9/11/03 is upon us. And, since I have so many new readers, I thought I should re-post the original 9/13/01 comments.
———–
It is recorded in our history books that when he looked down at the ship full of smiling, victorious faces… faces of his flyers, just having returned from Pearl Harbor, Japanese fleet Admiral Yamamoto was quiet, pensive, even apprehensive. He later wrote in his private diary, “I fear all I have done is awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve.”
As this column is written, it is the second night after the dastardly attacks on the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, and the Pentagon. In that amount of time, I have heard, on the news channels, and on the internet, a phase batted about several times, in various refinements, when discussing these attacks: “Like Pearl Harbor”.
Something in that phrase struck a deeper chord with me. It was, at the same time, unsettling, and reassuring. And about 20 minutes ago, my memory finally coughed up that quote from Yamamoto, and with it, my entire thought process about these events crystallized. In that revelation, it occurred to me I’d already written about what I was feeling.
In that column, I wrote of my worry that our influence on the world stage had suffered seriously, under the weight of Bill Clinton’s international bumbling. Well, Bumbling isn’t the right word. Bullying, is perhaps more accurate, yet still not spot-on.
I said, then:
>>> From Oslo to Camp David, Clinton has pushed Israel to the bargaining table, and pressured her to give up vital strategic and cultural assets she has no business giving away, if survival is at all on her agenda. Ehud Barak, by his giving into Bill Clinton (who, along with his staff including Jim Carville, did much to put Barak into office), has done little more than demonstrate just how empty the Palestinians’ peace talk really is, and how desperate Clinton was to be seen as a good President, his crimes against his oaths not withstanding.
Consider….
At Clinton’s insistence, Barak offered Arafat the keys to the kingdom; just about all of the West Bank and Gaza, plus East Jerusalem and even Palestinian sovereignty over the Temple Mount. How do the peace loving Palestinians respond? Yasser Arafat turned it all down, and gave us another few nights of headlines, filled with kids in the street throwing stones, and being shot, occasionally. He also sent his armed forces, (You recall, they’re supposed to be policemen?) to fire at the Israelis, apparently hoping for an excuse to tell the rest of the world how Israel is a war-mongering nation.
Of course that should have been a signal to about anyone with a brain that he didn’t give a damn about peace. All he and his followers are interested in is the destruction of Israel. It should have also been a signal that Clinton’s attempt at a legacy backfired, big time, and more, that it didn’t have a chance to start with…. something that Clinton should have known, did he have any understanding of the situation at all. You will recall, perhaps that back in 1992 , Clinton more or less bragged he had no understanding of matters of foreign policy. This was never quite so clear as during this monstrosity Mr. Clinton unleashed on the world.
For Israel’s part, all of this has been laid at the feet of Ehud Barak, perhaps unfairly. No, I don’t think he was the man for the job, and clearly was only in the PM’s position because Clinton’s people worked so hard to get him there, apparently hoping to set up Clinton’s brokering a of peace deal. Easy to do when you have the PM of Israel owing you his election. But Barak apparently was under pressures he had no control of, having nothing to do with politics at home, or the Palestinians… both of which were quite out of his control to begin with, in any event.. He was concerned with Israel continuing to get support from the US. In this concern, he saw Israel as being on the controlled end of the puppet’s string… and knowing that if he did not capitulate to Clinton’s demands, that vital US support would wither as quickly as Benjamin Netenyau’s prime ministership did, when
it became clear he wasn’t going to buckle to Clinton’s concession demands.
And Barak wasn’t alone, nor was the left in Israel, in this perception of US control versus Israel’s survival. Yitzhak Rabin, hardly a liberal even by American standards and certainly not under Bill Clinton’s extortion based control to the extent that Barak was, saw the same problems. His longtime friends, according reports I’ve seen, tell us he was deeply troubled over the prospect of losing US support… and therefore bought into the ‘land for peace’ deals being brokered by the liberals in the US. This was something I predicted he wouldn’t have done.
Israeli voters, seeing this happening, and clearly annoyed with the US control over Israel’s dealings with the Palestinians, trounced Barak in the polls. Unless one considers this anger, the election of Ariel Sharon, his replacement, is hard to fathom, since he has never been overly popular, as best I can tell. But perhaps the people of Israel are finally figuring out what the real story is.. that in truth, there is no dealing with the Palestinians, and Arifat.
One hopes that they’ve not been too late in coming to this conclusion. If they are, world war seems fairly certain to me… possibly nuclear in nature.
>>>
Others learned the lessons, painful as they tended to be. Chaimberlin’s England, for example, along with the remainder of the free world, learned about appeasement of a mortal enemy the hard way. The American left, apparently not having leaned the lesson taught by the infamous socialist, Hitler, was taught the lesson again, by another band of socialists, as Soviet tanks rolled into Afghanistan 40 or so years later.
SOUTH EL MONTE, Calif. — California Gov. Gray Davis (search) on Saturday took a dig at Republican gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger (search ), telling one potential voter at a campaign stop that “you shouldn’t be governor unless you can pronounce the name of the state.” (full story)
This to my mind says it all on his diversity. Can you imagine him saying this about, say a Hispanic?
Good evening. I have asked for this time to keep you informed of America’s actions in the war on terror.
Nearly two years ago, following deadly attacks on our country, we began a systematic campaign against terrorism. These months have been a time of new responsibilities, and sacrifice, and national resolve, and great progress.
America and a broad coalition acted first in Afghanistan, by destroying the training camps of terror, and removing the regime that harbored al-Qaida. In a series of raids and actions around the world, nearly two-thirds of al-Qaida’s known leaders have been captured or killed, and we continue on al-Qaida’s trail. We have exposed terrorist front groups, seized terrorist accounts, taken new measures to protect our homeland, and uncovered sleeper cells inside the United States. And we acted in Iraq, where the former regime sponsored terror, possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, and for 12 years defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council. Our coalition enforced these international demands in one of the swiftest and most humane military campaigns in history.
For a generation leading up to September 11th, 2001, terrorists and their radical allies attacked innocent people in the Middle East and beyond, without facing a sustained and serious response. The terrorists became convinced that free nations were decadent and weak. And they grew bolder, believing that history was on their side. Since America put out the fires of September 11th, and mourned our dead, and went to war, history has taken a different turn. We have carried the fight to the enemy. We are rolling back the terrorist threat to civilization, not on the fringes of its influence, but at the heart of its power.
This work continues. In Iraq, we are helping the longsuffering people of that country to build a decent and democratic society at the center of the Middle East. Together we are transforming a place of torture chambers and mass graves into a nation of laws and free institutions. This undertaking is difficult and costly – yet worthy of our country, and critical to our security.
The Middle East will either become a place of progress and peace, or it will be an exporter of violence and terror that takes more lives in America and in other free nations. The triumph of democracy and tolerance in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and beyond would be a grave setback for international terrorism. The terrorists thrive on the support of tyrants and on the resentments of oppressed peoples. When tyrants fall, and resentment gives way to hope, men and women in every culture reject the ideologies of terror, and turn to the pursuits of peace. Everywhere that freedom takes hold, terror will retreat.
Our enemies understand this. They know that a free Iraq will be free of them ? free of assassins, and torturers, and secret police. They know that as democracy rises in Iraq, all of their hateful ambitions will fall like the statues of the former dictator. And that is why, five months after we liberated Iraq, a collection of killers is desperately trying to undermine Iraq’s progress and throw the country into chaos.
Some of the attackers are former members of the old Saddam regime, who fled the battlefield and now fight in the shadows. Some of the attackers are foreign terrorists, who have come to Iraq to pursue their war on America and other free nations. We cannot be certain to what extent these groups work together. We do know they have a common goal ? reclaiming Iraq for tyranny.
Most, but not all, of these killers operate in one area of the country. The attacks you have heard and read about in the last few weeks have occurred predominantly in the central region of Iraq, between Baghdad and Tikrit ? Saddam Hussein’s former stronghold. The North of Iraq is generally stable and is moving forward with reconstruction and self-government. The same trends are evident in the South, despite recent attacks by terrorist groups.
Though their attacks are localized, the terrorists and Saddam loyalists have done great harm. They have ambushed American and British service members ? who stand for freedom and order. They have killed civilian aid workers of the United Nations ? who represent the compassion and generosity of the world. They have bombed the Jordanian embassy ? the symbol of a peaceful Arab country. And last week they murdered a respected cleric and over a hundred Muslims at prayer ? bombing a holy shrine and a symbol of Islam’s peaceful teachings.
This violence is directed, not only against our coalition, but against anyone in Iraq who stands for decency, and freedom, and progress.
There is more at work in these attacks than blind rage. The terrorists have a strategic goal. They want us to leave Iraq before our work is done. They want to shake the will of the civilized world. In the past, the terrorists have cited the examples of Beirut and Somalia, claiming that if you inflict harm on Americans, we will run from a challenge. In this, they are mistaken.
Two years ago, I told the Congress and the country that the war on terror would be a lengthy war, a different kind of war, fought on many fronts in many places. Iraq is now the central front. Enemies of freedom are making a desperate stand there ? and there they must be defeated. This will take time, and require sacrifice. Yet we will do what is necessary, we will spend what is necessary, to achieve this essential victory in the war on terror, to promote freedom, and to make our own Nation more secure.
America has done this kind of work before. Following World War II, we lifted up the defeated nations of Japan and Germany, and stood with them as they built representative governments. We committed years and resources to this cause. And that effort has been repaid many times over in three generations of friendship and peace. America today accepts the challenge of helping the Iraqi people in the same spirit ? for their sake, and our own.
Our strategy in Iraq has three objectives ? destroying the terrorists ? enlisting the support of other nations for a free Iraq ? and helping Iraqis assume responsibility for their own defense and their own future.
First, we are taking direct action against the terrorists in the Iraqi theater, which is the surest way to prevent future attacks on coalition forces and the Iraqi people. We are staying on the offensive, with a series of precise strikes against enemy targets increasingly guided by intelligence given to us by Iraqi citizens. Since the end of major combat operations, we have conducted raids seizing many caches of enemy weapons and massive amounts of ammunition, and we have captured or killed hundreds of Saddam loyalists and terrorists. So far, of the 55 most wanted former Iraqi leaders, 42 are dead or in custody. We are sending a clear message: Anyone who seeks to harm our soldiers can know that our soldiers are hunting for them.
Second, we are committed to expanding international cooperation in the reconstruction and security of Iraq, just as we are in Afghanistan. Our military commanders in Iraq advise me that the current number of American troops ? nearly 130,000 ? is appropriate to their mission. They are joined by over 20,000 service members from 29 other countries. Two multinational divisions, led by the British and the Poles, are serving alongside our forces ? and in order to share the burden more broadly, our commanders have requested a third multinational division to serve in Iraq.
Some countries have requested an explicit authorization of the United Nations Security Council before committing troops to Iraq. I have directed Secretary of State Colin Powell to introduce a new Security Council resolution, which would authorize the creation of a multinational force in Iraq, led by America.
I recognize that not all of our friends agreed with our decision to enforce the Security Council resolutions and remove Saddam Hussein from power. Yet we cannot let past differences interfere with present duties. Terrorists in Iraq have attacked representatives of the civilized world, and opposing them must be the cause of the civilized world. Members of the United Nations now have an opportunity, and the responsibility, to assume a broader role in assuring that Iraq becomes a free and democratic nation.
Third, we are encouraging the orderly transfer of sovereignty and authority to the Iraqi people. Our coalition came to Iraq as liberators and we will depart as liberators. Right now Iraq has its own Governing Council, comprised of 25 leaders representing Iraq’s diverse people. The Governing Council recently appointed cabinet ministers to run government departments. Already more than 90 percent of towns and cities have functioning local governments, which are restoring basic services. We are helping to train civil defense forces to keep order ? and an Iraqi police service to enforce the law ? and a facilities protection service ? and Iraqi border guards to help secure the borders ? and a new Iraqi army. In all these roles, there are now some 60,000 Iraqi citizens under arms, defending the security of their own country ? and we are accelerating the training of more.
Iraq is ready to take the next steps toward self-government. The Security Council resolution we introduce will encourage Iraq’s Governing Council to submit a plan and a timetable for the drafting of a constitution, and for free elections. From the outset, I have expressed confidence in the ability of the Iraqi people to govern themselves. Now they must rise to the responsibilities of a free people and secure the blessings of their own liberty.
Our strategy in Iraq will require new resources. We have conducted a thorough assessment of our military and reconstruction needs in Iraq, and also in Afghanistan. I will soon submit to Congress a request for 87 billion dollars. The request will cover ongoing military and intelligence operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, which we expect will cost 66 billion dollars over the next year. This budget request will support our commitment to helping the Iraqi and Afghan people rebuild their own nations, after decades of oppression and mismanagement. We will provide funds to help them improve security. And we will help them to restore basic services, such as electricity and water, and to build new schools, roads, and medical clinics. This effort is essential to the stability of those nations, and therefore to our own security. Now and in the future, we will support our troops and we will keep our word to the more than 50 million people of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Later this month, Secretary Powell will meet with representatives of many nations to discuss their financial contributions to the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Next month, he will hold a similar funding conference for the reconstruction of Iraq. Europe, Japan, and states in the Middle East all will benefit from the success of freedom in these two countries, and they should contribute to that success.
The people of Iraq are emerging from a long trial. For them, there will be no going back to the days of the dictator ? to the miseries and humiliation he inflicted on that good country. For the Middle East and the world, there will be no going back to the days of fear ? when a brutal and aggressive tyrant possessed terrible weapons. And for America, there will be no going back to the era before September 11th, 2001 ? to false comfort in a dangerous world. We have learned that terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength ? they are invited by the perception of weakness. And the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people is to engage the enemy where he lives and plans. We are fighting that enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan today, so that we do not meet him again on our own streets, in our own cities.
The heaviest burdens in our war on terror fall, as always, on the men and women of our Armed Forces and our intelligence services. They have removed gathering threats to America and our friends, and this Nation takes great pride in their incredible achievements. We are grateful for their skill and courage, and for their acts of decency, which have shown America’s character to the world. We honor the sacrifice of their families. And we mourn every American who has died so bravely, and so far from home.
The Americans who assume great risks overseas understand the great cause they are in. Not long ago I received a letter from a Captain in the Third Infantry Division in Baghdad. He wrote about his pride in serving a just cause, and about the deep desire of Iraqis for liberty. “I see it,” he said, “in the eyes of a hungry people every day here. They are starved for freedom and opportunity.” And he concluded, “I just thought you’d like a note from the ‘front lines of freedom.'” That Army captain, and all of our men and women serving in the war on terror, are on the front lines of freedom. And I want each of them to know: Your country thanks you, and your country supports you.
Fellow citizens: We have been tested these past 24 months, and the dangers have not passed. Yet Americans are responding with courage and confidence. We accept the duties of our generation. We are active and resolute in our own defense. We are serving in freedom’s cause ? and that is the cause of all mankind.
Thank you, and may God continue to bless the United States of America.
Some interesting text I found while doing some research on Hispanics vis’a’vie Estrada… in an article in the Alameda Times-Star
“While Mexican immigrants come to America no more or less poor, no more or less uneducated than previous waves of immigrants, they are far more resistant to assimilating into American culture. Hanson notes that, of the millions of Mexican immigrants legally admitted to this country since 1982, only 20 percent had bothered to become citizens by 1997.
A resistance to fully assimilating into American society and the de-emphasis of “American” in Mexican-American, has impeded the Mexican immigrant population’s upward mobility in California. That notion is borne out by data compiled by the Center for Immigration Studies, the Washington-based public policy group headed by immigration expert Mark Krikorian. Some 65 percent of Mexican immigrants in California are high school dropouts, according to the center, compared to only 7 percent of the native-born population. Some 41 percent of Mexican immigrant households are on the public welfare rolls, compared to 14 percent of natives.
The socio-economic status of Mexican immigrants barely improves over time. Nearly 55 percent of Mexican immigrants are living in or near poverty after residing here in this country more than 20 years. Some 45 percent are without health care after 20 years and 37 percent are still relying on welfare.”
This pretty much backs the argument I’ve been making for some time now. The issue isn’t racism, it’s refusal to become part of the American Culture. PAW; One’s success is not linked to race, by any means. Rather one’s success is linked directly to how completely one becomes part of the American Culutre.
Consider those blacks who have taken on the mainstream culture as their own, as opposed to the ‘black street culture’ (for lack of a better term….) Who will invariably do better in their lives?
Even liberals have to admit, if they are being logical, that universally, those who do better, regardless of race, or for that matter any other single factor, are people who have adopted the majority culture. We all know the examples of black individuals who have done so, for example. One could draw a parallel to the Asian ‘problems’ that the schools in California are having. The very reason Asians do well in our society is because they are more willing to adapt themselves to our society’s way of doing things, in their interactions with other people, most notably, teachers, and other students…. and employers.
The socioeconomic success achieved by whites is not due to racism, but rather is due to a demonstrably superior set of cultural values, work ethic, family, stress on education, what not. For the large part these methods can be emulated. And universally, when these are so adopted, the individual succeeds at a far greater pace.
One could logically argue, therefore, that we do hispanics, and ALL minorities a diservice when we allow multi-lingaulism in our society. Are we creating a permanant dependant class of people by selling our own culture short? Who is it that pushes for such cultural mishmashes? Who pushes for multilingualism? And who would most benefit by such a dependant class as is created by such moves?
Democrats, of course.
Of all of Bush’s judicial nominees, Estrada by far had the best credentials. Considered highly qualified by the American Bar Association, Estrada actually worked in the Clinton administration’s solicitor general’s office. One would think that alone would get him some credit among the left. No such luck.
Estrada is a *conservative* Hispanic. Had he been selected, he would have served as an example of a minority that doesn’t swallow the far left Democrat mantra. Ironicly, thereby, had Estrada not been Hispanic, he’d have had an easier time being confirmed.
Also, any conservative on the bench would be a threat to the Left’s continued legislating by judicial fiat, rather than by LAW. This combination of these two factors would be a long-term electorial disaster for the leftist radicals.
They could not allow this to happen. The Democrats need a permanant underclass to maintain power. Both the above factors are a threat to that grip on power. The lest, as I have said before is ultimatly racist, and this travisty against Estrada is as good an example as you need to see why I say that.
Is it any wonder that Hispanics are the now the fastest growing segment among the Republicans?
Reuters is reporting this morning that Arnie has come out against illegals getting drivers licenses in California.
“I am an immigrant,” he said. “I waited for 10 years to get my American citizenship and I know first-hand how immigrants who come to this country and obey the laws have struggled to achieve their dreams. I am pro-immigrant. But we should not invite fraud or undermine law enforcement.”
The correct move, of course, but also a politically brilliant move. Consider the recent record of MEChA member Cruz Bustamante. Your remember them… the ones with the motto…”For the race, everything. For those outside the Race, nothing.” Is it any wonder Bustamante is behind this bill?
Based on thisI think Arnie has just won it; the bill is very unpopular.
Oh, I also note an interesting quote from the story…
Schwarzenegger also said he had returned a campaign contribution from the union representing Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies because he did not want to be compromised if elected governor.
“We don’t want to take money from unions,” the film star said. “We don’t want to get into something where we feel we owe something to the unions. That’s the biggest problem in Sacramento right now.”
Now, the voters have something to go on. I’ve said it before; I’m somewhat non-plussed by Arnold Schwarzenegger being in office there. He’s no conservative. Yet, given the weird state of politics in that state, I’ve come to the conclusion that he would be an improvement.
Bill Gertz is reporting that a French company is suspected of illegally supplying Iran with four specialty pumps. According to the report, our Treasury and Commerce departments are worried that these cryogenic fluid transfer pumps, are being used as part of the cooling system for Iran’s nuclear reactors, which in turn can be used to produce weapons-grade material.
Meanwhile, guess who is blocking progress in Iraq?
That’s right… France….. and their pals in Germany.
It appears President Bush has correctly identified that these people are not the freinds of peace, not the freinds of America, not the freinds of freedom.
“I am an American. I love my country and have great hopes for it,” Depp said in a statement released by his Los Angeles-based publicist. “It is for this reason that I speak candidly and sometimes critically about it.”
Story:
Sorry, Johnny old boy… no sale. However, The Ditsy Twits may welcome you on their tour.
Remember the Obesity lawsuits against McDonalds? Check this report:
NEW YORK (Reuters) – A federal judge on Thursday threw out a revised lawsuit against McDonald’s Corp . that accused the fast food restaurant of using misleading advertising to lure children into eating unhealthy foods that make them fat.
Here’s the full report.
It’s always easier to be a victim, than to blame your own actions. That will always be a factor. But if we had more rulings like this, perhaps they’d at least not be able to do it in court, at our expense.
The Dow is now at a 14-month high, and the NASDAQ just reached a 17-month high. The Democrats’ hoped for a bad economy to get them back into power. worked for it, if you watch the voting patern of the Democrats in Congress….
Their electiontime mantra of “Bush wrecked the economy” is now looking somewhat problematic at best.
If the left is going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then let’s see who else did. This may shock some of you.
“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” —
Bill Clinton in 1998
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for
the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Bob Graham, December 2002
“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
Tom DeLay has a way with words, occasionally. This is one such time. He’s got it nailed, in speaking of Howard “Duck” Dean….
If this cruel, loudmouth extremist is the cream of the Democratic crop, next November’s going to make the 1984 election look like a squeaker,” DeLay said in a reference to President Reagan’s landslide victory over Walter Mondale.
Of all places, this report comes to us from the usually very leftist CBC
QALAT, Afghanistan (AP) – Afghan officials claimed victory Wednesday after a nine-day siege by U.S and Afghan troops against suspected Taliban fighters holed up in a region of mountains and caves of southern Afghanistan.
Scores of Taliban guerrillas were killed and others retreated in Zabul province, local officials said.
In a sign that major fighting is over, about 600 Afghan troops have pulled out of Dai Chupan, a remote district of Zabul province, said Khalil Hotak, the province’s intelligence chief. That area has been the scene of the heaviest fighting since the Taliban’s fall from power in late 2001.
I’d like you to consider something, here.
Had the Afghan military command reported, say, “124 Allied dead, and 5 reported for the Taliban”, how do you suppose the press would react?
You can bet your left buttcheek that they’d be mouthing the word QUAGMIRE, before the echo of the explosions died away.
But that’s not what hapened. The Allied Afghan/US forces won… and won in fine, convincing fashion. And the press won’t tell us about it.
Guess the facts get in the way of their agenda.
And yes, I know the CBC is simply passing on what they got off the AP wire.
But can you explain why you’d not heard this story before reading it here on the net?
Fox News Channel was the only cable news service in August to grow in viewership from a year ago, gaining 20% in primetime and 29% across the entire day, according to Nielsen Media Research.
What a crock. I know John Kerry is desperate for some publicity… but is there no depth to which this slime won’t go?
