ThinkProgress Attacks Major CAP Donor, Walmart

The commies and progs have so many wars going on it is not even funny. Progressives and liberals are WAR MONGERS!! The war on women, the war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war on heterosexuals, the war on Christianity, the war on Christmas, the war on Syria and now the war on Walmart. Good going progs! Keep progressing us towards another WAR!

From the Freebeacon.com 

The Center for American Progress Action Fund’s blog attacked Walmart on Wednesday for retaliating against employees as they were demonstrating for wage reform.

The post did not disclose that the Center for American Progress (CAP) received up to $1 million from the retail giant and partnered with the group to hold a large party during last year’s Democratic National Convention in Charlotte.

Cindy Sheehan Quits as 'Face' of Anti-War Movement

bubye, bubye now...Yippee! Rosie O'donnell and now Cindy "loo who" Sheehan!

From FNC:

Cindy Sheehan, the "peace mom" who made headlines in 2005 by staging a marathon protest outside President Bush's Crawford, Texas, ranch, said Monday that she no longer wants to be seen as a leader of the anti-war movement.

In a 1,245-word missive entitled "Goodbye Attention Whore" posted on the liberal DailyKos blog, Sheehan said her campaign to end the war in Iraq had strained her relationship with her children, cost her a marriage and left her nearly penniless.

"This is my resignation letter as the 'face' of the American anti-war movement," Sheehan wrote. "I am going to take whatever I have left and go home. I am going to go home and be a mother to my surviving children and try to regain some of what I have lost."

I for one will not miss her and she must be a better mother than a left wing loon, because she did raise a true American Hero; Casey Sheehan.

Technorati Tags: news, politics, anti-war, war, liberals, the left, cindy sheehan

Clinton announces effort to revoke president's war powers; but can they?

From USA Today:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton announced Thursday that she's joining forces with one of the Senate's most skilled parliamentary infighters to try to rescind President Bush's authority to wage war.

Clinton, a New York Democrat seeking her party's presidential nomination, and Sen. Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat who is the Senate's longest-serving member, said they will seek a vote to rescind the authority Congress granted Bush to use force in Iraq in October 2002. If approved, the measure would require congressional reauthorization for troops to remain in Iraq, Clinton said.

"We're going to force a debate on the whole war," she told reporters outside the Senate chamber. "We want to force the Congress to look at whether the president's authority, which comes from Congress, should be rescinded."

Ok,, the Congress has no authority to rescind the President's War Powers, they are enshrined in the Constitution. The President needs no authority to use the military in any way he sees fit in defense of his country, country's assets or citizens. Congress' only role is to declare war and provide funding, something they did not do by the way. authorizing the use of force is not declaring war. This is where things get confusing, in 1973 the Senate and the House of Representatives achieved the 2/3 majority required to pass the War Powers Resolution over President Nixon's veto on November 7, 1973.

From Public Law 93-148:

TSEC. 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent
of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the
collective judgement of both the Congress and the President will apply to the
introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into
situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicate by
the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or
in such situations.

It goes on further, but you get the idea on its purpose. The purpose is to breach the Executive Branches War powers under the Constitution. You can go read the whole law and see how at every turn they have usurped the Presidents constitutional power as Commander and Chief. This law is clearly a violation of the separation of powers and to change the Constitution requires an Amendment, not just Congress passing legislation.

Article I, Section 8, Clauses 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the United States Constitution states:

The Congress shall have power...

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Now, in Article II Section 2 Clause one it States:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the army and navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

\1419\2 M. Farrand, The Records of the Federal Convention of
1787 (New Haven: rev. ed. 1937), 318-319.
\1420\Jointly introducing the amendment to substitute
``declare'' for ``make,'' Madison and Gerry noted the change would
``leav[e] to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks.'' Id.,
318.
\1421\Connecticut originally voted against the amendment to
substitute ``declare'' for ``make'' but ``on the remark by Mr. King that
`make' war might be understood to `conduct' it which was an Executive
function, Mr. Ellsworth gave up his opposition, and the vote of
Connecticut was changed. . . .''

What does all this mean you ask? To sum it up the President has sole power to use the Military abroad for the good of the nation. The President does not require congressional approval to use the military as he sees fit. Congresses role of recognizing an official protracted war abroad is to DECLARE WAR and they are responsible for funding of the military at all times. Well originally the limit to a standing army was two years, but the Constitution was later amended. the only power Congress has is the power of the purse.

Here are some examples of Presidents using their power as Commander and Chief over the years:

Thomas Jefferson, in one of his first acts as President, took a preemptive action to destroy the "Barbary Pirates" based in Tripoli. The Barbary Pirates (Muslims BTW) demanded tribute to stop them from attacking our merchant ships and enslaving our citizens aboard, Jefferson sent the Navy into another nation's harbor, to protect American vessels and its citizens. Needless to say, the United States was not the world power then that it is today, but Jefferson's action worked. It also established a precedent ,as there was no declaration of war from Congress; because it was not needed.

Interestingly enough Jefferson tried to get an 'international coalition' but none of the European Countries wanted to rock the boat. So Jefferson sent a small contingent of Marines in to burn the captured ship and free the hostages, which was a success.

Sixty years later, the Supreme Court sustained the blockade of the Southern ports instituted by Lincoln in April 1861 at a time when Congress was not in session.

Under Ronald Reagan's presidency, U.S. intelligence learned of Libyan diplomatic communications regarding a bomb that killed two people, including an American soldier and injuring 230 others, in a West Berlin nightclub. President Reagan's reaction was to begin lobbing missiles at Libya, claiming it was self-defense.

Under President George Herbert Walker Bush's administration he expelled Saddam Hussein's Iraqi forces from Kuwait,

President Clinton ordered warships in the Persian Gulf to fire missiles at the Mukhabarat, the Iraqi Intelligence Service, in downtown Baghdad, because the Mukhabarat was believed to have planned the effort to assassinate former President Bush. Then in In 1998, he attacked Osama bin Laden's forces. U.S. warships fired cruise missiles at bin Laden's Afghan camp and a Sudanese chemical plant.

OK so your still not convinced...

In March of 2003 a federal appeals court upheld a lower court's dismissal of a challenge to the president's power to use military force in Iraq.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a district court judge who had dismissed a challenge from a group of antiwar lawmakers and activists claiming the president cannot act without a declaration of war by Congress.

In rejecting the plaintiffs' argument unanimously Thursday, the three-judge appeals panel in Boston said, "As the circumstances presented here do not warrant judicial intervention, the appropriate recourse for those who oppose war with Iraq lies with the political branches."

The suit sought a preliminary injunction preventing President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld from initiating a war in Iraq.

The plaintiffs included several outspoken congressional foes of the war: Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio; Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Illinois; Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas; Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington; and Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan. Parents of active duty personnel also were among the plaintiffs.

It seems the democrats have no use for the Executive or the Judicial branches of our government. this is like an attempted coo, going on right in front of our eyes.

Hillary Rotten Clinton should be ashamed at herself for playing politics with something this important. This is Presidential campaigning at its worst. Either vote to defund the war or send the military their money, those are your choices.

Sources:
Constitutional Convention
Find Law
CNN
U.S. Constitution
Policy Almanac
A Patriot's History of The United States

Technorati Tags: constitution, war, iraq, politics, democrats, congress, executive branch, president, news, politics, clinton, byrd

Debating the Iraq surrender

I am sitting here listening to the House debate about the override vote and they are making me ill. I cannot understand how so many people can work so hard to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.



We have not been at war in Iraq longer than WWII. The war was over in weeks, we are now fighting the peace which lasted 11 years after WWII.



This is not a civil war, these new big attacks are being done by al-Qaeda terrorists, not Iraqi insurgents.



When is the last major war we have actually won? I will tell you, WWII, after that date Congress has never declared war. They authorize the use of force, but Constitutionally, the President does not need Congress's permission to use the military. This is why the Korean and Vietnam war was called a police action. We left in defeat in Korea and we left in defeat in Vietnam. Now, Congress wants to make sure that we leave Iraq in defeat; we have become FRANCE!



Sweeper of the house stated that Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror, that "war" is in Afghanistan... No you DUMB BITCH all the terrorists are not in Afghanistan! They are all over the world and allot of them are now fighting us in Iraq, which is better than fighting them here on our soil! The military is better able to fight terrorists than law enforcement and unfortunately "we the people". I personally would like to see "we the people" armed and trained to deal with terrorists.



Let me explain this to you people in a way you can understand; I am going to get in a fight with you right now and I am NOT setting a time table to when I am going to stop kicking your backside! When you give up I am going to continue to kick your backside until I am done.



Now, that you have wrapped your head around that scenario, wars end when one side is victorious over the other, period. If you stop fighting and leave, you have SURRENDERED and you have LOST; get it?





Thanks to you weak willed, spineless people and your elected cockroaches we have been defeated in Vietnam, Korea, Mogadishu, and now you wish to add Iraq. Tell me, when will you be demanding we pull out of Afghanistan?



You people make me sick...





Technorati Tags: democrats, liberals, war, military, iraq, middle east, politics, news, oinion, history

Reid: Someone Tell Bush the War in Iraq is Lost

The hezbocrats have declared victory for the terrorists...

From FNC:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Thursday said the war in Iraq is lost militarily and "can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically" after more than four years of fighting.

"Now I believe, myself, that the secretary of state, the secretary of defense and you have to make your own decision as to what the president knows: that this war is lost, that the surge is not accomplishing anything," Reid, D-Nev., told reporters.

That is it folks! Harry "Droopy Dog" Reid has decided the USA cannot defeat a bunch of backwards terrorists. Well, if droopy dog says we lost, we might as well pack up and go home, NOT! The hezbocrats are so invested politically with our defeat in Iraq it is sickening.

I hate to tell you Droopy Dog, but without the military component, there is no economic or diplomatic solution. You need ALL THREE, the Surge is only one part of the President's plan, the rest includes economic and diplomatic solutions.

Here is another news flash, the TERRORIST ARE LISTENING YOU BOOB!

'Iran trying to recruit Israeli spies'

From The Jerusalem Post:

Iran has been making concerted efforts to recruit Jewish and Arab Israelis as spies against Israel, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Service) revealed Tuesday.

According to the report, Iranians have, over the past two years, been targeting Israelis of Iranian origin who traveled to Iran to visit relatives.

Counterintuitively, Iran is not considered an enemy state by Israel, and Israelis can travel freely to the country.

I used to think Israel was a smart country when it comes to security, but not considering Iran, who's government has called for the annihilation of Israel and denies the holocaust, is ludicrous.

On Tuesday afternoon, Labor MK Ami Ayalon told Channel One that the reports show that Iran sees Israel as a threat.

He added that Israel's classified defense information is digitized and kept on computer systems, and that these systems would be the Iranians' primary targets.

In the past two years, over 100 Israelis have applied for visas to Iran, 10 of whom were questioned by the Shin Bet and discovered to have been recruited as spies by the Iranians.

"The Iranians are collecting intensive intelligence on the state of Israel," a senior Shin Bet official told reporters.

Iran sees Israelis who travel to the country as potential spies, who can gather intelligence against Israel.

The Shin Bet said that Iran's intelligence gathering focused on three main points: Israel's decision-making echelon; Israeli military and defense establishments; and the strengths and weaknesses of Israeli society.

Since Iran does not allow anyone into the country whose passport bears an Israeli entrance stamp, Israelis who want to travel to Iran must pass through the Iranian Consulate in Turkey, where they are issued special documents that allows them into to Iran, or alternatively - take out an Iranian passport.

Eh, no need to worry here, right?

From the interrogation of the ten suspected spies, it emerged that Iranian intelligence officers disguised as diplomats work at the Iranian Consulate in Turkey. Israelis who arrive are taken into a separate room and questioned for hours about their military background, their families, political issues in Israel and possible connections to defense officials.

The Shin Bet identified one of those officers as "Takwi," otherwise known as "Abdulli," and another as "Zinali."

After the initial contact at the consulate in Istanbul, the Israelis who arrive in Iran are taken again for questioning and, in many cases, their travel documents are confiscated. In some cases, Israelis are stuck in Iran for several months, the Shin Bet said.

The Israelis are then contacted again with an offer to help them trace their documents and leave Iran.

Once the documents are returned, the Israelis are usually asked to begin gathering information to pass on to their handlers.

In some cases, the Israelis were requested to obtain research papers and photos of classified military installations in exchange for thousands of dollars.

In the case of an Israeli who was offered a large sum to cooperation with Iranian intelligence, Iran hinted that his refusal would meet with a negative response. In some cases, Iranian intelligence has been known to arrest the Israeli citizens' relatives in Iran.

The Shin Bet has urged the Knesset to pass legislation defining Iran as a combatant country.

There are currently 25,000 Jews residing in Iran.

Why in God's name would any Jew live in Iran? That is just insane! Well, I hope the Israeli government listens to Shin Bet, because it amazes me this has gone on this long.

I would like to know if our government let's Iranian nationals into our country still. Heck, when I was in the Air Force, we were training Iranians on our military bases.

Radical cleric allies quit Iraq Cabinet

From the AP:

Cabinet ministers loyal to the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr resigned on Monday to protest the prime minister's refusal to set a timetable for an American withdrawal, raising the prospect that the Mahdi Army militia could return to the streets of Baghdad.

Well, maybe you should stop killing yourselves first.

The number of bodies found dumped in Baghdad increased sharply on Sunday to 30 — from as low as five in recent days — in a possible sign of the militia's resurgence, even ahead of the six resignations.

The bodies, most of them tortured before they were shot execution-style, are widely believed to be the victims of Shiite death squads associated with the Mahdi Army. Al-Sadr had ordered his fighters hide their weapons and stay off the streets shortly before the U.S. troop surge and security crackdown began on Feb. 14.[snip]

Earlier in the day, Nassar al-Rubaie, head of the Sadrist bloc, declared that the ministers would "give the six Cabinet seats to the government, with the hope that they will be given to independents who represent the will of the people."

I don't know if this is a bad thing or a good thing yet. I mean it seems that the Sad'r Shiite Death Squads are the problem right now.

Al-Sadr leads anti-U.S. push

Mookie is back...

From The Washington Times::

Radical cleric Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr, ending weeks of tacit cooperation with American forces, called for renewed efforts to drive U.S. forces out of Iraq on the eve of a major anti-American rally in Najaf today.
Thousands of supporters, mainly Shi'ites, were streaming into the central Iraqi city for the rally, according to reports from Najaf, while Iraqi authorities closed the capital to all vehicle traffic during today's anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein.[snip]

Even before the rally, defiant handbills appeared in the shrine city bearing Sheik al-Sadr's official seal, the Associated Press reported. The warning appears to signal an end to eight weeks of tacit cooperation with the U.S. military, which has permitted a reduction in Shi'ite militia violence under the Baghdad Security Plan.
"You, the Iraqi army and police forces, don't walk alongside the occupiers, because they are your archenemy," said the statement, which also urged the cleric's followers to end sectarian infighting and turn all their efforts on the Americans.
"God has ordered you to be patient in front of your enemy, and unify your efforts against them -- not against the sons of Iraq," the statement said.[snip]

One American observer said the crowds appeared disciplined, contradicting the ragtag reputation that the Mahdi's Army has earned over the past four years.
Iraqis close to the militia say its members have been to Iran for training, acquiring better weapons and better techniques.
Sheik al-Sadr reportedly has told his followers to wear civilian clothing rather than their signature black clothes, and to carry the Iraqi flag rather than the Shi'ite black banner. By Saturday, along one street in northeast Mansour known to be a Mahdi's Army stronghold, Iraqi flags were waving from every other lamppost.

First, I have no problem withe the Iraqi people flying their own flag, that is proper. But this is like the Mexican illegals who now fly the USA Flag when they protest and march; it is false. It is a simple ruse, it has nothing to do with how they feel. Mookie learned some new tricks in Iran is all this means.

In my opinion, he has been watching the hezbocrats with their cut and run attitude and Nancy :the Damascus Deva" Pelosi's unlawful trip to the Middle East and he has decided to help the hezbocrats achieve their goals of getting us out of Iraq, before it is time.

you have to understand, what our elected cockroaches say back here is watched closely in the Middle East and it has very real conciquences.

U.S. spending billions on 'enduring bases' in Iraq

With all the talk of pulling the troops out of Iraq, what are we going to do about this?

From OneNewsNow:

The head of a conservative civil liberties organization says despite the talk about withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq, the United States government has spent billions of dollars for a long-term stay there. John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, says he is concerned about efforts in both the Senate and House to force the premature withdrawal of American fighting forces from Iraq.

While Congress talks about pulling U.S. troops out, lawmakers have spent billions of tax dollars for about a dozen so-called "enduring bases," Whitehead observes. "These are large mega-bases, at least 15 that we've now built in Iraq at the cost of billions of dollars, and the president needs to tell us that. The Congress needs to tell us that," he insists.

And the conservative civil liberties advocate feels there is a problem with staffing these bases with 50,000 to 60,000 non-combat soldiers. "We're saying we're going to leave non-combat troops there; but the problem with that is the insurgents over there ... don't see them as non-combat," he explains.

"People have to realize, American soldiers are going to continue to be killed in Iraq," Whitehead says. "It's different in Germany. I mean, there's not an insurgency in Germany. I'm not sure we should be even pulling the combat troops out [of Iraq]," he says.

"The point is that people don't realize that we have these huge bases that have Burger Kings, Pizza Huts, car dealerships, biker trails, and all that," the head of the Rutherford Institute contends. "I mean, these are mega-cities here, and the average American doesn't know these things exist," he says.

The United States could have a presence in Iraq for the next 30 years, Whitehead points out. Under the circumstances, he says the American people need to know that despite all the talk about withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq as early as next year, the government has already spent billions of dollars in preparation for a long-term American presence in Iraq.

I was hoping we had long term plans to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is a very important strategic position in the Middle East. We are there to stifle Iran and Syria's plans for the region. Iraq puts us between Iran and Syria and gives us access to the Persian Gulf. You can get a better idea of Iraq's importance on this map.

Let us not forget that Iraq is important to Usama Bin Laden as well. He wants to make Baghdad to be the capital of his Islamic Sunni Caliphate. Iran, of course, wants Iran to be the Capital of its Islamic Shite Empire. Keep in mind Iranians are Persians, not Arab. Studying the history of the region, known as Mesopotamia, this makes sense.

Did you know the City of Babylon is in Iraq and Saddam was rebuilding it?

The Uncooperative Radio Show Recording March 31, 2007

Another Geo-political primer. President Carter’s foreign policy vs President Regan’s.

Subject: It’s time to go around the world with the Uncooperative Radio show host. Also, we are at war with the Islamic world how did we get here and who’s to blame tune in to find out.

Sources:

• A Patriot’s History of the United States by Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen
• Tehran's Hostages
• Comparison of Iraq Withdrawal Language
• Congressman Compares Iraq and Detroit

Iran Nuclear Bomb Could Be Possible by 2009

Yup, Nothing to worry about in Iran...

From The Blotter:

Iran has more than tripled its ability to produce enriched uranium in the last three months, adding some 1,000 centrifuges which are used to separate radioactive particles from the raw material.

The development means Iran could have enough material for a nuclear bomb by 2009, sources familiar with the dramatic upgrade tell ABC News.
The sources say the unexpected expansion is taking place at Iran's nuclear enrichment plant outside the city of Natanz, in a hardened facility 70 feet underground.
[snip]

"If they continue at this pace, and they get the centrifuges to work and actually enrich uranium on a distinct basis," said David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security, "then you're looking at them having, potentially having enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 2009."

Previous predictions by U.S. intelligence had cited 2015 as the earliest date Iran could develop a weapon.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has publicly predicted his country would have 3,000 centrifuges installed by this May, but few in the West gave his claim much credence, until now.[snip]

The new centrifuges are in open defiance of the U.N. Security Council which last week imposed a new set of sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt enrichment.

We had better start taking Iran serious before it is too late. They keep telling us in advance what they will do and we dismiss it. Even though they have proven time and time again they actually do it!

Iran has said:

• Israel will be wiped off the map. It will cease to exist.
• The ayatollah has said it is ok to use nuclear weapons against Israel, because they could not survive the attack, but the muslim world can survive retaliation.
• They will share nuclear technology with other Islamic countries
• Abbadabbadoodoo wants to bring the 9th imam out of the well by bringing on the end times
  

Why will you not believe them?

Well, I believe if they get the "Islamic Bomb" they will use it on Israel. I believe they will give the technology to other Islamic countries. I believe they will give nukes to terrorists. Remember they are in direct control of Hezbollah, the biggest most organized terror group in the world.

China has gained and tested array of space weapons

I warned everyone about china's space ambitions...

From The Washington Times:

China is developing an "impressive" array of space weapons, including missiles and jammers, and is moving toward placing nuclear weapons in space to attack U.S. satellites, the commander of U.S. strategic forces told the Senate yesterday.
The Chinese military has "undertaken what we would call a very disciplined and comprehensive continuum of capability against ... our space capabilities," Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright yesterday told the Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee.
Their capabilities go "all the way from temporary and reversible effects -- [Global Positioning System] jamming, things like that, [communications] jamming, all the way through direct ascent ASAT," he said, referring to anti-satellite weapons. "Eventually, they'll probably be looking at co-orbital" weapons -- missiles that orbit near a satellite and then explode.

I cannot reproduce the whole article and you really need to read the whole thing.

This is why funding for the space program and going back to the moon is so important. china has plans for a moon base, has space weapons and is not our friend. The General questions whether or not this should spark a space race? What has happened to our country? China is ahead of us in space weaponry and we shouldn't respond? What happened to the country that wanted to be the first to put a man on the moon? In my opinion, we had better not only get into the race, we better win it.

The Uncooperative Radio Show Recording March 24, 2007

Much to do about nothing with the fired attorneys? Gore blows hot air on capital hill. Illegal immigration roundup and some good news from Iraq.

Subject: Brian thinks the Dems “doth protest too much” when it comes to the fired U.S. attorneys, he’ll tell you why. Then the Grand Wizard of Global Warming arrives on Capital Hill, all bow before him. The “Mexicans” are coming thanks to President Bush and some heroes of Iraq.

Sources:

• House OKs subpoenas for top Bush aides
• Gore Outlines Grand Climate Change Plan
• Bill to Ban Regular Light Bulbs Introduced in House
• Judicial Watch Uncovers 2005 Chertoff Implementation Memo on Security and Prosperity Partnership
• U.S. destroys bomb factory in Iraq
• Soldier performs life-saving actions despite life-threatening wounds

Senate OKs war bill with Iraq timeline

Son of a...

From the AP:

Senate Democrats ignored a veto threat and pushed through a bill Thursday requiring
President Bush to start withdrawing troops from "the civil war in
Iraq," dealing a rare, sharp rebuke to a wartime commander in chief.

In a mostly party line 51-47 vote, the Senate signed off on a bill providing $123 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also orders Bush to begin withdrawing troops within 120 days of passage while setting a nonbinding goal of ending combat operations by March 31, 2008.[snip]

Forty-eight Democrats and independent Bernard Sanders (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont were joined by two Republicans, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Gordon Smith of Oregon, in voting for the measure. Opposed were 46 Republicans and Connecticut independent Joseph Lieberman.

Sens. Mike Enzi, R-Wy., and Tim Johnson, D-S.D., did not vote.

I never thought they could get this out of the Senate. A time line to pull our troops out of Iraq, another defeat for the U.S. I guess the democrats, who voted in lock step, are not tired of losing wars. They are not tired of ensuring the U.S. has no teeth in foreign policy.

The President is going to veto this Bill and they know it. Then Harry "Droopy Dog" Reid and Nancy "Shrieker of the House" Pelosi will say that Bush defunded the troops because he vetoed a Bill TELLING the President how to run the war. They have no right, to tell the President anything about how to run the war. Congress, decides whether or not to go to war, or to continue it after 60 days, and then the President, as commander in chief, prosecutes the war.

Let's just add the icing on the cake and add over 20 Billion Dollars in PORK spending to the Bill!!

I have had it with the hezbocrats. It is time to change their party's name to the socialist party.

House Passes War Appropriations Bill with Date Certain

From FNC:

Democrats won passage by a 218-212 vote on the $124 billion war spending bill, which will fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush has promised to veto the measure.
...snip

Meanwhile, the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved a $121 billion version of Bush's emergency war spending request, but bucked the White House by putting in language that sets a date-specific timeframe for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

The Senate bill sets a March 31, 2008, goal for withdrawing all combat troops out of Iraq. The legislation, which also gobs on billions in special projects at home, now heads to the Senate floor for a vote by the full chamber.
...snip

President Bush vowed to veto a measure pushed through the House by Democrats on Friday that would order the commander-in-chief to withdraw U.S. combat troops from Iraq by September 2008.

"I will veto it if it comes to my desk," Bush said from the White House Diplomatic Reception Room joined by family members of veterans and troops in combat.

Bush called the measure by Democrats "an act of political theater voted to subsitute their judgement for that of our military commanders on the ground in Iraq."
...snip

Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned that if Congress fails to pass a measure funding the war efforts by April 15, it will slow down training of troops scheduled for future deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Gates says it would also delay repair of equipment.

It is not likely to pass the Senate, but if it does the President will veto it. However, that means no money for the troops.

Did I mention how Nancy Pelosi got the votes?

Democrats Load Up emergency Iraq Funding Bill With Pork

For Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.), there is $25 million for spinach growers hurt by last year's E. coli scare. For three conservative Democrats in Georgia, there is $75 million for peanut storage. For lawmakers from the bone-dry West, there is $500 million for wildfire suppression. An additional $120 million is earmarked for shrimp and Atlantic menhaden fishermen.

And that was taken from WaPo!!

Iran seizes 15 British sailors, marines

From the AP:

Iranian naval vessels on Friday seized 15 British sailors and marines who had boarded a merchant ship in Iraqi waters of the Persian Gulf, British and U.S. officials said. Britain immediately protested the detentions, which come at a time of high tension between the West and Iran.

...snip

Britain's Defense Ministry said the British Navy personnel were "engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters," and had completed a ship inspection when they were accosted by the Iranian vessels. The British sailors were assigned to a task force which protects Iraqi oil terminals and maintains security in Iraqi waters under authority of the
U.N. Security Council.

...snip

In London, the British government summoned the Iranian ambassador to the Foreign Office: "He was left in no doubt that we want them back," Britain's Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said after the meeting.

...snip

No one could be immediately reached for comment at either government offices in Iran or at the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad. An Iranian official at the U.N. mission in New York said he was not aware of the report and could not immediately comment.

Iran is in the middle of its New Year holiday when almost all government offices close.

Well, I think you better WAKE SOMEONE UP or break up there party over this one; don't you think?

Personally, I would arrest Abbadabbadoodoo who is in NY right now.

U.S. officials had expressed concern that with so much military hardware concentrated in the Persian Gulf, just such a small incident could spiral out of control and trigger a major armed confrontation.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the Bush administration was monitoring the situation.

"The British government is demanding the immediate safe return of the people and equipment and we are keeping watch on the situation," Snow said.

...snip

Earlier this week, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said if Western countries "want to treat us with threats and enforcement of coercion and violence, undoubtedly they must know that the Iranian nation and authorities will use all their capacities to strike enemies that attack."

This clown actually runs the country. In contrast our President said...

In February, President Bush said: "The Iranian people are good, honest, decent people and they've got a government that is belligerent, loud, noisy, threatening — a government which is in defiance of the rest of the world and says, 'We want a nuclear weapon.'"

In other words their government behaves like petulent children because it is immature.

According to a statement from the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, which is based in Bahrain and operates jointly with the British forces off the coast of Iraq, the British sailors had just finished inspecting the merchant ship about 10:30 a.m. "when they and their two boats were surrounded and escorted by Iranian vessels into Iranian territorial waters."

Cmdr. Kevin Aandahl of the Fifth Fleet said the British crew members were intercepted by several larger patrol boats operated by Iranian sailors belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy, a radical force that operates separately from the country's regular navy.

The Iranian boats normally carry bow-mounted machine guns, while the British boarding party carried only sidearms, Aandahl said. No shots were fired and there appeared to be no physical harm done to any personnel involved or their vessels, Aandahl said.

The seizure of the British vessels, a pair of rigid inflatable boats known as RIBs, took place in long-disputed waters just outside of the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway that divides Iraq from Iran, Aandahl said. A 1975 treaty gave the waters to Iraq and U.S. and British ships commonly operate there, but Aandahl said Iran disputes Iraq's jurisdiction over the waters.

Iran really thinks it can play with the big boys, doesn't it?

This is the action of a rogue nation, not one that wishes to be part of the civilized world. there are some of you out there that want to trust them with nuclear technology? They cannot even behave with conventional weapons! Not only was this arrogant, it was incredibly STUPID! With the Security council discussing sanction on Iran and their President here to speak to the U.N. you do something like this? We shouldn't be surprised, their President is a whack job hostage taker from way back.

I tell you what, I want to know what was on that Merchant Ship. I also think their President should be arrested until their people and property are returned. Why, because in my opinion, this was an act of war.

U.S. destroys bomb factory in Iraq

Monsters...

From the AP:

U.S. troops killed five insurgents and destroyed a bomb-making factory Wednesday north of Baghdad, and dozens more were detained after fierce clashes in a Sunni-dominated province west of the capital.

Scattered violence killed at least nine people, while a claim by the U.S. military that insurgents used children in a weekend suicide attack raised concerns about new tactics being adopted by insurgents as a security crackdown aimed at stopping sectarian violence enters its sixth week.

Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, meanwhile, renewed calls for talks to be opened with insurgents in an attempt to bring peace, but he excluded al-Qaida in Iraq.

"I do believe that there is no way but to talk to everybody," he told the British Broadcasting Corp.

Apart from al-Qaida, which he said was "not very much willing in fact to talk to anybody," all parties "should be invited, should be called to sit down around the table to discuss their fears, their reservations."

Maj. Gen. Michael Barbero, deputy director for regional operations on the Joint Staff, said Tuesday that a vehicle used in the attack was waved through a U.S. military checkpoint because two children were visible in the back seat. He said this was the first reported use of children in a suicide car bombing in Baghdad.

"Children in the back seat lowered suspicion, (so) we let it move through, they parked the vehicle, the adults run out and detonate it with the children in the back," Barbero told reporters in Washington. "The brutality and ruthless nature of this enemy hasn't changed."

I should say cowards! Blowing it up with children in the vehicle as they ran away?

U.S. forces killed five suspected insurgents, detained three others and used an airstrike to destroy a bomb-making factory that contained large-caliber ammunition and several 50-gallon barrels of explosive material near Taji, an air base 12 miles north of Baghdad, the military said in a statement. No American troops or civilians were injured during the operation, it added.

A Sadrist lawmaker, Bahaa al-Araji, also said U.S. troops raided his office Wednesday, seizing the memory card from his computer along with a gun and a rifle. The U.S. military had no immediate comment.

We are making progress, but I know Sad'r told his militia to pull back and hide their arms until this is over. He is probably watching Congress and figures we will be leaving so he can just wait; thanks hezbocrats!

Military Families and Veterans Arrested at Nancy Pelosi's Office

Yup, Nancy "shrieker of the house" Pelosi supports the troops and their families...

From Indy Bay:
by Military Families Speak out

On Monday, March 19th 2007, eleven military family members and veterans were arrested by federal police at Nancy Pelosi's office in San Francisco after they met with Pelosi staff to express their opposition to Pelosi's plan to continue funding the War in Iraq, as outlined in the supplmental appropriations bill coming to house vote this week. The group included veterans who had served in Iraq and mothers whose sons are in Iraq now and others whose sons have served multiple deployments. The arrestees inlcuded members of Military Families Speak Out, Iraq Veterans Against the War, and Veterans for Peace. The group was charged with "disturbances" and failure to obey orders of federal police. After processing, all eleven were released.

Now, that is a nice way to treat military family members huh? hehe

I must admit, I don't have all the details, but you would think Pelosi would avoid this like the plague. I mean aren't they on her side? They are eating their own people!

Democrats Load Up emergency Iraq Funding Bill With Pork

There has not been enough reporting on this...

From WaPo:

For Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.), there is $25 million for spinach growers hurt by last year's E. coli scare. For three conservative Democrats in Georgia, there is $75 million for peanut storage. For lawmakers from the bone-dry West, there is $500 million for wildfire suppression. An additional $120 million is earmarked for shrimp and Atlantic menhaden fishermen.

These people DO NOT support the troops. This is a Bill to fund the military and it is being held up do to politics. They need to pass a CLEAN appropriations bill to fund the war and get it out FAST. If they want to pull the troops out now, than vote to de-fund the war. Forget all these games about time tables. If you are going to leave the troops in harm's way than you give them what they need to achieve VICTORY. Notice all time tables discussed have been just PRIOR to the 2008 Presidential election. Do you think that is a coincidence??

We need more of what Winston Churchill said during WWII; Victory at all costs... victory despite all terror... I think I got that righVictory—victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be...

General: Al-Sadr's fighters feel heat

Yup, let's end this new direction in Iraq...

From USA Today:

Coalition forces have detained about 700 members of the Mahdi Army, the largest Shiite militia in Baghdad, the top U.S. commander in Iraq said Monday.

The militia, which is loyal to radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and has clashed with U.S. troops in the past, has mostly avoided a direct confrontation with U.S. and Iraqi government forces, Gen. David Petraeus said in an interview with USA TODAY.

Some of the militia's top leaders have left the capital, and Iraqi government officials are negotiating with al-Sadr's political organization in an effort to disband the militia, Petraeus said.

"I think, in part, one reason that al-Sadr's militia has been lying low … is due to some of the discussions being held," Petraeus said in a telephone interview from Iraq. "It's also in part due to some of the leaders leaving Baghdad" and others being arrested, he said.

U.S. and allied troops have arrested top-ranking and rank-and-file militia members during operations over the past several months, Petraeus said. Coalition forces are engaged in a major plan, devised in part by Petraeus, to limit sectarian and insurgent violence in Baghdad.

Let's all take a deep breath and let the President and the military work towards victory, shall we? I am sick of people in this country being worthless and weak! We can win this if we keep at it, not give up. People, a fight is not over until it is over. The USA can win any war, if "we the people" let them win it! Just get out of their way people and they will learn from their mistakes and adjust until we are victorious; it is that simple.