posted on April 18, 2007 12:08:20 AM new
(The author is J.D. Pendry, a retired Army Command Sergeant Major
who writes for Random House. HE IS QUITE ELOQUENT and he seldom beats around the bush!!!)
Jimmy Carter, you're the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You're the runner-in-chief.
Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia, and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses to the U.S.S. Cole and the First Trade Center Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately they grew bolder, until 9/11.
John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You've accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, and the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You're a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam is another war that you were for, before you were against it.
John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can't win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof. And said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa John? And the Democrats call you their military expert. Are you sure you didn't suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You're a sad, pitiable, and corrupt and washed up politician. You're not a Marine, sir. You wouldn't amount to a good pimple on a real Marine's a__. You're a phony and a disgrace. Run away John .
Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot, who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned South East Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? Lord help us!!
See Dick run.
Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster-sized pictures from Abu Grhaib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraqi's torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news this week, Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrate real Torture for you again. If you truly supported our troops, you'd show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You're a bloated drunken fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer, et al ad nauseam. Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers - the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we'll run away again, and all they have to do is hang on a little longer.
American news media, the New York Times particularly: Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one United, with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can't strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer
You are America's "AXIS OF IDIOTS". Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don't ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home, as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies. Yes, I'm questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I'm also questioning why you're stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don't deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war, this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.
No, Mr. President, you don't get off the hook, either. Our country has two enemies: Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It's your obligation to support them by confronting the AXIS OF IDIOTS. America must hear it from you that these Self-centered people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger, please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets. Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot. They need you to do it now.
AMEN
J.D. Pendry
Army Command Sergeant Major, retired
_________________
I'll not here for a long time, I'm here for the good time.
-------------------------
Amen,
Reverend Colin
http://www.reverendcolin.com
The truth be told at:
Rev's Roadhouse
http://www.revsroadhouse.com
posted on April 18, 2007 03:22:01 PM new
True American Patriots recognize that the dem party IS putting their own political gain AHEAD of our National best interests/National Security. And above the lives of the Iraqi's that only want their FREEDOM and liberty.
No doubt about that....and this letter sums up their anti-American behavior to a "T". tsk tsk tsk
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on April 18, 2007 04:02:00 PM new
"And above the lives of the Iraqi's that only want their FREEDOM and liberty."
Freedom from what or whom? The Sunni/Shia
Civil War? From the New Statesman:
The clash between Sunni and Shia Muslims across the Arab world is already the greatest single cause of strife around the globe. It is taking place within countries and between countries. It has been brewing for years, but only now do governments appreciate the dangers. The hanging of Saddam Hussein in late December took the problem to a new level. Sunnis saw the timing of the execution, on the eve of Eid al-Adha, one of their most significant festivals, as a deliberate insult. Shias worldwide celebrated the death of a man whom they saw as an oppressor. Now the United States and the rest of the western world are attempting, belatedly, to stabilise a situation that they themselves played a major role in creating.
"The New Statesman is a British left-of-centre political magazine published weekly in London. The current editor is John Kampfner. The magazine is committed to "development, human rights and the environment, global issues the mainstream press often ignores".
In the issue dated 29 May 2006, editor John Kampfner stated that the New Statesman remained "true to its heritage of radical politics"."
Why am I not surprised?????? you would quote something from a Socialist rag.
Amen,
Reverend Colin http://www.reverendcolin.com
posted on April 19, 2007 06:13:36 AM new
Your C & P's are, more often than not, from right wing blogs or news sources. If that's ok, I'm sure it is ok to C & P something from a "left of center" magazine.
From the Institute for Policy Studies
1. The Bush administration says that a war against Iraq is needed due to the threat of weapons of mass destruction, Iraq's support of terrorism, and human rights. Are those valid concerns?
The government of Iraq has long been brutally repressive towards its own people, and has twice attacked other countries (Iran and Kuwait) over longstanding political, economic and security disputes. Iraq's apex as a military power came during the 1980s, as a result of its decade-long alliance with the United States, which (along with European and other U.S. allies) provided political, military, technological and financial support. In fact, it was during this period of the U.S.-Iraqi alliance that Baghdad committed its worst human rights violations.
But the 1991 Gulf War bombing and 12 years of debilitating sanctions severely diminished Iraq's military capacity. By the time the United Nations weapons inspectors left Iraq in 1998 in anticipation of the U.S. "Desert Fox" bombing campaign, they had found and destroyed or rendered harmless 90 - 95% of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, including its chemical and biological weapons and long-range missiles. They had also completely destroyed its unfinished nuclear efforts.
The Bush administration linked Iraq with North Korea and Iran as a so-called "axis of evil." Yet only Iraq is singled out for possible military attack. Unlike North Korea, which may already have nuclear weapons, has repudiated the Non-Proliferation Treaty, expelled UN nuclear inspectors and directly threatened the United States, Iraq does not have nuclear weapons and is giving UN arms inspectors open access. Unlike a number of other countries, Iraq has not made international terrorism its pattern. Iraq simply does not pose a threat to the United States.
6. Who in the Bush administration supports going to war in Iraq?
The strongest voices for war in the administration are from the ideologues grouped around Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and Vice-President Cheney. They include Rumsfeld's deputy Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, head of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, Cheney's chief of staff Lewis Libbey, and others. All have been urging stronger military action against Iraq for a decade or more; in 1998, they all signed an open letter to President Clinton demanding more aggressive military action against Iraq. Many of them were part of a campaign launched by the Project for the New American Century calling for a new foreign policy aimed at preventing any country from even aspiring to match U.S. power. Since almost none of them served in the military and none have actual combat experience, but they are arguing for a war that others will fight, they are known as "chicken hawks."
War remains their strategic option of choice for Iraq policy. Perle, for instance, told an audience of British parliamentarians in November 2002 that "even a clean bill of health" from the UN arms inspectors would not stave off a U.S. war against Iraq.
11. Did Iraq have anything to do with September 11th, or with al-Qaeda? Would going to war against Iraq improve the security of Americans at home and abroad?
Iraq had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks.
In fact, Iraq has a long history of antagonism to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. According to the New York Times: "[S]hortly after Iraqi forces invaded Kuwait in 1990, Osama bin Laden approached Prince Sultan bin Abdelaziz al-Saud, the Saudi defense minister, with an unusual proposition.…Arriving with maps and many diagrams, Mr. Bin Laden told Prince Sultan that the kingdom could avoid the indignity of allowing an army of American unbelievers to enter the kingdom to repel Iraq from Kuwait. He could lead the fight himself, he said, at the head of a group of former mujahideen that he said could number 100,000 men." Even though the offer was undoubtedly exaggerated, bin Laden's hostility toward secular Iraq is clear. There is no evidence that that has changed.
Far from making Americans more secure, there is every reason to fear that war against Iraq will place Americans in greater danger. Across the Middle East, anti-American feeling is already widespread due to U.S. financial and diplomatic backing of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land and its support for corrupt and repressive regimes across the Arab world. A U.S.-led war against Iraq will further exacerbate that anger, perhaps leading more desperate individuals to turn to acts of violence against individual Americans or institutions perceived as symbols of American power or policy.
I'm sure you will find a problem with my source, but it is just as valid as yours are.
posted on April 19, 2007 09:54:34 AM new
Your sources coincouch are clearly from biased left winged agenda sources. More often than not, they are disproved as lies and/or deceipts.
Now to set you straight, colins posts are also confirmed on your left winged sites. ABC, CBS, CNN.
If you really wanted the truth, you would look at the whole picture. Colin is correct. If Sadam did not like you, you were doomed. If you listen to the left wingers, things in Iraq are much worse as they look for the one person there that is willing to say anything negative. In reality, most of the country is better off. But the liberal media only reports on Baghdad. Yes, Baghdad is a hell hole right now. No one is disputing that. But if you watch and listen to the tunnel visioned left winged media, you actually believe the whole country is under seige, which couldn't be further from the truth.
.
.
.
If it's called common sense, why do so few Demomorons have it?
Are YOU a Bunghole?