Posts Tagged ‘Vietnam’

Vietnam Reflections ….

March 29, 2009

First Loaica updates her blog at Vietnam Reflections (great images — with 3000 more to come!!) and then ut-Obama launches his Afghanistan policy ….

I’m no authority, but why do I get the feeling that Obama has just put his signature on the Afghan war …. and it’s starting to look a lot like Vietnam?

Interesting how he appears to be distinguishing between the Taliban (can’t we all get along?) and Al Qaeda (boooo bad guys) while isolating both from the problems IN Afghanistan AND Pakistan

And we’re supposed to trust this empty suit who says nothing without a teleprompter?

Funny how Al Qaeda has not launched an attack on anyone from Afghanistan in eons, yet it’s critical we rush in with thousands of additional troops — to maybe rescue the drug trade? 

Son of Soros got this plan from the puppetmaster, methinks.  The ole global drug legalization baron himself — George Soros

We’ve got the chemical spray to destroy the poppy fields (which will not harm other crops or people), and would in succession, destroy the Taliban and Al Qaeda PLUS allow Pakistan and Afghanistan to regain control of their countries AND their own economies.

Isn’t that what we want???

Advertisements

Obama and his Hoax on America II

October 26, 2008

First about Colin Powell and

— his questionable expertise (code word: ignorance of Muslim theology) on the (un)likelihood of a practicing Muslim (ever swearing allegiance to the US Constitution to be eligible for) serving as POTUS, and,

— his rejection of Sarah Palin as “inexperienced.” 

The cusp of Powell’s definition of a woman’s “experience” may lie (ala, Bill Clinton) in his definition of “is” …..

Take for example “someone” who learned about Powell’s attitude toward “inexperienced” women in Vietnam first hand:  This “someone” shared a 2-bedroom hooch with one of Colonel (at that time) Powell’s “experienced” women …. How “experienced” was she?   Suffice it to say that she was so “experienced” that after Powell rose through the ranks to Secretary of State, she was sent to Brazil to live a life of luxury …..  Did I mention that this “someone” also has names and pictures? 

And I ain’t talkin’ shoe fetish “experienced” here.

Obama’s mistress should be jealous — she was banished, not a life of luxury, but to a job in Martinique. 

But I digress.

Am I the only one who remembers that Powell’s contemporary political bed-fellows were once the minions calling him “Uncle Tom” and other racially-toned slurs?

Astute observers of Powell’s career in Vietnam and the Gulf War never seriously considered him a viable candidate for President to begin with — Powell’s abject failure as Secretary Of State is suggested by only the bravest of historians.  Allowing him to resign was but a face-saving alternative to his being fired.    

Resentments?  Powell surely has a few …. But so do those who know the REAL Colin Powell.

Secondly — let’s be more realistic than Powell’s hyperbole RE: Obama’s associations and assumed alliances:

That Obama’s biography touches so frequently on such unsavory organizations as CAIR and the Nation of Islam should give pause. How many of politicians have a single tie to either group, much less seven of them? John McCain charitably calls Obama “a person you do not have to be scared [of] as president of the United States,” but Obama’s multiple links to anti-Americans and subversives mean he would fail the standard security clearance process for Federal employees.

What our mainstream media is not telling us involves Powell’s ludicrous Middle East, pro-Muslim speaking tour and his close affiliation with Saudi prince Bendar, his tennis-playing buddy who gifted him with a new Jaguar. 

Surely the distinguished General Powell has not been blinded by the glitter of Saudi gold? 

…. on the basis of having seen a picture of a Muslim mother of a Muslim son who had been killed in Iraq, Colin Powell uses his (apparent) prestige to tell the interviewer and all of America, that there is nothing wrong with Islam, nothing wrong with the ideology of Islam, nothing to be concerned about in Sharia supremacism, nothing wrong with the idea of a Muslim president. His irresponsibility astounds.

He once held high office. And though he never demonstrated any particular gifts, he acquired — possibly because there had to be something good about him to focus on — the reputation for “integrity.” Apparently the gift to his wife of a Jaguar from Prince Bandar, his tennis partner, who was recently revealed in Great Britain to have been the recipient of up to $2 billion in kickbacks from a British aerospace company, and who was famous for distributing his largesse to powerful people in Washington, did nothing to modify this reputation for “integrity.” It would be useful to know, by the way, whether Colin Powell has been on the Arab lecture-circuit, the way so many others among our high and mighty have been, picking up, for a single lecture, a hundred thousand, two hundred thousand, even a million dollars (if you are Bill Clinton, or the first George Bush). But palling around with an obvious fixer and influence-peddler who worked on behalf of a sinister ruling family of a most sinister country, Saudi Arabia, befriending him, becoming his tennis-partner, says a lot about Colin Powell’s judgment — none of it good.

But in his offhand remarks In Defense Of Islam — remarks based on his having seen a photograph of a mother mourning her son — demonstrate what is so wrong with so many of our high and mighty, who presume to instruct and protect us. What does that photograph tell us? It tells us nothing at all about what Islam inculcates. Unless Colin Powell has studied the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira, unless he has read the Qur’anic commentators, and such influential people at present as Qaradawi and Tantawi, he knows nothing about Islam, and has a duty not to make pronouncements as if he does. The dead soldier was, it appears, one of a very few Muslims who joined up. Indeed, there have been widespread reports of how the handful of Muslim (not Black Muslim) soldiers in the American and British armies have been subject to harassment and threats and even, in Great Britain, plots, by fellow Muslims who are outraged that they would behave in so un-Islamic a fashion, and dare to join an Infidel army to “fight against Muslims.”

Is Colin Powell aware of how few Muslims are in the army, the Reserves, the National Guard? Is he aware of how few are like the soldier whose grieving mother at his gravestone apparently struck him so much that he felt it gave him the right to pontificate to the public at large about Islam? He only has that right when he learns enough about Islam. And there are no signs, none, that he has been any more diligent or responsible in fulfilling that task than Bush, or a hundred others, at the top of the Washington heap, who have squandered so many men, so much money, so much material, so much attention, so much time, in their insensate inability, or willful refusal, to learn about the ideology — the politics, the geopolitics — of the Total Belief-System of Islam.

What Powell did was a clear dereliction of duty. He baselessly, on the slimmest and most misleading of anecdotal evidence, jumped to sweeping conclusions about Islam and Jihad. A glimpse of a grave and a griever tugged at his heartstrings, but did not tell him anything about what the texts and tenets of Islam are all about, and why that particular grieving mother was, if she had no regrets about her son joining the American army, as little representative of Muslims as her son was. That photograph had no larger significance. It said nothing about the texts, tenets, attitudes, and atmospherics of Islam. An intelligent observer would have understood this. A responsible observer, aware of his own ignorance of Islam, would never have dared to draw a conclusion, and impose that conclusion, on a presumably naive, and in some cases far too respectful, audience.

Of course Powell is behaving just like those who sentimentalize everything, reducing issues to this or that “real life” individual who may, or may not, be a useful representative or guide. But the error in this case was particularly egregious, and the irresponsibility flabbergasting, given the dangers the Infidels everywhere face. Does Powell know what is going on in southern Thailand? Does he think about the Biafra War, or southern Sudan? What does he know about the treatment of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh? What does he know about the spending of a hundred billion dollars by the Saudis alone to spread Islam all over the globe? What does he know about the present and certain future troubles, presented by no other group of immigrants, the result of the Muslim presence in Western Europe? He knows, I suspect, nothing of this. He’s a big shot. He delivers lectures. He speaks slowly, and portentously. He has an air, some think (I don’t) of “rectitude.” We are expected to admire him, and to forgive this kind of negligence — a failure to perform due diligence in investigating the matter of Islam — that does damage to the ignorant and the simple-minded, who may not recognize anecdotal evidence, or be able to see how misleading it is.

Why should we forgive Colin Powell? What’s so wonderful, what has ever been so wonderful, about him? And when will he give back that Jaguar to Prince Bandar?

And let’s not forget those other questionable associates that are the cause of multiple “obama smears” re-writes:

Did we mention the updates on the Rezko-Obama connection?  They go deep …. Meet Obama’s buddy whom he nominated as Illinois State Treasurer ….  The Chicago Way’s “new” party is now reserving cells in a federal prison near you!!!

Wait — Has anyone introduced you to Ayer’s good buddy Khalidi?  How about another of George Soros’ groups and a “former” Obama adviser ….

And the list is growing. 

Ahhhhhh, nothing clears your head like the smell of a hoax in the morning!

 

Part III coming …..

The John McCain Hoax

January 1, 2008

From Perish the Thought:

I’ve always held the Vietnam vet in high esteem.  I was with them — literally and figuratively — and experienced first-hand the harassment and spite they have endured.  That being said — I have historically distrusted John McCain for how he has used his military service (particularly as a POW) as a crutch to further his political career. 

His political career always has that subliminal disclaimer: “…yeah, but he was a military hero …”   As if he’s “entitled” to forgiveness when straying from his conservative roots.
My contention is that, had his father not been an admiral, his lack-luster record (including the loss of at least 2 airplanes) would have gotten him thrown out of the military or notably demoted.  For whatever he didn’t accomplish — it was not until his POW status that he gained any esteem. 

Is this relevant to his run for an office to which he has always aspired?

I think so.  There are too many correlations and incidents of self-service, entitlements and compromise in his background to qualify him as a reliable conservative candidate for POTUS.  Much less as commander-in-chief in a volatile time.
 

If you choose to disagree — fine.  But when you do, keep in mind his voting record, his defense of amnesty, his history of sanctions by his peers, his emotional instability, his flip-flops and inconsistencies in promoting basic conservative tenets. 

—————-

From Pat Murphy:

Those who’ve known John McCain since he began his Arizona political career two decades ago made two mistakes. First, we underestimated the Washington media’s gullibility for a political schmooze job. Second, we underestimated McCain’s mastery in reincarnating himself as a lovable maverick glowing with political virtue and amiable charm while camouflaging his bullyboy and deceitful ways.

If McCain were to become president, Americans would wake up to more than a commander-in-chief with a prickly temperament and a low boiling point. McCain is a man who carries get-even grudges. He cannot endure criticism. He threatens. He controls by fear.  He’s consumed with self-importance. He shifts blame. McCain’s thin skin and demand to have it his way have been obvious since infancy, when he held his breath until he was unconscious, and later in Washington, where he has resorted to pushing and shoving colleagues when irritated.
McCain is a man obsessed with political ambitions but plagued by self-destructive petty impulses. It was vintage McCain who exploded when the Arizona Republic questioned whether the man dubbed “Senator Hothead” in Washington is fit to be entrusted with presidential powers. Instead of conceding what’s common knowledge about his volcanic personality, McCain exploded in denial, blaming a newspaper vendetta and George W. Bush for “orchestrating” the criticism. When his claims drew snickers, McCain shifted to another explanation: He explodes when he sees “injustice.”
But this sort of blame-fixing works where it counts–with reporters who’ve come to blindly lionize McCain as a high-minded champion of political virtue fighting demons of political corruption. Perhaps McCain’s master stroke in inoculating himself from serious media

scrutiny was his early fusillade of confessions–his adultery ruined his first marriage, the Keating Five scandal was a blemish on his reputation, he indulged in wild and reckless misbehavior as an Annapolis midshipman. He finally endeared himself to the media with

his Quixotic promise to reform campaign financing and by holding court with reporters aboard his “Straight Talk Express” bus.
The new journalism of dwelling on personalities rather than tedious investigative digging gives McCain a free ride from the national media. Swooning media ensure McCain special treatment in the right places: 60 Minutes correspondent Mike Wallace cooed on the air that he likes McCain so much, he might leave TV to become his press secretary. Salon’s Jake Tapper dubbed him “basically just a cool dude.” Newsmen of another generation note that reporters covering McCain also are reluctant to seem tough on a man with McCain’s painful experience as a prisoner of war.
One who hasn’t been so quick to fall in line is Washington Post columnist David Broder, who warned on NBC’s Meet the Press that “after the experience we all had with President Clinton [ignoring Arkansas reports of his misdeeds], I’m not inclined to discount the view of home-state reporters and journalists who have covered a candidate over the years.” A few enterprising non-Arizona journalists have peeled back the McCain veneer. Boston Globe reporter Walter Robinson spent several weeks digging into McCain’s Arizona behavior and reporting his dark side. Ditto Ted Rose of Brill’s Content. And the acknowledged Arizona media expert on

McCain, reporter Amy Silverman of the Phoenix New Times (more on her later), gave readers of Playboy a McCain portrait not found elsewhere. ABC’s Sam Donaldson came close to giving millions of viewers a clearer picture in a taped interview with Silverman for 20/20. But

the segment was canceled the night before airing, fueling speculation that McCain’s oversight of broadcasters as Senate Commerce Committee chairman makes the networks wary of offending him. Several years ago, when NBC refused to support his TV-rating system, McCain wrote a letter to NBC President Robert Wright, threatening to ask the FCC to review licenses of the network’s locally owned stations.
I’m among the swelling ranks of onetime McCain acquaintances ostracized for not being slavishly loyal. After McCain settled in Arizona with his young second wife, a millionaire, he asked me at dinner for help with a political career. As editorial page editor (and later publisher) of the Arizona Republic, I declined to be his political coach. However, we socialized, including dinners at his home. We even discussed writing a book. The relationship ended, however, when our newspaper exposed McCain as a liar who used an underhanded political trick.
Here is what happened: McCain boasted to my wife and me over lunch in Washington that he had planted complex questions with the Senate Interior Committee chairman to sabotage the testimony of Arizona Gov. Rose Mofford, a Democrat, about the Central Arizona Project, the multibillion-dollar Colorado River water delivery system for Arizona urban areas. When I protested to McCain that the project had enjoyed bipartisan support for nearly 50 years, from conservative Barry Goldwater to liberal Morris Udall, McCain retorted: “I’m duty bound to embarrass a Democrat whenever I can.”
When reporters later asked McCain about planted questions, he feigned insult and injury and denied any such ploy. Editors in Phoenix were informed of McCain’s deceit. After a news story and editorial appeared, McCain went into meltdown, shrieking on the phone: “I know you’re out to get me!” (Several years later, McCain admitted the dirty trick and apologized to Mofford, who was then out of office.)
When Barbara Barrett, wife of Intel CEO Craig Barrett, ran against McCain’s protégé, Gov. Fife Symington, McCain offered to buy her out of the 1994 GOP primary. She refused. Furious, McCain threatened revenge. Barrett lost, but Symington later was forced out of office after being convicted of seven counts of fraud (his conviction was overturned and is under appeal). McCain’s wife was a front-row regular at Symington’s criminal trial in Phoenix. McCain still calls Symington “my friend.”
While Barrett, a successful attorney, emerged mostly unscathed, others weren’t so lucky. Maricopa County (Phoenix) schools superintendent Sandra Dowling, a Republican, refused McCain’s demand to abandon support of Barrett. Dowling told Morley Safer during a 60 Minutes interview about Arizona politics (which never aired) that McCain exploded and threatened to “destroy” her. Thereafter, her son lost his appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy, where McCain sits as an ex officio member of the Board of Visitors. McCain denied any connection.

Even former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods, McCain’s onetime senior aide who considered succeeding him in Congress, was purged from the senator’s circle for investigating Symington and refusing to seek McCain’s advice as a loyal understudy.
More of McCain’s style:
McCain indulges in hypocrisy with a flair. He attacks tobacco but ignores alcohol. Why? His wife’s millions flow from the family beer and wine distributorship, Arizona’s largest.

The affable, candid, gregarious candidate, who mingles with reporters and yuks it up in the back of the bus, is no friend of free speech, and merely tolerates and uses the press as part of his political strategy. In Arizona, McCain tries to subdue reporters by threatening to have them fired when he’s displeased with their pieces. Upset about critical reporting in the Phoenix New Times by Amy Silverman, McCain complained to her father, Richard, general manager of the Salt River Project, an Arizona hydroelectric utility. McCain’s intent seemed clear: muscling the federally chartered SRP in hopes Silverman would pressure his daughter to back off.
One of my Arizona neighbors, Dianne Smith, wrote McCain protesting his criticism of Anita Hill in confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas. A widow then in her sixties, Smith was flabbergasted when McCain telephoned her, shouting at her for “questioning my integrity.”
McCain promised Arizona voters, “I’ve never tried to exploit my Vietnam service to my country because it would be totally inappropriate.” But his presidential campaign is festooned with reminders of his POW years, from campaign videos to speeches to best-selling books, trying to capture the veterans vote.
Even as he moralizes about corrupt corporate money, McCain rakes in hundreds of thousands of dollars from Washington lobbyists and asks corporations for use of their jets for campaigning. Last year, the Washington Post documented thousands of dollars of donations to McCain’s political war chest from K Street lobbyists who do business before the Senate Commerce Committee.
McCain himself has acknowledged that he intervenes before regulatory agencies with letters on behalf of campaign donors, but claims he’s merely performing a “constituent service”–the same explanation he used when initially defending himself in the Keating Five scandal. As a peevish lobbyist told Newsweek: “He sees no connection between twisting our arms for money and then talking about how corrupt the system is.”
The John McCain glamorized by the national media is a total stranger to Arizonans who are painfully familiar with a far coarser and more foreboding man. His victory in the New Hampshire primary may bring greater scrutiny. Instead of treating him as a lovable maverick and quotable long shot, the national media that have been fawning over him are certain to begin digging seriously into the McCain background that has turned so many of his home-state Republicans against him.