Picture Of The Week

afghanistanFort Lewis, Washington State.

This US soldier is crying 4 members of his Unit killed while fighting in Afghanistan

I was moved by this picture. You should be too.

(picture Janet Jensen/AP/SIPA).

Zipper's

37 Responses to “Picture Of The Week”


  1. 1 harry Oct 23rd, 2009 at 6:45 am

    This is really deep…no matter what your stance is on the conflicts going on abroad, please support our troops. They do great things on a regular basis and always put themselves in harms way, sometimes making the ultimate sacrifice. If you ever see a Soldier/Sailor/Airman/Marine, please tell them thank you, let them know that they are loved and appreciated.

  2. 2 Patrick R. Oct 23rd, 2009 at 7:03 am

    Support our troops. Support our President Barack Obama.

  3. 3 Shifter. Oct 23rd, 2009 at 7:08 am

    Great idea to publish this picture. Thanks Cyril.

  4. 4 WT Oct 23rd, 2009 at 7:16 am

    First, as always……support our troops. Can’t say that enough. No matter what you believe, support them.

    Second, I find posting the image of solider grieving to be almost uncalled for and really disrespectful. It’s a private moment for him and shouldn’t be broadcast all over the internet. He is not “crying” he is mourning for his lost fellow soldiers. Cyril, not cool and just because the image was an AP image doesn’t mean it’s alright to post.

    Third, Patrick no I will not support Obama……not going to happen.

  5. 5 Russell Oct 23rd, 2009 at 7:33 am

    WT. I can’t believe you wrote this. Publishing this picture is useful for all not to forget what our soldiers are doing to serve our country. What’s wrong with crying your fellow soldiers. Real men cry. You don’t seem to know the difference between crying and mourning or grief. Mourning is a later stage. Cyril you were right to publish this picture and I support you for doing so and all soldiers and patriots will also approve.

  6. 6 Terri Budge Oct 23rd, 2009 at 7:37 am

    Never commented before. I served and I also approve showing this picture. Btw, Cyril publishes what he wants. It’s his blog.

  7. 7 Jeff Nicklus Oct 23rd, 2009 at 8:39 am

    Cyril,

    As a combat veteran myself I must say that I have no problem with your posting of this moving picture. War is hell no matter how it is added up. Our men and women in uniform deserve our support and encouragement each and every day. I love and respect each of them and I thank each of them!

    Patrick R. I doubt you have ever had the balls to serve in the military any more that the President you blindly serve …. So from me to you I say this: Screw you and Osama Obama …. I will never support either of you!

    Over & Out,

    Jeff

  8. 8 Busfreak Oct 23rd, 2009 at 10:36 am

    Send this pick to Ob at the white house. Maybe he will hurry up and make up his mind on what to do with our men in Afghanistan. He spent more time peddling the Olympics than he did talking to his General on the ground.

  9. 9 WGS Oct 23rd, 2009 at 10:37 am

    Wonderful picture! It shows us the reality of war and reminds us that Freedom is not Free.

  10. 10 z Oct 23rd, 2009 at 11:02 am

    Publish all the realities of war.
    The bush admin. tried to hide the realities by not allowing pictures of coffins.

  11. 11 harry Oct 23rd, 2009 at 11:10 am

    Leave all of the political bullshit alone and realize what this is really about: Supporting the folks that enlist and protect the freedoms that we all enjoy. Mourn the ones that defend that freedom to the end. If you don’t like what I am saying then I have two words for you: Fxxx Oxx. Hope that is easy for you to understand.

  12. 12 Chelsey Oct 23rd, 2009 at 11:28 am

    If dumb Bush didn’t send our troops in Iraq for a useless and unjustified war and instead focused on the real ennemy in Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden would be caught or killed, the war would be won and over and these 4 soldiers would not have been killed. Bush will go to history as the worst ever President and Chesney as the worst Vice-President. Both will have difficulties writing their memoirs without lying and lying again. And for the few republicans reading this website, you lost the election, get over it, and you will lose the next one with racist Limbaugh as your spokesperson because there is no reputable republican party anymore. Now, because they have no argument to present, I expect Nicklus & co to send insults after insults. Go ahead.

  13. 13 Uncle Sam Oct 23rd, 2009 at 11:55 am

    — Saddam Hussein violated numerous United Nations resolutions following the first Persian Gulf War. Saddam’s military continuously shot at U.S. and British planes patrolling the Northern and Southern No-Fly Zones. He offered $25,000 to families of homicide bombers. We know he possessed chemical and biological weapons because he used them during the Iraq/Iran war, and on his own people, the Kurds.

    — The October ’02 National Intelligence Estimate concluded with “high confidence” — the highest certainty allowed — that Saddam possessed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. All 16 intelligence agencies contributing to the NIE unanimously agreed on the chemical and biological weapons assumptions, with disagreement only on how far along Saddam was toward acquiring nukes.

    — Weapons inspectors found no WMD stockpiles, leading many Americans to feel that the president either lied or cherry-picked intelligence to lead us into war. But the Robb-Silverman Commission concluded that the president didn’t lie. The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee’s 511-page report concluded that the president did not lie. The British Butler Commission, which examined whether Prime Minister Tony Blair “sexed up” the intelligence to make a case for war, concluded the PM didn’t lie.

    — Kenneth Pollack, an opponent of the Iraq war, served as Iraq expert and intelligence analyst in the Clinton administration. Pollack writes that during his 1999-2001 tour on the National Security Council, ” . . . the intelligence community convinced me and the rest of the Clinton Administration that Saddam had reconstituted his WMD programs following the withdrawal of the UN inspectors, in 1998, and was only a matter of years away from having a nuclear weapon. . . . The U.S. intelligence community’s belief that Saddam was aggressively pursuing weapons of mass destruction pre-dated Bush’s inauguration, and therefore cannot be attributed to political pressure. . . . Other nations’ intelligence services were similarly aligned with U.S. views. . . . Germany . . . Israel, Russia, Britain, China, and even France held positions similar to that of the United States. . . . In sum, (SET ITAL) no one (END ITAL) doubted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.”

    — Meanwhile, neighboring Iran defiantly pursues nuclear weapons. Bush reasoned that a free, democratic and prosperous Iraq would destabilize Iran, accomplishing regime change without military force. This would encourage the rest of the Arab world to direct their grievances toward their own leaders, rather than against the “infidels.”

    — We remain in Iraq because, as former Secretary of State James Baker put it, “[I]f we picked up and left right now . . . you would see the biggest civil war you’ve ever seen. Every neighboring country would be involved in there, doing its own thing, Turkey, Iran, Syria, you name it, and even our friends in the Gulf.”

    — Former Secretary of State and informal Bush adviser Henry Kissinger — who knows something about the consequences of cutting and running — wrote, “Victory over the insurgency is the only meaningful exit strategy.”

    — The political aim of our Islamofascist enemies is a worldwide Caliphate, or Islamic world. Renowned Islam expert Bernard Lewis recently reiterated his support for the war: “The response to 9/11 came as a nasty surprise [to bin Laden and his followers]. They were expecting more of the same — bleating and apologies — instead of which they got a vigorous reaction, first in Afghanistan and then in Iraq. And as they used to say in Moscow: It is no accident, comrades, that there has been no successful attack in the United States since then. . . . [T]he effort is difficult and the outcome uncertain, but I think the effort must be made. Either we bring them freedom, or they destroy us.”

    True, 2,800 of our best have died. Any figure above zero is a tragedy. But America — on both sides of the Civil War — lost more than 600,000 soldiers, or 2 percent of the country’s population of 31 million. Of our country’s 132 million, we lost more than 400,000 in World War II, or .3 percent of our population. In the Korean War, we lost 37,000, and the Vietnam War saw 58,000 dead.

    Many people say that after failing to find stockpiles of WMD, Bush “switched” rationale for the war. Consider this excerpt from a New York Times editorial about a speech Bush gave weeks before the coalition entered Iraq:

    “President Bush sketched an expansive vision last night of what he expects to accomplish by a war in Iraq. Instead of focusing on eliminating weapons of mass destruction, or reducing the threat of terror to the United States, Mr. Bush talked about establishing a ‘free and peaceful Iraq’ that would serve as a ‘dramatic and inspiring example’ to the entire Arab and Muslim world, provide a stabilizing influence in the Middle East and even help end the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

    The media have ignored an even greater omission in the nine-eleven joint congressional committee report released last month than the failure of the Bush administration to allow the release of the 28 pages said to document complicity of the Saudi Arabian government in the nine-eleven attacks. The omission is the failure of the committee to investigate or report on evidence that Iraq was in fact linked to al Qaeda and the World Trade Center attacks.

    In May, in the first court decision based on the nine-eleven terrorist attacks, federal Judge Harold Baer ruled that lawyers representing two families who lost loved ones in the World Trade Center attacks had, according to New York Newsday, proven that “Iraq provided material support to Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group al Qaeda.” In Judge Baer’s ruling, he said “the opinion testimony of the plaintiff’s experts is sufficient to meet plaintiff’s burden that Iraq collaborated in or supported bin Laden [and] al Qaeda’s terrorist acts of September 11.

    According to NewsMax, who contacted James Beasley, one of the attorneys involved in the case, Beasley disputed the joint committee’s finding that there was no tie between Iraq and al Qaeda. And the committee never called him to testify, though he had proven his case to Judge Baer, who said that a “reasonable jury” would be convinced that Iraq played a material role in the nine-eleven attack.

    Among the evidence cited by Beasley were accounts from Czech government officials who still insist that one of the lead hijackers, Mohammed Atta, did in fact meet with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague just five months before the attack. The CIA and many in the media continue to dispute that that meeting took place, but Judge Baer must have believed otherwise. Beasley said, “We talked to the Czech ambassador to the U.S., the guy who kicked out [Iraqi ambassador to the Czech Republic] Ahmad al Ani two weeks after he met with Atta…He’s absolutely sure they met.”

    Beasley had also called upon former CIA director James Woolsey to help make his case. Woolsey testified that he had interviewed two terrorist instructors who said they had trained radical Islamists at the notorious Salman Pak, a terrorist training camp in Baghdad where training included how to hijack U.S. commercial airliners. The methods they used were the exact methods used by the nine-eleven hijackers.

    ABC was the only broadcast network that reported the story. The Washington Post carried an editorial, but no news story, a week after Judge Baer’s ruling. They called it “Phantom Justice” and emphasized that though the judge said the lawyers had shown Iraq’s support for bin Laden and al Qaeda, he had added the word “barely.” They objected on grounds that such judgments interfere with foreign policy and that the two governments named, Iraq and Afghanistan, no longer exist. Perhaps this explains the Bush administration silence on the subject. Presumably the Democrats and the liberal media want to ignore this link between al Qaeda and Iraq, since it would help justify the war that removed Saddam Hussein from power.

    “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

    “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

    “Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.” Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

    “He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998.

    “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

    “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.” Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

    “Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

    “There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

    “We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

    “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

    “Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

    “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

    “The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…” Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 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.” Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

    “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

    “He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do.” Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

    “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. 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.” Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), 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.” Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.

    “[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …” Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

  14. 14 Jeff Nicklus Oct 23rd, 2009 at 12:16 pm

    Chelsey,

    Honey, please read and attempt to understand what Uncle Sam has shown as facts above. I understand, by your writings and grammar that you are very, very young and obviously just beginning your education so this would be a perfect time to take a step back and learn some real history not the “spin” put out by politicians. Now, recess is over get back to class!

    Uncle Sam ….. THANK YOU!

    Over & Out,

    Jeff

  15. 15 A$$HOLE Oct 23rd, 2009 at 1:06 pm

    Some of you people make me sick! THis was not the time nor place to spew your bullshit pollitical talking points. This picture was about the men and women in uniform who have signed the blank check, payable up to the cost of their life, to give you the freedoms that you take for granted everyday. Our military is voluntary, and they have sacrificed their lives for the rest of us going back far longer than BUSH and OBAMA. THis pic is about the sacrifice made for us, and to give us a chance to offer up some gratitude, and appreciation. There is nothing wrong with posting this picture, as it shows reality. As a civilian I offer up my appreciation to our military every time every chance I get. Hell I even have a similar scene tattooed on me, with the words “THANK YOU” above it. As a member of the Kansas Patriot Guard I see these scenes all too much, and it rips my guts out every time. And to see the sick distorted people protesting the funerals of these fine young men and women makes my blood boil. They died for your freedom of speech that you so ignorantly abuse every day. God Bless these fallen American Heroes, God Bless this grieving American Hero, God Bless all of our American Heroes, past, present, and future, (Including the American Heroes posting on this blog), and God Bless the USA! If you do not support our military, you are a treasonous, pinko communist pig who is free to leave anytime. Don’t let the RED< WHITE and BLUE door hit you in the ass too hard!

  16. 16 Manhattan Choppers Oct 23rd, 2009 at 1:19 pm

    Ask Powell why he left bush.

  17. 17 Manhattan Choppers Oct 23rd, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    Great pic Cyril, Thanks. Born & Raised and worked in DC that pic says it all.

  18. 18 Jeff Nicklus Oct 23rd, 2009 at 1:35 pm

    A$$HOLE,

    I think you are missing something here …. the very thing men and women have fought and died for from the very beginning of the Great Country is exactly what is transpiring on this blog right now …… it is called Freedom Of Speech. Like what is said or not many have fought and died so we can sit on our butts and communicate freely with each other without fear of reprisal from our Government.

    As you so eloquently say: …. “If you do not support our military, you are a treasonous, pinko communist pig who is free to leave anytime. Don’t let the RED< WHITE and BLUE door hit you in the ass too hard!”.

    I couldn’t have said it better my brother.

    Over & Out,

    Jeff

  19. 19 Manhattan Choppers Oct 23rd, 2009 at 1:47 pm

    “If you do not support our military, you are a treasonous, pinko communist pig who is free to leave anytime. Don’t let the RED< WHITE and BLUE door hit you in the ass too hard!”. love that!!

  20. 20 Lyndelski Oct 23rd, 2009 at 3:36 pm

    Bring em home lets make them come and get us we are spending to much money to chase desert thugs with AK’s and opium problems we should worry about our borders more than the afgan and Paki borders.

    This is a truely hard to look at picture for a war that seems to be all about money.

    I support the troops but not the war it has been a true waste other than good practice and the intrest of people who have gov contracts to supply our troops.

  21. 21 A$$HOLE Oct 23rd, 2009 at 3:36 pm

    Jeff,
    I whole heartedly agree with you that we all have the right to say as we wish, and that is what I am doing. I think I even stated something to this affect in the beginning of my rant.
    We as Americans also have the responsibility to our men and women in uniform to show them undying support, and to excercise some discretion in knowing the time and place to make a political argument, and this blog simply was not it.
    Sure you have the right to say as you wish, and sure you can turn anything into a political argument, but the truly patriotic Americans know when to put that bullshit on the back burner, and be respectful of the suffering our service members and their families go through so we can have the right to speak freely, or in this case to not say shit, other than “Thank You for your sacrifice, your service to our country, and God Bless these fine soldiers’ families and comrades.” In my opinion, (and that is all it is.) to say anything else is just downright disrespectful.
    Sure you have the right to, but do you really NEED to do it? As you stated, some of the argumernts above show youth and inexperience. Discretion and respect are acquired qualities and are not taught these days. We’re too busy teaching the Mmm, Mmm, Mmm bullshit. That is covered by freedom of speech as well, but that does not make it right.
    Jeff, and to you sir, I would like to THANK YOU for YOUR service to our country! (And a long distance internet handshake!)

  22. 22 Conrad Nicklus Oct 23rd, 2009 at 6:38 pm

    Chelsey,

    Sweetheart, go brush your hair and watch FOX news. Get the real stories from experience and read Uncles Sams FACTS from above. You are merely an Obama puppet, oh so typical for a young female, that he has used to perfection as seen above. There are way more “reputable” Republicans out there than Democrats and if you knew ANYTHING about Politics you would know that the Bush Administration made choices but your people, the Democrats who run Conrgress and the Senate, also had the choice to accept or deny the choices. IF they would have said no to sending troops and no to many other issues the Bush admin would have not recieved such a bad name. Get your facts down, kiddo. Don’t be so quick to post what you hear on MTV and BET, they lie to you because it is the politically correct thing to side with the racism excuse.

    Now, as I said before, go brush your hair and watch the REAL news. Look at Obamas Approval rating vs Bushs at this time of the game.. Obama is about to beat Tafts rating after only 11 short months, sad??? At this rate Obama will beat Bushs 8 year rating in 1.45 years.

    Conrad Nicklus

    Your PROUD Republican that watches Obama approval rating drop lower and lower everyday.

  23. 23 Conrad Nicklus Oct 23rd, 2009 at 6:44 pm

    Chelsey,

    Read below, if you need help understanding just ask questions, I will respond.

    We were always told Barack Obama would do something spectacular, that he would shatter previous presidential records – and now he has. The One has recorded the sharpest slump in popularity rating of any US president at this stage in office for 50 years. Nor is that figure just a snapshot of a bad week: it reflects his average daily approval rating for the past quarter of the year – running at 53 per cent. Considering it stood at 78 per cent last January, that is impressive work.

    So, a 25 per cent fall in electoral support over nine months is the response of an ungrateful public to all the good things he has done: getting rid of all those dangerous nuclear weapons, making revolutionary improvements in healthcare to enable committees to weed out unproductive geriatrics (the Dangerous Grannies Act), cosying up to Latin American lefties to assist the spread of Marxism in America’s back yard, dithering in the killing ground of Afghanistan, waging war on Fox News while the unemployment rate surges towards 10 per cent – what’s not to like?

    Unfortunately, in this wicked world there are people prepared to exploit temporary misunderstandings between rulers and the ruled. Nancy Pelosi is becoming downright disloyal over Afghanistan and Hillary – well, Mrs Bill is just waiting for the right moment, if the Obama electoral mud-slide continues, to put the knife between the shoulder blades (Would you turn your back on a Clinton?).

    The election prospects are looking good, too – if you happen to be a raw-meat Republican thirsting for vengeance. In the governorship races, Virginia can be written off, while New Jersey (!) is on the critical list. Nothing rounds off a spate of bad opinion polls better than concrete defeat in real-life elections. Perhaps there is still a road back, though the problem with a mega-hype like Obama’s, which was almost metaphysical, is that once the idol has shown its feet of clay the religious faith of former believers cannot be restored.

    Things are not looking good for Kenya’s favourite son, or for America under his stewardship. It is a shame about America, but as for the Chicago wide boy getting his come-uppance, he cannot fall hard enough or fast enough

    Conrad Nicklus

    Again, Proud to be American and Republican

  24. 24 hoyt Oct 23rd, 2009 at 6:47 pm

    Chelsey has good points, regardless of grammar or assumed age.

    Uncle Sam could quote* all he wants but it will not change that history has documented the Iraq invasion profoundly shifted the focus from the real perpetrator of 9/11.

    Current events suggest Afghanistan is back to a danger level as high as it was 9 years ago. Plus, the Taliban are resorting to Afghan human rights atrocities. That makes the picture above all the more fucking hard to take.

    Meanwhile, Bush’s decision to invade Iraq and his incompetence since has deeply divided this country. In that respect, bin Laden could be more than happy. He duped bush and his supporters.

    *there were Senators who voted no to the Iraq Invasion. One of them is in the White House.

  25. 25 Chelsey Oct 23rd, 2009 at 8:56 pm

    Conrad. I am not watching FAUX NEWS. So, I am not brainwashed. Faux News? It has never been a news channel. It’s propaganda for has been republicans. I told you, you lost the election. Get over it because the Democrats are there at least for 7 more years. You don’t seem to kow that Barack Obama voted no to the war! LOL. The democrats who voted yes were abused by the white house lies, like most Americans. The world hated America under Bush. The world loves the new America under Obama. Do you think that the rest of the world is socialist? Ask for a passport if you can get one and travel during 1 year. Bush was the joke of the world. Everywhere you will go they will tell you.

  26. 26 A$$HOLE Oct 23rd, 2009 at 9:44 pm

    Stop your bickering! Show some reverance for the young Americans in the picture. Who cares what side you were on. They are politicians and they all lie. You guys do not even know half of the story regardless how many times you regurgitate the bullshit facts that you throw around as if you know something. The figure head is just a mouth peice. All of the politicians are the same. While you are bickering you fail to see the whole picture. Now show some damn respect. You have missed the whole point of this article, and of the picture. You guys wanna fight it out, go to a political blog, and fight all you want.

  27. 27 Steve Oct 23rd, 2009 at 9:48 pm

    If hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue, then the flip-flops on previously denounced anti-terror measures are the homage that Barack Obama pays to George Bush. Within 125 days, Obama has adopted with only minor modifications huge swaths of the entire, allegedly lawless Bush program.

    The latest flip-flop is the restoration of military tribunals. During the 2008 campaign, Obama denounced them repeatedly, calling them an “enormous failure.” Obama suspended them upon his swearing-in. Now they’re back.

    Of course, Obama will never admit in word what he’s doing in deed. As in his rhetorically brilliant national-security speech yesterday claiming to have undone Bush’s moral travesties, the military commissions flip-flop is accompanied by the usual Obama three-step: (a) excoriate the Bush policy, (b) ostentatiously unveil cosmetic changes, (c) adopt the Bush policy.

    Cosmetic changes such as Obama’s declaration that “we will give detainees greater latitude in selecting their own counsel.” Laughable. High-toned liberal law firms are climbing over each other for the frisson of representing these miscreants in court.

    What about disallowing evidence received under coercive interrogation? Hardly new, notes former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy. Under the existing rules, military judges have that authority, and they exercised it under the Bush administration to dismiss charges against al-Qaeda operative Mohammed al-Qahtani on precisely those grounds.

    On Guantanamo, it’s Obama’s fellow Democrats who have suddenly discovered the wisdom of Bush’s choice. In open rebellion against Obama’s pledge to shut it down, the Senate voted 90 to 6 to reject appropriating a single penny until the president explains where he intends to put the inmates. Sen. James Webb, the de facto Democratic authority on national defense, wants the closing to be put on hold. And on Tuesday, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said, no Gitmo inmates on American soil — not even in American jails.

    That doesn’t leave a lot of places. The home countries won’t take them. Europe is recalcitrant. Saint Helena needs refurbishing. Elba didn’t work out too well the first time. And Devil’s Island is now a tourist destination. Gitmo is starting to look good again.

    Observers of all political stripes are stunned by how much of the Bush national security agenda is being adopted by this new Democratic government. Victor Davis Hanson (National Review) offers a partial list: “The Patriot Act, wiretaps, e-mail intercepts, military tribunals, Predator drone attacks, Iraq (i.e., slowing the withdrawal), Afghanistan (i.e., the surge) — and now Guantanamo.”

    Jack Goldsmith (The New Republic) adds: rendition — turning over terrorists seized abroad to foreign countries; state secrets — claiming them in court to quash legal proceedings on rendition and other erstwhile barbarisms; and the denial of habeas corpus — to detainees in Afghanistan’s Bagram prison, indistinguishable logically and morally from Guantanamo.

    What does it all mean? Democratic hypocrisy and demagoguery? Sure, but in Washington, opportunism and cynicism are hardly news.

    There is something much larger at play — an undeniable, irresistible national interest that, in the end, beyond the cheap politics, asserts itself. The urgencies and necessities of the actual post-9/11 world, as opposed to the fanciful world of the opposition politician, present a rather narrow range of acceptable alternatives.

    Among them: reviving the tradition of military tribunals, used historically by George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Winfield Scott, Abraham Lincoln, Arthur MacArthur and Franklin Roosevelt. And inventing Guantanamo — accessible, secure, offshore and nicely symbolic (the tradition of island exile for those outside the pale of civilization is a venerable one) — a quite brilliant choice for the placement of terrorists, some of whom, the Bush administration immediately understood, would have to be detained without trial in a war that could be endless.

    The genius of democracy is that the rotation of power forces the opposition to come to its senses when it takes over. When the new guys, brought to power by popular will, then adopt the policies of the old guys, a national consensus is forged and a new legitimacy established.

    That’s happening before our eyes. The Bush policies in the war on terror won’t have to await vindication by historians. Obama is doing it day by day. His denials mean nothing. Look at his deeds.

    Bush in Albania 2007 – Cheering in Fushe Kruja http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKDdF6vfjoo
    10th June 2007
    A historic date for all Albanians

    President Bush is given a hero’s welcome in Albania. This is the first visit ever of a serving president of USA to visit Albania and will be remembered long time, even though it only lasted eight hours.

    Albania is the only country where no one has seen any protests against USA or the President. Some even say the Albanians are the most proamerican people on the planet. This is not a hoax. This is a real deal and there is a reason for it.

    Why Albanians love Americans? Simply because americans are a freedom loving people and they showed this love in practice many times in the history of Albanians (and other small nations) by defending the Albania’s right to exists as a state despite the appetite of many world powers and neighboring countries to carve and erase the country from the map. e.g. USA’s President Wilson in 1919, at the Paris Peace Conference, was a crucial voice that saved Albania from being ceased as a state. Also in a more recent case, in 1999, it was USA and United Kingdom (leading) that saved kosovar albanians from being extinct by the killing machinery of Serbia. Therefore, the actions of the american people speak very loud about their just intentions towards small nations like Albanians. And remember, Kosovo had no oil worthy of such intervention in 1999! You americans should be proud of your soldiers who risk their own life to bring peace and stability to the world. They need your support!

    Albania as a state had its ups and downs in relations with USA, but after fall of communism in 1990 (something that America and Bush Senior again helped to get rid off), since then, Albania and albanians are back on track to drive forward a lasting relationship with the american people. We urge the american government to be more involved in Albania and Kosovo, to work closely with Albanians and deter potential involvements of radical islamists who may want to exploit new democracies like ours, by offering the very much needed financial incentives, but with a high price in return. We are aware of this, but we need your help!

    Albanians are a nation that will long remember your sincere attitude and support in our cause to freedom and democracy. Albanians stand united with Americans in the War on Terror! If you are told different, don’t believe them! They are all ill wishers and they’ll do anything to convince you otherwise!

    SUPPORT INDEPENDENCE FOR KOSOVA!
    TIME IS NOW!

    http://videoshqip.blogspot.com

    p.s. If you are an american and you ever thought that America should not get involved or intervene in hot spots around the world, we Kosovar albanians are a living proof to show you that such intervention are needed to bring order and democracy in the world. If you think that by turning your back to the sufferings of other people will make your life better, you are terribly wrong and that makes you a bad person. Sooner or later, the global instability is going to effect your home. War is never ok, but we come from there and had it not been for America’s intervention, there would have been hardly anyone to tell you what really happened in Kosova.

    p.p.s. Bush’s wristwatch enigma!
    The saga is now over. The following video proves it, the watch has not been stolen, but President Bush took it off by himself and placed it in his pocket (or as some suggest, handed over to his bodyguard behind, but that’s not relevant now).

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBUJkr
    (or check video responses)

    Ok, the whole situation was humorous but in the end, it has been proven that we do not do such things as lifting presidential watches, lol. God Bless America and Albanians. The warm welcome to President Bush is no doubt addressed to the whole american nation.

  28. 28 Steve Oct 23rd, 2009 at 9:52 pm

    Obama Ignorance Watch: What Do the Joint Chiefs Really Do?

    Obama: “I am absolutely committed to ending the war,” the longtime community organizer declared. “I will call my Joint Chiefs of Staff in and give them a new assignment and that is to end the war.”

    While everyone has focused on the first part of the statement – Obama’s “absolute commitment” to defeat – I want to devote a little attention to the second part, the mechanism whereby Obama will make that defeat a reality. In Obama’s telling, he will call in his Joint Chiefs of Staff and reset their priorities.

    I know Obama is a student of military matters and intellectually voracious, so it is thus rather stunning that he would betray such ignorance regarding the way the military actually functions. In truth, the Joint Chiefs are not part of the chain of command. Indeed, they are specifically by statute not part of the chain of command but instead serve solely in an advisory capacity to the president.

    Surely Obama knows this. Obviously he wouldn’t be seeking the role of Commander-in-Chief without knowing how the job is done. So what follows will be familiar to him, but may be enlightening to the media types who to date have overlooked yet another Obama misstatement.

    In 1986, the Goldwater-Nichols act passed congress, and it reorganized the way the military functions. Its prime goal regarding the Joint Chiefs was to cut down on inter-service rivalries. To give you the hyper-condensed Reader’s Digest version of things (which will still obviously put you several leagues ahead of presumptive-nominee Obama), the intent was that a guy like Norman Schwarzkopf could have command of a theatre without having to repeatedly go hat in hand to the different services. The Joint Chiefs would have a representative from each of the services that could advise the president of their individual service’s insights, but they were specifically cut out of the command loop so that the Schwarzkopf-type could run things efficiently.

    So what is to become of our poor President Obama, barking out orders to his Joint Chiefs only to learn that they don’t carry out orders but just give advice? Will he claim he is powerless to end the war? Or will he eventually figure out that he has to get Odierno or Gates or Petraeus on the phone to make his wishes known?

  29. 29 nicker Oct 23rd, 2009 at 10:50 pm

    The facts stated above are what they are. How you personally “feel” about the war is of little consequence.

    What is often overlooked is the fact that both Bush-the-elder and Bush-the-younger are supporters of “A new world order.” A concept based on UN coordination of Geo-politics.

    Resolution 4114 put that war on the tracks (not “oil” or “revenge”… etc.).
    Bush went to the UN and told them they would become irrelevent if they did not stand behind their chartered resolutions.
    Simply that, and only that, is what “started” the Iraq war.

    All the Liberals need to understand this; The notion that the world could be organized around either a Liege Of Nations, a United Nations, or a Star Trek Federation is a Progressive pipe dream (see Woody Wilson) that’s been propagated by intellectuals for many decades. One that should not…… and with any luck….. will not ever happen. And it lead Bush to take on the Iraq war.

    On the relevance of Politics on this Blog:
    For all those who don’t like politics, you damned well better get used to it if you want to continue riding your scooters in a free society. Freedom doesn’t allow ya to opt out, it requires that you pay attention and participate.

    The lives of the troops that our society has put in harms way require that you participate. THAT is how you support the troops. You do everything to assure that they win. You don’t trivialize their sacrifices by changing you mind in the middle of a war.

    These wars are only battles in WW-II. This clash of civilizations has been going on since the 1970’s. It will continue for a long time. And the less resolve we show now, the long it will continue. WW-III may go on for generations (see Europe’s 100 years war).

    Lastly, why support a President who isn’t an advocate for his own troops. A President who disrespects his troops should be reviled, at least, impeached and removed is more like it.

    -nicker-

  30. 30 nicker Oct 23rd, 2009 at 10:53 pm

    Ooooops……make that
    “…But it lead Bush to take on the Iraq war…”

    Sorry, it’s late and my back hurts.

    -nicker-

  31. 31 A$$HOLE Oct 23rd, 2009 at 11:54 pm

    Nicker,
    Please do not take my discontent with politics in THIS story as being a dislike for politics, nor lack of interest in politics. I am actually very involved and educated in politics, I just think the story that heads this string is not a POLITICAL statement. It is great that people want to argue their sides, and engage in a battle of the wits over politics, as it shows participation, and involvement, but that is not what this pic is about. No one likes war, justified or otherwise. It is completely irrealavant at this point, as to who started it or why. The fact is that we are in, and will remain so for some time to come. I guarantee the young man in this picture, although grief stricken, would go again, and do it all over again, and so would the fallen comrades for whom he grieves. They would stand up, grab their guns and run into harms way all over again. It is fine to disagree with the war, but any action, verbal or otherwise that questins the soldiers mission, and undermines the soldier’s morale is the very definition of treason. TO call the mission that these young men gave their lives for a mistake, or a waste, or pointless is a slap in the face to the soldiers that have to face death every day. To tell them that what they are doing is a mistake, or a waste of time and money undermines their confidence, and puts them more at risk. Once they start to second guess what they are doing, fear starts to sneak in. We should not add more to their plate, merely to argue our political points on a blog. Like I said before, argue all you want about politics. Recite republican, or Democratic, or independant talking points until you are blue in the face. Scream, yell, rant and rave until you feel better, but not about this pic. No matter how you vote, or what you believe, this pic should tear at your heart, and you should be able to feel this young man’s pain. That should make you feel greatful, humbled, and reverent. It should not envoke the need for you to jump up and down and yell I TOLD YOU SO, and start pointing fingers!

  32. 32 Conrad Nicklus Oct 24th, 2009 at 2:14 am

    Chelsey,

    I have a passport, I am not some illegal alien here kiddo. I have friends from ALL OVER THE WORLD and the ONLY ones who dislike Bush are the ones who are not working their ass’ off everyday to make a living. In Fact, the above long paragraph I posted was written by a Professor at Oxford, which if you didn’t know is in England. Also, some very close friends of mine that live part-time in the US do to business, actually tell me what people in Venezuela think about Obama and they say this;
    “Well this Chelsey girl seems to be way stupid and ignorant in here theories. I am not even a US citizen but my family pays a lot of money in Taxes and supports the Republican National Comitee with an open check account. Obama is a saint to the unwilling to work and the liberal hearted main stayers.The man is seen as a joke to us and most others around the World. The only people who DON’T seem him as that are the ones that the propaganda stations put on TV… (for your info that does not include FOX as you stated above) We use our nationalized oil to make money but we hate the socialized way our country works and Obama wants to make America just like that. We live in the US now for safety and comfort not to worry about everything constantly.”
    When I emailed him your idea and such he just called and laughed, didn’t even email me CALLED ME.

    So, as for your basic democrat views. Read all the entries on here againa nd see youa re out numbered. The Democrats have not been brainwashed, they voted on the War just as the Republicans did. Bush could not just say “HEY LETS GO TO WAR”. That is VOTED on sweetheart. Good try though. Go to bed, its late and you probably have a BET parade to attend in the morning or a briefing on the Anti-American Train you so love to belong.

    Conrad Nicklus

  33. 33 BikerMarc Oct 24th, 2009 at 7:28 am

    Hey Cyril, please … Can we stick to Custom Motorcycle News & Updates?

    God Bless Our Troops and let’s support them to the max.

    Do that by helping getting their asses outta there and back home to America.

    Thank you Cyril. We get enough sad military pictures from the mainstream media.

    BikerMarc

  34. 34 Knucklehead1 Oct 24th, 2009 at 12:22 pm

    Jeff and US wrote it all well. I hurt every time I hear or see of a fallen Hero. God bless our troops.

  35. 35 1550tc Oct 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pm

    Can we stick to Custom Motorcycle News & Updates?

    Politics just brings out the best and worse in people!!

    Americans are just so passionate about their politics 🙂

  36. 36 nicker Oct 24th, 2009 at 4:37 pm

    A$$-

    RE:
    “…Please do not take my discontent with politics in THIS story as being a dislike for politic…”

    I think we’re on the same page.

    -nicker-

  37. 37 1550tc Oct 24th, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    Hey guys if your going to do the political grand standing on here, or are going to perform ostentatiously so as to impress an audience or us!

    Please do us a favour and give us the; CliffsNotes or Reader Digest version 🙂

Comments are currently closed.
Crusher
S&S
S&S
Barnett
S&S

Subscribe

Socialize

Facebook Google+ Twitter