16 Mar

Tomb of the Unknown Soldier

On Jeopardy the other night, the final question was How many steps does the guard take during his walk across the tomb of the Unknowns —— All three contestants missed it.
This is really an awesome sight to watch if you’ve never had the chance….Very fascinating

1. How many steps does the guard take during his walk across the tomb of the Unknowns and why?
21 steps. It alludes to the twenty-one gun salute, which is the highest honor given any military or foreign dignitary.
2. How long does he hesitate after his about face to begin his return walk and why?
21 seconds for the same reason as answer number 1

3. Why are his gloves wet?
His gloves are moistened to prevent his losing his grip on the rifle

4. Does he carry his rifle on the same shoulder all the time and if not, why not?
He carries the rifle on the shoulder away from the tomb. After his march across the path, he executes an about face and moves the rifle to the outside shoulder.
5. How often are the guards changed?
Guards are changed every thirty minutes, twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year.
6. What are the physical traits of the guard limited to?
For a person to apply for guard duty at the tomb, he must be between 5′ 10″ and 6′ 2″ tall and his waist size cannot exceed 30.” Other requirements of the Guard: They must commit 2 years of life to guard the tomb, live in a barracks under the tomb, and cannot drink any alcohol on or off duty for the rest of their lives. They cannot swear in public for the rest of their lives and cannot disgrace the uniform {fighting} or the tomb in any way. After two years, the guard is given a wreath pin that is worn on their lapel signifying they served as guard of the tomb. There are only 400 presently worn. The guard must obey these rules for the rest of their lives or give up the wreath pin.
The shoes are specially made with very thick soles to keep the heat and cold from their feet. There are metal heel plates that extend to the top of the shoe in order to make the loud click as they come to a halt. There are no wrinkles, folds or lint on the uniform. Guards dress for duty in front of a full-length mirror.
The first six months of duty a guard cannot talk to anyone, nor watch TV. All off duty time is spent studying the 175 notable people laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery . A guard must memorize who they are and where they are interred. Among the notables are: President Taft, Joe E. Lewis {the boxer} and Medal of Honor winner Audie Murphy, {the most decorated soldier of WWII}.
Every guard spends five hours a day getting his uniforms ready for guard duty.

In 2003 as Hurricane Isabelle was approaching Washington , DC, our US Senate/House took 2 days off with anticipation of the storm. On the ABC evening news, it was reported that because of the dangers from the hurricane, the military members assigned the duty of guarding the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier were given permission to suspend the assignment. They respectfully declined the offer, “No way, Sir!” Soaked to the skin,
marching in the pelting rain of a tropical storm, they said that guarding the Tomb was not just an assignment, it was the highest honor that can be afforded to a serviceperson. The tomb has been patrolled continuously,
24/7, since 1930.

16 Mar

Thank You Senator Douglas ~ May Hanoi Jane Rot In Hell!

Atlanta Journal Constitution
Jane Fonda’s name still raises the blood pressure of many Georgia veterans more than 30 years after her famous pose on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun.
So the idea of honoring “Hanoi Jane” for her recent charitable and public service work didn’t go over too well with at least one member of the Georgia Senate on Wednesday.
Sen. Steen Miles (D-Decatur) (steen.miles@senate.ga.gov) introduced a resolution recognizing the two-time Academy Award-winning actress for her efforts to help women and children globally, particularly her work as the founder and chairwoman of the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention.
Senate Resolution 1189 seemed to breeze through the Senate without a raising an eyebrow — as do hundreds of honorary and commemorative resolutions each year. There’s no vote on these types of quick resolutions, and lawmakers very rarely object to them.
But Sen. John Douglas (R-Covington), (john.douglas@senate.ga.gov) a retired Army Major and the chairman of the Senate Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, stood as the Senate was adjourning and briefly voiced his strong opposition to the resolution.
His words provoked a strong response from Miles, who argued that Fonda’s work deserved recognition. “We have been very, very hypocritical when it comes to taking care of the least of these and the lost,” Miles said.
Miles’ speech, however, may have backfired. When she wrapped up, Douglas immediately made a motion for the Senate to reconsider its approval of SR 1189. The Senate will decide at 9 a.m. today.

Douglas had harsh words later in the day for Fonda, who has said she regretted the gesture on the anti-aircraft gun. “I think Jane Fonda is less worthy than any living American to be honored by our Senate and the people of Georgia,” Douglas said. “It starts off with her actions during the Vietnam War and it continues today. No amount of good work now will make up for her past actions against the military and our country.”

April, 1973 — Hanoi Jane Fonda calls the freed American prisoners “hypocrites and pawns,” insisting that…….
“Tortured men do not march smartly off planes, salute the flag, and kiss their wives. They are liars. I also want to say that these men are not heroes.”

“We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was
ashamed of American actions in the war, and that she would struggle along with us.” –
Bui Tin, Colonel, People’s Army of Vietnam (PAVN)

Wild Thing’s comment……
Thank God for men like Senator Douglas.

15 Mar

It’s Legal


Wild Thing’s comment………..
This is excellent! Long article but well worth it.


National Review Online
Bryon York
EDITOR’S NOTE: On Monday, when Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold introduced a resolution to censure President Bush, he said, “When the President of the United States breaks the law, he must be held accountable.” Bush, Feingold continued, “authorized an illegal program to spy on American citizens on American soil and then misled the Congress and the public about the existence and the legality of that program.” Although few Democrats have joined Feingold’s call for censure, nearly all of them agree with Feingold’s contention that the surveillance program is illegal. But the president’s adversaries overlook the solid legal basis for the administration’s actions.
The solid legal basis for the administration’s surveillance program.
In early September 2002, just before the first anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, a group of lawyers gathered in a heavily protected, windowless room in the Department of Justice building in Washington. There were three federal appeals-court judges, Laurence Silberman, Edward Leavy, and Ralph Guy. There was Theodore Olson, the U.S. solicitor general. There was Larry Thompson, the deputy attorney general. And there was John Yoo, the Justice official who had closely studied questions of war powers and presidential authority. Rounding out the group were a few other department staffers, one official from the FBI, and David Addington, Vice President Cheney’s top lawyer.
The purpose of the meeting was to argue a case whose details remain so classified that they are known by only a few people, but whose outcome, a decision known as In re: Sealed Case, has become one of the key documents in the hottest argument in Washington today: the fight over what President Bush calls the “terrorist surveillance” of persons with known al-Qaeda connections, and what the president’s opponents call “domestic spying.”
The three judges made up what is known as the FISA Court of Review. It was created in 1978 by the now-famous Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The act required that the president go to the so-called FISA Court to seek a warrant for surveillance in top-secret foreign-intelligence cases. For any disputed decisions that might arise, Congress also created the Court of Review, a sort of super-secret appeals court.
But in all the years between 1978 and 2002, there had never been occasion for the Court of Review to actually meet. Not until Sealed Case, and the three-way collision between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches that it involved. Today, a look at the circumstances of the case provides not only an insight into the administration’s rationale for the secret, warrantless surveillance program but also important clues to the mystery of how the whole thing got started in the first place.
The conflict began with the passage of the Patriot Act in October 2001. The act tore down the “wall” that had arisen in the Justice Department that blocked intelligence officials and criminal investigators from working together and sharing information. That wall had been cemented by a set of internal department guidelines written in 1995, in which then–attorney general Janet Reno outlined the department’s constricted surveillance procedures.
The Patriot Act was designed to fix that problem. But a month after the act was passed, when the Justice Department submitted surveillance requests to the FISA Court under the new, looser standards passed by Congress, the FISA Court in effect rejected the Patriot Act, and instead reaffirmed the old 1995 Clinton-era standard.
A standoff ensued. In early 2002, the Justice Department adopted new surveillance procedures based on the Patriot Act. In March 2002, the department informed the FISA Court that it would use those new standards in surveillance applications. In May, the FISA Court said, in effect, not so fast, and ordered modifications in the procedures. Among other things, the FISA Court ordered that “law enforcement officials shall not make recommendations to intelligence officials concerning the initiation, operation, continuation or expansion of FISA searches or surveillances” — a reasonable facsimile of the old wall. The FISA Court also ordered that the Justice Department include certain staffers in all surveillance debates, an order that quickly became known in the Justice Department as the “chaperone requirement.”
The Justice Department resisted, and in July 2002 filed a surveillance application — the details are still a secret — using its new procedures, without the FISA Court’s mandated changes. The Court approved the application but insisted that the modifications be made according to the court’s dictates. And then, in August, the FISA Court took the extraordinary step of making its decision public, accusing the Justice Department of habitually misrepresenting evidence and misleading the court. That’s when the department decided to take the matter to the Court of Review, leading to the September 2002 session in that secure room in department headquarters.
“We’re here today,” Theodore Olson said as the secret In re: Sealed Case court argument began, “because the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s May 17th order . . . has perpetuated a serious and increasingly destructive barrier which has hamstrung the president and his subordinates” in their work to protect “the United States and its citizens from attack and from international terrorism.” The FISA Court’s ruling, Olson continued, was “inexplicable.”
Olson and the judges went back and forth over the history of the wall. Nobody really knew how it first came into being; the judges later said its origin was “shrouded in historical mist.” They went over what Congress intended when it passed the Patriot Act. And they went over the question of whether the FISA Court had the power to tell the president how to conduct investigations.
The answer was no, Olson said. “To the extent that the FISA Court is purporting to reorganize the executive branch, the so-called chaperone function, I don’t think Congress could constitutionally tell the executive or the attorney general that he could not talk to this subordinate without involving that subordinate,” Olson told the judges, “and I certainly don’t think the court can do so.”
The entire session lasted just a few hours, and the Justice Department waited for the Court of Review’s ruling. When it came, in November 2002, it was a slam-dunk win for the government.
In its opinion, the Court of Review said the FISA Court had, in effect, attempted to unilaterally impose the old 1995 rules. “In doing so, the FISA Court erred,” the ruling read. “It did not provide any constitutional basis for its action — we think there is none — and misconstrued the main statutory provision on which it relied.” The FISA Court, according to the ruling, “refus[ed] to consider the legal significance of the Patriot Act’s crucial amendments” and “may well have exceeded the constitutional bounds” governing the courts by asserting “authority to govern the internal organization and investigative procedures of the Department of Justice.”
And then the Court of Review did one more thing, something that has repercussions in today’s surveillance controversy. Not only could the FISA Court not tell the president how do to his work, the Court of Review said, but the president also had the “inherent authority” under the Constitution to conduct needed surveillance without obtaining any warrant — from the FISA Court or anyone else. Referring to an earlier case, known as Truong, which dealt with surveillance before FISA was passed, the Court of Review wrote: “The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. . . . We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power.”
It was a clear and sweeping statement of executive authority. And what was most likely not known to the Court of Review at the time was that the administration had, in 2002, started a program in which it did exactly what the Court of Review said it had the power to do: order the surveillance of some international communications without a warrant.
Read today, In re: Sealed Case does more than simply outline the president’s authority. It also puts the administration’s warrantless-surveillance decision in some context. What was going on at the time the president made the decision to go ahead with the surveillance? Well, first Congress passed the Patriot Act, giving the administration new powers. Then the FISA Court refused to recognize those powers and attempted to impose outdated restrictions on the administration. Then the White House, faced with the FISA Court’s opposition — and with what administration officials believed were some inherent weaknesses in the FISA law — began to bypass the FISA Court in some cases. And then, in In re: Sealed Case, the administration received irrefutable legal support for its actions.
After the decision was handed down, the American Civil Liberties Union, which had submitted a brief in support of the FISA Court’s actions restricting the administration, asked the Supreme Court to review In re: Sealed Case. The justices declined to take any action. That is not the same as the Court’s upholding the ruling, but it does mean that the justices looked at the decision and chose not to intervene.
Today, the opinion stands as a bedrock statement of presidential power. And ironically, it came from a case that was not about whether the president had overstepped his bounds, but about whether the courts had overstepped their bounds. The Court of Review ruled strongly in favor of the president, and the Supreme Court declined to reconsider that decision. Reading the opinion, it’s no wonder that George W. Bush has so strongly defended the surveillance program. If the FISA Court of Review is right, he has the Constitution on his side.

15 Mar

Condi Looses Mind In Brazil


The United States hopes to find a way to increase humanitarian donations to the Palestinians following Hamas’ election victory, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday.
Rice said she will ask Indonesia, a moderate Muslim nation, to help press the message that the Palestinians must remain committed to peace with Israel even though Hamas refuses to accept the Jewish state’s right to exist.
“We are looking at ways to even increase our humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people during this period of time,” Rice said.
Rice was not specific. But her comments suggested that the United States intends to replace money it once gave directly to the current moderate and secular Palestinian government with grants for charity work or other projects that are independent of the new government.
U.S. officials have nearly finished an extensive review of aid to the Palestinians that was intended to ensure that future aid does not flow to Hamas.
Hamas, which refuses to renounce violence and has claimed responsibility for dozens of suicide bombings against Israel, is listed as a terrorist organization by both the United States and the European Union.

Wild Thing’s comment……
OK I know she gets her talking points from da’ boss man. BUT, here is the thing, this is BS to even think about giving aid to the Hamas in any way, shape or form. We need to declare as a Nation that any group of Islamic terrorists, even if in power such as the Hamas, is our enemy if they do not recognize Israel, and if they refuse to renounce violence etc. I have a 12 year old nephew that understands this better then Condi Rice.
This half assed some are ok and some are not when it comes to terrorists is only making us weak and wimpy! Let’s call it the bada bing mentality is what is needed. The take no prisoners frame of mind and stick to it.
I don’t have balls and neither does Condi, but if we did, mine sure as hell would be bigger then hers! Screw this shit and stop making excuses for terrorists!
During the Vietnam War there was a saying, ” kill them all and let God sort them out”! I say Exactly!

* Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler

15 Mar

The Free Jack Idema Blogburst

It’s been two weeks now since anyone heard from Jack Idema, Brent Bennett or Ed Caraballo, the three Americans illegally imprisoned in Afghanistan. Clearly, this is a worrying situation — Those of us who’ve campaigned for Jack’s release have never been out of touch with him for so long, and the silence is beginning to seem ominous.
Though this isn’t to say that Jack and his men are the only people affected by fallout from the terrorist riots at Pulacharke prison:A car bombing in the capital targeted Sibghatullah Mujaddedi, a Muslim cleric who briefly served as president in 1992. He now heads the upper house of parliament and leads a commission encouraging Taliban fighters to reconcile with the government.
Mujaddedi escaped with burns to his hands and face, but two bystanders — a girl on her way to school and a man on a motorbike — were killed. Two attackers who drove the explosives-laden station wagon into the convoy also died.
“The explosion was very strong. For a while I couldn’t see anything. I was in the front seat of my car. I saw a big fire came toward me,” the white-bearded Mujaddedi told a news conference a few hours later.
His hands were wrapped in bandages — burned when he raised them to protect his face from the blast.
The bloodstained road was littered with parts of the attackers’ car.

Now, before anyone begins feeling too much sympathy for the injured Mujaddedi, it’s worth bearing in mind that in his capacity as Afghanistan’s ‘Chief of Peace and Amnesty’ he’s responsible for releasing more Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorists back onto the streets than anyone else. Ever.
It’s for this reason that both Mujaddedi and his boss, President Karzai, are faced with the problem of figuring out precisely who would want to blow up the Mullah. Not al-Q, obviously. No one seriously thinks they’d attempt to murder the man who’s working harder than anyone else to release their compatriots from Afghan prisons. So that leaves — Who?

Mujaddedi directly accused Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency for the bombing. He offered no proof.
“We have got information that ISI of Pakistan has launched a plan to kill me,” he said.

So Mujaddedi thinks the Pakistani secret service tried to murder him with a suicide bomb? Well, anything’s possible … Although it is, perhaps, worth bearing in mind that sticking Pakistan with the blame would help Mujaddedi out no end with another of his problems — He’s currently under investigation by his own Parliament for treason on the grounds that he is, himself, a Pakistani agent.
Is it credible that Pakistan would try to murder one of its own, most highly-placed agents? If not, then who, precisely, might Mujaddedi’s would-be assassin have been?

Hey stupid, did you ever think it was a brother of a female inmate that was raped and beaten by the terrorist hostage takers that you gave amnesty to? Right folks, no one is talking about the rape of 80 women prisoners because it would be instantaneous civil war in Afghanistan and Karzai would be hanging in Sharanow Park like Dr. Najebullah (another “foreign” president but for the Soviets). Afghans don’t like you to look at their women (hence the Burhkas) no less rape them.

This is, of course, the very mess that men like Jack Idema and the Northern Alliance were desperately trying to prevent Afghanistan descending into.
Back in 2001, the Taliban-era was over and the Afghan people were free. All that remained was the work of rounding up and imprisoning the few head-hackers who’d avoided capture as Northern Alliance and U.S./British Special Forces took control of the country.
Then, of course, we turned Afghanistan over to the Karzai-State Department alliance, who chose to pursue a disastrous policy of appeasement with terrorists. Jack Idema was one of the first casualties of this, as evidenced by the wording of the ‘wanted’ posters the FBI put-out prior to his initial arrest:

Approach With Force
Idema is well connected with the Afghan society, and has dealings with key military, political and local authority figures. He has been working in Afghanistan for three years, and has travelled extensively within the country. Idema is wanted by the FBI. He is known to travel with large and heavily armed soldiers from the illegal Northern Alliance.

The ‘illegal’ Northern Alliance were, in fact, the men who risked their lives fighting to free Afghanistan from the clutches of the Taliban. Yet, by the summer of 2004, they’d been pushed to one side by the State Department, along with soldiers like Idema who stuck around to finish the job they’d started in 2001.
Fast-forward two more years, and today we can see where these policies have led: Most Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorists are back on the streets, enabled by men like Mujaddedi, whose corruption is so complete that he finds himself under attack by an entirely new form of terrorist — Ordinary Afghans radicalised, not by Western ‘aggression’, or Abu Ghraib, or Israel, but by the failings of their own President to punish Islamofascists for committing one of the largest gang-rapes in history. Truly, we are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
So what can we do? Well, anyone reading this with their own blog can sign up for the weekly Free Jack Idema Blogburst by emailing Cao or Rottweiler Puppy for details. I’d urge everyone to do this, as we’re still terribly short on takers. If you want to know more about the story, Cao’s Blog has a large section devoted to Jack Idema. There’s also a timeline here, and, of course, a huge amount of information is available over at SuperPatriots, without whose work none of us would have learned about Jack’s story.



Finally, PLEASE NOTE: The SuperPatriots and Jack images on this site are used with WRITTEN COPYRIGHT PERMISSION and any use by any third party is subject to legal action by SuperPatriots.US
jack idema
Technorati Search for Jack Idema
The Free Jack Idema Blogroll:

The Pink Flamingo Bar & Grill
The Lone Voice
Red Hot Cuppa Politics
Kender’s Musings
Irate Nate
The Devil’s Kitchen
Cao’s Blog
Big Dog’s Weblog
Theodore’s World
Rottweiler Puppy

My Newz n’ Ideas
Right For Scotland
Freedom Folks
The City Troll


15 Mar

Iranian Students Burning Posters Of Khamenei


Iran’s Khamenei attacks Bush, rules out “any retreat” on nukes

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told the country’s foreign minister and diplomats on Tuesday that any retreat on the nuclear issue would “break” the Islamic Republic’s independence and would entail “a huge cost” for the Iranian people.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that any retreat over the nuclear issue, which is the great demand of the nation and the natural right of our people, as breaking the country’s independence, and this would entail a huge cost for the Iranian nation”, the official news agency IRNA quoted Ayatollah Khamenei as telling members of Iran’s diplomatic service.
“Any retreat will, under the present circumstances, bring with it an unending chain of pressures and more retreats. It is therefore clear that this path is irreversible and our foreign policy establishment must courageously defend this right”, Khamenei said.
Iran’s Supreme Leader reacted sharply to recent remarks by U.S. President George W. Bush, who expressed support for Iranians who seek to bring democracy to their country.
“If there a place with no democracy, it’s America”, the ayatollah said. “A small minority of capitalists, who are mainly Zionist, pull all the strings in elections and the people’s vote has no impact”.
“This Mr. George W. Bush himself has been elected through fraud”, Khamenei said, while attacking Bush for “his illegal acts, including his orders for tapping the telephone conversations of Americans, his weak standing in the opinion polls in America, and the censorship of news in that country”.
Khamenei repeated the charge that “there are indications and intelligence showing that the intelligence services of America and the Zionist regime are behind the assassinations and bombings in Iraq”.
“As for America and some of the countries that tow the American line, their principal motive in trying to prevent Iran’s acquisition of its natural and scientific right is that they are frightened that Iran would reach the pinnacle of scientific power”, he added.
Khamenei’s comments once again backed those of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has repeatedly vowed to reject international pressure to accept the demands of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
In the meeting with Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, senior Foreign Ministry officials, and members of the country’s diplomatic service, Ayatollah Khamenei said, “Those who represent the Islamic Republic of Iran abroad must ensure that our national rights are safeguarded and that they truly embody the steadfastness, dignity, and wisdom of the Iranian nation”.
“The fact that the Muslim world is now feeling a sense of identity and Islamic dignity is attributable to the victory of the Islamic revolution, and one of the most important elements of Iran’s national power. This must be emphatically noted in Iran’s international relations”, the ayatollah said.
Khamenei ridiculed “those who make propaganda and say that Iran was hiding [its nuclear project], because no country declares its scientific work while it’s at the research stage”.
In August 2002, the Iranian opposition National Council of Resistance of Iran exposed, for the first time, key nuclear sites that Iran had built secretly in Natanz and Arak. The revelation led to the international scrutiny that finally culminated in Iran’s nuclear dossier being sent to the UN Security Council for a decision.
Iran’s Supreme Leader said Western governments “were put to shame by remaining silent when the Zionist regime threatened to assassinate the head of the elected government of the Palestinian people”.
Knowledgeable sources in Tehran said the government has summoned its ambassadors and envoys from across the world to brief them on a fresh diplomatic offensive to “counter the poisonous Western propaganda” against Iran.

Students, security forces clash in Iran capital

Tehran, Iran, Mar. 14 – Police fired tear-gas and used force on Monday to disperse protesting students at Sharif University of Technology in Tehran, eye-witnesses reported.
The disturbances broke out after hundreds of students tried to prevent the burial of three “unidentified martyrs” on the university campus. The students, many of them women, carried placards against the takeover of universities by Islamist groups affiliated to the Revolutionary Guards.

Martial law imposed in volatile Iran cities

Iranian authorities have imposed a de facto martial law in several volatile cities in the north-western province of Kurdistan as restive youths used the occasion of Iran’s traditional “fire festival” to hold anti-government protests, residents told Iran Focus by telephone on Tuesday.

Youths set fire to posters of Khamenei in Iran capital

Tehran, Iran, Mar. 14 – Young people set fire to pictures of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and former leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Tehran, according to dissidents in the Iranian capital.
Protestors gathered and burned down posters of Iranian leaders hung on lampposts in Mirdamad Street in Tehran.
Despite a massive crackdown to prevent this year’s “fire festival” from turning into scenes of anti-governments protests, young people have taken to the streets across Iran to defy the government ban and celebrate the last Tuesday of the Persian year with a big bang.
During the festival, known as ‘chaharshanbeh souri’ – literally, Feast of Wednesday – people jump over bonfires to “drive away evil”. Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, however, Iran’s theocratic leaders have made strenuous efforts to stamp out the festivities, but to no avail. In recent years, there have been extensive clashes between festive crowds and the security forces deployed to prevent street celebrations. This year the event falls on March 14.
Iran’s main opposition group, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MeK), has issued an appeal to people across the country to take part in the celebrations on the night and turn it into an anti-government protest.
Already steps have been taken to prevent widespread protests from flaring during the traditional Persian festival celebrated by Iranians for over 2,500 years.

Posters of officials set fire to in Iran

Furious people set on fire posters of hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and former Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini during extensive demonstrations in the western city of Khorramabad as “fire” festivals across the country continued well into the night.

Effigies of Iran’s Supreme Leader set on fire in demos
Anti-government demonstrations erupted across the Iranian capital as well as in towns and cities across the country as young people used the annual Persian “fire festival” to ignite fireworks and set cars belonging to the State Security Forces (SSF) on fire, dissidents told Iran Focus.
In the south-western city of Ahwaz protestors constructed an effigy of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and set it on fire.

15 Mar


Received this tonight from a friend, Jack at Conservative Insurgent, who asked “Remember this?” I never saw this before. This was my first time and it is excellent.

Do you remember this as an e-mail circulating in 2002 before MSM spread the misleading poison that eventually tainted some of the patriotic enthusiasm of some Americans. That the fervor of patriotism and pride in being an American has been eroded since 2002 is evidenced by the popular emails that circulated then and those that are being forwarded today. I haven’t seen enough of this ethos lately. A revival could begin by forwarding this one to your mailing list.


Your alarm goes off; you hit the snooze and
sleep for another 10 minutes.
He stays up for days on end.

You take a warm shower to help you wake up.
He goes days or weeks without running water.

You complain of a "headache", and call in sick.
He gets shot at, as others are hit, and keeps
moving forward.

You put on your anti war/don’t support the
troops shirt, and go meet up with your friends.
He still fights for your right to wear that

You make sure your cell phone is in your pocket.
He clutches the cross hanging on his chain
to his dog tags.

You talk trash on your "buddies" that aren’t with you.
He knows he may not see some of his buddies

You don’t feel like helping out your dad today, so you don’t.
He does what he is told.

You walk down the beach, staring at all the pretty girls.
He walks the streets, searching for insurgents
and terrorists.

You complain about how hot it is.
He wears his heavy gear, not daring to take
off his helmet to
wipe his brow.

You go out to lunch and complain because the restaurant got
your order wrong.
He does not get to eat today.

Your maid makes your bed and washes your clothes.
He wears the same things for months, but makes
sure his
weapons are clean.

You go to the mall and get your hair redone.
He doesn’t have time to brush his teeth today.

You are angry because your class ran 5 minutes over.
He is told he will be held an extra 2 months.
He does as
he is told.

You call your girlfriend and set a date for that night.
He waits for the mail to see if there is a
letter from home.

You hug and kiss your girlfriend, like you do everyday.
He holds his letter close and smells his
love’s perfume.

You ditch class to go to a movie.
He goes where he is told.

You roll your eyes as a baby cries.
He gets a letter with pictures of his new
child, and wonders
if they’ll ever meet.

You criticize your government and say that war never solves
He sees the innocent tortured and killed by
their own
government and remembers why he is fighting.

You hear the jokes about the war and make fun of the
men like him.
He hears the gun fire and bombs.

You see only what the media wants you to see.
He sees the bodies lying around him.

You are asked to go to the store by your parents. You don’t.
He does what he is told.

You stay at home and watch tv.
He takes whatever time he is given to call and
write home,
sleep, and eat.

You crawl into your bed, with down pillows, and try to
get comfortable.
He crawls under a tank for shade and a 5
minute nap,
only to be woken by gun fire.

You sit there and judge him, saying the world is a worse
place because of men like him.

only there were more men like him!

* Conservative Insurgent
* Indigo Insights

14 Mar

Free Turbo Tax Filing For Military

This year, the Department of Defense is providing free access to the popular TurboTax filing program to all active duty guard and reserves (regardless of their activation status) and their family members via the Web site http://www.militaryonesource.com.
This free program serves as an online “tax mentor” and helps in the preparation and filing of both federal and state taxes. Military OneSource can also refer you to certified financial counselors, tax experts and public accountants who can answer questions, also at no charge, by calling toll-free: (800) 342-9647. (To access the numbers for overseas, Spanish language and hearing-imparied tax fliers log unto http://www.militaryonesource.com)
Please pass this information on, thank you.
Thank you Sondra for this.

* Knowledge Is Power / SondraK

14 Mar

Terrorists Lover Russ Feingold Is A Four Letter Word

Presidential wanna be………..”What the president did by consciously and intentionally violating the Constitution and laws of this country with this illegal wiretapping has to be answered,” Mr. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said on the ABC News program “This Week.” “Proper accountability is a censuring of the president, saying: ‘Mr. President, acknowledge that you broke the law, return to the law, return to our system of government.’ ”
White House replys……………

The White House on Monday dismissed as politically motivated a Democratic senator’s attempt to censure President George W. Bush for ordering domestic eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without a warrant.
Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin told ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that he intends to push for a resolution in the U.S. Congress that would censure the president for what he considers an unlawful wiretapping program authorized by the White House after the September 11 attacks.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Feingold’s move “has more to do with 2008 politics than anything else.”
Bush has come under criticism from Democrats and many of his own Republicans for letting the National Security Agency eavesdrop, without court-ordered warrants, on telephone calls and e-mails to and from overseas contacts with suspected al Qaeda ties.
“I think it does raise the question, how do you fight and win the war on terrorism?” McClellan said. “And if Democrats want to argue that we shouldn’t be listening to al Qaeda communications, it’s their right and we welcome the debate. We are a nation at war.”

Dems object to censure resolution vote: hold off for political purposes

…Democratic Senator Russ Feingold has introduced a resolution that would censor the President of the United States for “eavesdropping” in the wake of 9/11. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, moments ago, made a unanimous consent motion that the Senate vote on the resolution tonight. Maryland Democrat Paul Sarbanes rose to object to the motion. Frist then motioned to vote on the resolution again tomorrow. Sarbanes objected, saying no vote should take place on the resolution until Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid had cleared the timing.
In other words, Democrats know this is a political stunt, without a chance of passage, but want to time it politically for maximum impact.
Later, Harry Reid took the floor to say he was offended that Frist would go to the floor and motion for unanimous consent on such an “important issue” without talking to him first.
Reid’s two-facedness knows no bounds. Does he not remember last year taking the Senate floor and invoking Senate Rule XXI, thereby shutting down the Senate? When he made that parliamentary move to score political points over pre-war intelligence, he broke all Senate precedent by invoking the draconian measure without first seeking the compliance of the Senate Majority Leader as has always been done in the past.

Here is his “Censure Resolution
Wild Thing’s comment………..
Traitor Feingold voted NO on the Patriot Act renewal. Send him to Gitmo.Frist tried to bring it up for a vote, and every time he did DemocRATS objected and wouldn’t let there be a vote.
The Democrats think President Bush has done too much to protect us from additional terrorist attacks. The Democrats are both idiots and traitors.
Kiss My Ass Feingold!

14 Mar

One Of The Left’s Favorite Cowards ~ A Draft Dodger

Wild Thing’s comment…..
I have NO sympathy, NO patience for draft dodgers or deserters.
I don’t care how many years it has been. Punish the hell out of them!!!!

U.S. arrests soldier who fled in 1968
Traveled to U.S. dozens of times since dodging service in Vietnam

Allen Abney, grandfather is languishing in confinement 
at a U.S. military base — 
under arrest for deserting the U.S. Marine Corps 
38 years ago because he didn’t want to fight in Vietnam.

Allen Abney, 56, is in custody at Camp Pendleton near San Diego today.

His family in the East Kootenays is anxiously awaiting word on what’s next 
for the father of three who deserted the marines and fled to Vancouver in 
1968 at the age of 19.

Charges of desertion can result in what’s known as "other-than-honorable" 
discharges, a special court martial and sentences of up to one year in military 
jail or a general court martial where the maximum penalty is five years behind bars.

“I really cannot conceive that that’s a possibility. I really want to stress that,” 
said Lynn Gonzales, who works with the San Diego Military Counseling Project, 
a branch of the GI Rights Hotline. 

Gonzales was to meet with Abney yesterday.

Abney, a Canadian citizen since 1977, was taken into custody Thursday. 
He and his wife, Adrienne, were crossing into Idaho after leaving their home 
south of Cranbrook, bound for a holiday in Reno.

“They stopped us at customs. I handed over our passports and they called us in. 
After 20 minutes of sitting there, they took him,” Adrienne told The Province.

Adrienne said her husband had traveled into the United States dozens, if not 
hundreds of times, with no problem whatsoever.

Allen, who was born in Kentucky but has lived in Canada since he was 10, 
joined the Marines voluntarily when his brother was drafted, figuring he too 
would be compelled to serve. His brother stayed in Canada as a conscientious 
objector. Allen completed basic training in Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.

Before he could be shipped overseas, he took a weekend break in Mexico then a 
bus all the way to Vancouver.

Abney married in 1971 and became a Canadian citizen in 1977, the same 
year then-U.S. president Jimmy Carter offered to pardon deserters if they 
applied through a special discharge review program. Abney did not take 
advantage of the offer.

Though he rarely talked about that time in his life, daughter Jessica said, her father 
was hardly living in secret. He never changed his name and has traveled extensively 
throughout the U.S.

What the marines would want with the “slightly overweight” man who likes hunting, 
fishing and driving ATVs is beyond Adrienne.

“Maybe they’re using him as an example to prevent Iraq-bound Marines from
I don’t think they’d have much use for him in Iraq,” she said.

A Marines spokesman said Abney will be returned to his original unit, where the 
commander will decide what happens next.

The family has called the Canadian consulate in the U.S. and has had sporadic phone 
contact with Allen since his detention.

Foreign Affairs spokesperson Rejean Beaulieu said federal officials are aware of the 
case, but he could not comment further.

The Abneys are also waiting to hear something from the government.

“The Canadian consulate in the U.S. is not being very helpful at all,” said Adrienne.

Meanwhile, U.S. Army deserter Joshua Key said Abney made the same “moral choice” 
to not fight in a war he felt was wrong. Key faces an immigration hearing later this month 
that will determine whether the 27-year-old can remain in Canada or must return to the 
U.S. to face military justice.

“It seems a little weird, crossing the border as many times as he did. I say it’s a damn 
shame. He’s already established himself as a Canadian citizen,” Key said from his home 
on Gabriola Island.


Wild Thing’s comment……….
Look how they are already making excuses for him.
“I really cannot conceive that that’s a possibility. I really want to stress that,”
said Lynn Gonzales, who works with the San Diego Military Counselling Project,
a branch of the GI Rights Hotline.

Shoot him! I could care less that he is a grandfather, a husband, a son or anything.
A Marines spokesman said Abney will be returned to his original unit, where the
commander will decide what happens next.

Good, Sir, please do not let this coward go unpunished. And I blame Canada too for
accepting draft dodgers and deserters.
Our country needs to begin to take a bad ass stand on things like this. And on other
traitors to like Carter, Gore, Bill Clinton, Kerry, Fonda, you name it!
And if that isn’t bad enough that they even have to think about what to do with this jerk.
Look at this! OMG!


Plans for U.S. draft dodger sculpture revived
Activists’ proposal draws fire from conservatives, veterans groups

VANCOUVER, British Columbia – Peace activists have revived plans for a sculpture to commemorate Vietnam War draft resisters who fled to Canada, a proposal that had drawn the ire of U.S. veterans groups and conservatives.
The activists, who are also organizing a reunion for “draft dodgers” in July, said on Tuesday the proposed monument is still needed to warn Americans and Canadians about the dangers of militarism.
“It is very important educationally that we have specific peace monuments,” said Isaac Romano, an American who immigrated to Canada and now lives in British Columbia’s Kootenay region where many U.S. war resisters settled.
The plan for a monument in Nelson, B.C., was originally announced in 2004, but quickly dropped after it was denounced by the U.S. Veterans of Foreign Wars and conservative media commentators.
“It could be that there is a group in the States that sees it as an opportunity to remind Americans that they are not locked into the militarism. That there is an escape valve,” Romano said.
The proposal calls for a sculpture of two Americans, a male and a female, crossing an imaginary border where a Canadian figure is waiting to welcome them.
It has been estimated that 125,000 draft-age Americans fled to Canada to avoid Vietnam and prosecution under U.S. law, although about half returned home after President Jimmy Carter granted amnesty in 1977.