that Saddam Hussein possessed an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and ties between Saddam and 9-11 have gone up in smoke, Move America Forward began an extensive and local commercial campaign to insist that Bush was right about what he said he was wrong about. Interesting tactical choice, to call your commander-in-chief a liar, but never let logic or patriotism get in the way of a good sound-bite. These jokers got their start in the Republican led effort in 2003 to recall California Governor Gray Davis, officially formed in 2004, spent two years raising about $1 million, and ran a campaign supporting Bolton as the U.N. Ambassador. They also sponsor conservative radio hosts in trips to U.S. military bases in Iraq to do live broadcasts, trying to make the case that WMD exist still inside that country and that it's not as violent as all the bombings might make you think. MoveAmericaForward also maintains the CensureCarter website, denouncing the former President for his Middle East peace activism. Understand them clearly, for the political hacks they are, and make no mistake.

Hip on current events, MoveAmericaForward works it's appeal on two fronts, working to gain a monopoly on the claim to support the troops, and portraying the anti-war movement as exactly the same group of people who marched on the Pentagon in 1967. The first conceals the fact that they openly attack and insult veterans who speak out against the Iraq War. By that means they seek to publicly strip veterans who do speak against Bush of their military service in public opinion and label them traitors. By portraying the current anti-war movement as hippies, they heap upon the current generation any sins of the anti-war past, all the violence and the disrespect. Of course, Americans convinced first that we are all hippies, are hard to enlighten as to the large advancements of civility reached between police and protestors following the long series of World Trade Organization protests, and the organizational push to control litter and acts of vandalism. The idea that any organization can control (what, through mind-control or turning people into zombies?) all of its members is juvenile and the demand of a pure simpleton. Yes, no one should have spray painted the steps of the capital, since it's the tax money of a Democratic city that has to pay for the chemicals to remove it. Hardly accounts for the hysteria that the Vietnam Memorial would be desecrated, and needed to be protected by a contingent of Vietnam vets who for the most part used to despise the Wall designed by a gook.

Gathering of Eagles presents itself as the "Silent Guard of America's Memorials" and claims that it does not support violence or verbal assaults on veterans, though it sorta forgot to tell the people who signed up to counter-protest last Saturday. Oops. The Eagles did a lot of verbal assaulting of veterans that cold afternoon. Anyways, one should take a close look at the verbal garbage being spouted there, because it's a problem that liberals need to be educated about. One member claims, "we are closer to civil war here than they are in Iraq." Another, "To most of the students up here, the US government is an evil thing that knocked the twin towers down for an excuse to steal Iraqi oil." Here, "we will take no prisoners when it comes to stopping our Vet’s from being hurt or our monuments from being splattered with paint or whatever…??? How are we going to do that without a little blood being spilled now and then?" And here, "I don’t know if I could restrain myself from KILLING any of the vermin attempting to further their anti American Anti God agendas by damaging ANY memorial in that area." Another, "Great mission statement and great work with one exception, the first sentence. “Gathering of Eagles is non-partisan.”. I believe being non partisan in today's political situation is not caring about our future and that is not in line with the rest of the mission statement." Others generally equate a concrete step with a "monument" to work up the hysteria that the Wall will be "attacked." Another, "I hope one of theose Muslim commies cross the line so we can teach them a valuable lesson. I will be there with my brothers and will be victorius over these Dimicrat scum. This will teach them not to look at us with seditious eyes." But of course, they are against violence. Sure.

Oh, and there's also this snippet of an opinion, "Oh, and I’ll add that we are in no one’s pocket - much less the Republicans. The Gathering of Eagles is a PURE grassroots effort - driven entirely by veterans. There has been NOT ONE politician involved to tarnish the purity of this movement. No one has their hands on this - not the media, not big money, not anyone in politics. It is JUST US." Grassroots? Let's google around and see how truthful this veteran is being, eh? Gathering of Eagles donations are handled by Vets for the Truth, which organized campaigns against Kerry in '04 and Murtha in '06. That is in it's turn a minion of Iowa Presidential Watch, a political action committee. The face behind the mask behind the mask is a PAC. Oops. That PAC bears responsibility for a horrendous fraud political poster depicting an American solider holding an adoring Iraqi child. The photo was an AP one but altered. The real child's face had been scrubbed off because she was riddled with American bullets received in a firefight in which her mother was killed. The Navy Corpman treating her wounds told the AP: "If anything good comes from this nonsense, I haven't seen it yet."

Searching back to the root of things untangles motives and brings clarity, so we should follow MoveAmericaForward and the Gathering of Eagles back from when I met them last Saturday to the beginning of their journey. Their first stop was not to the grave of a fallen soldier, to the family of such a soldier, to a military base, to anything one might first guess. So what's your guess? Sorry, time's up. Their first stop was to invade The Crosses of Lafayette. The Crosses are a hillside memorial, on private property belonging to a WWII vet, and set up in remembrance of those American soldiers who have died in Iraq. A sign at the memorial is updated every week with the current fatality count. The Crosses, which when first placed were destroyed by pro-war vandals, "signify a memorial to those soldiers who have sacrificed their lives in the service of our country." The organizers also ask that people who see them slow to the speed limit in salute of the fallen soldiers. But MoveAmericaForward and the Gathering of Eagles broke with their stated intentions and invaded the memorial, demonstrating a deep disrespect for areas of sacred ground set aside for fallen soldiers. Pro-war activists demonstrated their respect for a memorial for fallen soldiers with vandalism and verbal assaults. Would they support the right of anyone to scratch a name of the "The Wall?" Police were needed to keep the peace until the pro-war caravan moved on.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Not in My Name Either

So today we are going to discuss yesterday and what it takes to get a moonbat to walk away from an anti-Iraq war rally, the very March on the Pentagon. Loved the March. Being confronted by screaming hordes of mostly men swathed in black leather biker jackets and calling for us to be hanged, sorta lights a fire under you. So does the hilariousness of the counter-demonstrators trying to claim more of them came than those protesting the war. Enough is enough. How is it scandalous to hint at holding critical thoughts of those serving in the armed forces, and anyone who has served becomes a protected elite and free to conduct themselves in any manner in public? One key lesson that should come of this is that American should be made to face the unforgivable tactics of those who call for the mass slaughter of their fellow Americans. To call someone a traitor is to advocate for their death, and this thirst for bloodshed is the growing battle cry of those who advocate unending military involvement in Iraq. America needs to take a hard look, and the left should be ready at the next rally to provide unflinching documentation of this poison.

Let me take a little moment to give a shout out to the D.C. police, who handled themselves with remarkable decorum and efficiency, and whose mounted presence was crucial to the lack of violence at both the march and the rally. Thanks to the men and women in blue. And the horses. Love the horses.

But the rally broke my bleeding heart, which of course is hard to do as it is wet and soggy with the tears I cry over the state of the world. But the rally broke my heart indeed, and Cynthia McKinney torched the ruins. Standing there in my khaki slacks and a Mossimo jacket, I looked nothing like my fellow demonstrators (which did mean I wasn't harassed walking to the gathering point for the march). And the numbers for the march were again, as they were a year ago, not high enough. The devote anti-war contingent of the Left needs to take a hard look at the result of calling Democrats collaborators in torture and war crimes, especially since the movement has its hand out so often. Iraq is not the only goal, and whatever aid the anti-war movement gave towards the recovery of House and Senate last fall for the Democratic Party, we do not have a veto proof majority. Congress literally has not the ability to force complete withdrawal (which I don't advocate anyway), so denouncing the Democratic majority for not providing it only shows an extreme level of policial immaturity. Not a very pretty sight. Ire raised, I left and headed off to a family birthday party. And I love the cold. Et tu, Brute?

I will confess that the anti-war movement has made visible progress since last year's rally, which some of you might remember from the scant coverage that it received. I shall hear admit that I ran into the group World Can't Wait when they showed up at a pro-Wall of TexoChina rally. I rambled into the frakking thing, going from one Smithsonian Museum to another. Started chanting "Save the Cheap Lettuce." Got a shout out from the organizer for being disrespectful. Got joined in booing the rally by... a group of parents on a school field trip... from Texas. Texans ... booing the Wall. Go figure. Anyways, a passing officer worker text messaged a member of World Can't Wait, and they showed up with a few signs and [i]they[/i] made the photo for the Washington Post. Instead of me, the instigator of the whole counter-protest. As a random aside note, Nazis showed up to support the Wall of TexoChina, in full regalia. Oops.

So I got curious and showed up at two World Can't Wait meetings, which were Wednesday night in a basement of a row house near Union Station. I'm still on their email list. World Can't Wait leaned more towards "Bush Step Down" in those days over impeachment, which they saw as impossible and a validation of a system of corruption in Congress. Or something. I chastised them for that. And also their terrible fliers, full of quotes from Hollywood celebs and not facts and statistics. And for the silly bandannas over the faces bit. And for allowing the other side to frame themselves as the only ones holding the Stars and Stripes. And for not being able to explain their organization goals. The floor went on to another woman, who remarked at length about how all our lives were in danger because the CIA might "get us." Sigh. By the second meeting they were trying to arrange movie nights and facing up to the problem of their rent being $1100 a month for a basement. So I bailed and went back to Drinking Liberally.

The March reflected honest growth, some reclaiming of the right to call oneself a patriot and fly the colors, although bandannas still cropped up here and there. Really, it wasn't that cold. The signs were better, clearer, but the message coming from the speakers was not. Several were off topic, several attacked allies more than they criticized either the Bush administration of the conduct of Pentagon officials. Organizers recruited veterans and soldiers who had served in Iraq to speak, and that deserves especial kudos. But at some point, the anti-war left has to embrace the idea that speeches are a kind of art, and need polish and cohesion. And although I admire the dedication of Mama Moonbat Cindy Sheehan, no one should stand up in front of the crowd and call for people to not pay their taxes. When there's a shortfall, it won't be military funding that suffers, but domestic programs and the salaries of government employees, like myself. Although it commendable, the lenght that speakers went to in order to be respectful of all soldiers and veterans on both sides of the line, since the march was on the Pentagon, the speakers missed the mark time and again. Pentagon officials bear some responsibility for the fiasco in Iraq, yet their guilt was avoided by and large. More marches there should be, but the anti-war left will have to choose the goal of sanity in America's policy towards Iraq, and form coalitions with the liberal majority that is not inherently anti-all-war.

More flags. Clear documentation of what those who support unending war in Iraq are advocating be done with those Americans who disagree. More outreach towards the populations of the states surrounding the march site, so that the general liberal public doesn't find out about the march a week before hand from a tiny poster on a random city street light. Coordinated blogger coverage, utilization of YouTube, and more training of groups and organization members in dealing with resistance met along the march route. There are needed reforms to the anti-war movement, and until the lead dogs like answer find a way to address them, they will not come up with the numbers of marchers needed to really surround the Pentagon again.

Technorati Tags:
, , , , , , ,

Labels: , , , , ,