Happy Birthday America!

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

[….}

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

It was on this day, 232 years ago. That men decided that freedom was the only way. This post is for them.

A few videos:

A video that tells the story of our National Anthem and how it came to be:

A singing of our National Anthem, that I think is the closest thing to Heavenly Angels singing that we’ll ever get here on Earth:

Another American Classic:

Another one, done, only the way, this man could do it:

Even John Wayne knows:

I posted this, not for some stupid political ploy, not to be clever, but to remind everyone, no matter what your political stripe or conviction or feeling, You are, We are, all Americans. This is our land, and we should, at least once a year, stop and reflect on our freedoms. The freedom to write, the freedom to Pray to whatever God we wish or the freedom to not pray, at all.  The freedom to agree, the freedom of dissent or to disagree, the freedom to assemble or simply the freedom to do nothing at all.

As Always, We remember our soldiers, especially those who have fallen:

One of my favorite songs:

Update: I could not remember the name of this song last night, I remembered the name this morning:

I cannot listen to this without tearing up… it’s tough, even for a guy:

God Bless the United States of America and God Bless and Keep our Soldiers.

More of the Shame of America…

There is a bunch that one could say about this. From what I have read this was covered in a book. But it does strike me as shocking that a Presidential Administration would allow something like this to happen.

What the trainers did not say, and may not have known, was that their chart had been copied verbatim from a 1957 Air Force study of Chinese Communist techniques used during the Korean War to obtain confessions, many of them false, from American prisoners.

The recycled chart is the latest and most vivid evidence of the way Communist interrogation methods that the United States long described as torture became the basis for interrogations both by the military at the base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and by the Central Intelligence Agency.- An Expert Reveals Chinese Origins of Interrogation Techniques at Guantánamo – NYTimes.com

I just have to wonder aloud, I wonder if Neo-Con Michelle Malkin and her stooge Capt. Ed. will try and spin this one and act like there’s nothing wrong with it? When do you finally say, “This is wrong” and disassociate yourself with a Political Party? What does it take? It is to truly wonder.

Others: The Moderate Voice, Firedoglake, KIKO’S HOUSE, The Agitator, The Carpetbagger Report, The Seminal, the talking dog, Matthew Yglesias, cab drollery, On Deadline, Amygdala, The Daily Dish, Balkinization, Washington Monthly, Prairie Weather, LewRockwell.com Blog, Unfogged, The Mahablog, Balloon Juice, Shakesville, ATTACKERMAN and The Political Carnival

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

John Aravosis disrespects our Military……again….

Once again…. John Aravosis, the lefty commie idiot, disrespects our United States Military.

This time, he takes a swipe at John McCain.

Folks, I’m just going to tell it like it is. This is not a attack on John McCain, this is not even about him. This about our Military. The far left, Commie loving, Anti-American, Liberals utterly detest, HATE, and want to destroy our United States Military, all so they can pursue an agenda of Liberal Nationalism, or as it commonly known, Communism.

John, like I said in the comments section of your lame ass fucking Blog, you got one coming from me, you fucking asshole, one fine day, I will be invited to a Blog conference or something, and You’re going to be there. When I see you, there won’t be a thing said, I’m just gonna walk up and dot you in the fucking eye. Just the simple. You have insulted the Military and in doing so, you have insulted ME. Before anyone asks, no, I did not serve, But my family has, and when you insult my family, I tend to get a little pissed off.

My family has served in World War 2 and Vietnam, they served proudly, when their Government asked them to, they did not complain, they went and did what they were told. But yet, you and your commie, liberal, sissy ass, sits back and slams a Vietnam Vet, and tries to belittle his service, that my friend is just fucking inexcusable.

I say, everyone who reads this, head on over to John’s Blog and leave a message, letting him know, what you think about his disrespect of our fine Military. and, flag has blog as objectionable. Maybe, just maybe, he’ll get the message.

Update: and of course, ol’ Pussy boy John Deleted my comments. That’s fine, I don’t care. He’s still got one coming from me, he can bank on that.

Update #2: Ed Morrissey refers to Wesley Clark as “Commander Clueless*snort* Too Funny.

Others:
Right Wing Nut House, TownHall Blog, BLACKFIVE, Ben Smith’s Blogs, The Sundries Shack, michellemalkin.com, Right Wing News, JammieWearingFool, Comments from Left Field and Sister Toldjah

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Bush insiders prove to be hostile witnesses

As if the country needed any further proof that the Bush Administration engaged in unconstitutional, not to mention unlawful, behavior, this little fine nugget of information drops today in the media.

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post reports that the hearing yesterday failed to produce any substantive information, but rather exposed the parties involved for the heartless, condescending, disdainful people that these men really are.

Consider a couple snippets:

Could the president ever be justified in breaking the law? "I’m not going to answer a legal opinion on every imaginable set of facts any human being could think of," Addington growled. Did he consult Congress when interpreting torture laws? "That’s irrelevant," he barked. Would it be legal to torture a detainee’s child? "I’m not here to render legal advice to your committee," he snarled. "You do have attorneys of your own."

[…]

He had the grace of Gollum as he quarreled with his questioners. In response to one of the chairman’s questions, he neither looked up nor spoke before finishing a note he was writing to himself. When Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) questioned his failure to remember conversations about interrogation techniques, he only looked at her and asked: "Is there a question pending, ma’am?" Finally, at the end of the hearing, Addington was asked whether he would meet privately to discuss classified matters. "You have my number," he said. "If you issue a subpoena, we’ll go through this again.

[…]

However, that was just a warm up of things to come, It also become very testy as the hearing went forward:

He sat slouched in his chair, scratching his mustache, as Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Constitution subcommittee, warned about "the unaccountable monarchy" before offering Addington five minutes to make an opening statement. Addington spoke for a minute and 12 seconds — most of which was devoted to correcting two errors in Nadler’s introduction.

"Is that the entirety of your statement?" the chairman asked.

"Yes, thank you," Addington replied. "I’m ready to answer your questions."

He sure was. When John Conyers (D-Mich.) inquired about Addington’s pet legal concept, a "unitary executive theory" that confers extreme powers on the president, Addington dished out disdain.

"I frankly don’t know what you mean by unitary theory," Addington replied.

"Have you ever heard of that theory before?"

"I see it in the newspapers all the time," Addington replied.

"Do you support it?"

"I don’t know what it is."

The usually mild Conyers was angry. "You’re telling me you don’t know what the unitary theory means?"

"I don’t know what you mean by it," Addington answered.

"Do you know what you mean by it?"

"I know exactly what I mean by it."

[….]

Addington’s insolence appeared to embolden another witness, his former administration colleague John Yoo. Yoo took Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) on a semantic spin when asked about whether a torture memo was implemented.

"What do you mean by ‘implemented’?" Yoo asked.

"Mr. Yoo," Ellison pressed, "are you denying knowledge of what the word ‘implement’ means?"

"You’re asking me to define what you mean by the word?"

"No, I’m asking you to define what you mean by the word ‘implement,’ " the exasperated lawmaker clarified.

"It can mean a wide number of things," Yoo demurred.

After several such dances around the questions (whether, for example, the president could order somebody buried alive), Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) offered his grudging respect: "You guys are great on ‘Beat the Clock,’ " he said.

"I don’t play basketball," replied the 41-year-old Yoo.

"That was a game show," Cohen explained.

As you can see, convicting these guys on charges that they broke the law, and violated the Constitution is not going to be an easy task. Because obviously, these guys are not going to cooperate with Congress or with any other sort of criminal investigation. Lew Rockwell, a fellow Libertarian minded person, says, “Maybe now they’ll impeach them”.  Lew, I respect your work and writings, but I highly doubt that the impeachment or any sort of criminal hearings will take place, until after the November election and until the next President is in office.

More Blantant Neo-Conservative Stupidity…

David Brooks proves the depth of his blatant stupidity…

The arguments floating around the op-ed pages and seminar rooms were overwhelmingly against the idea of a surge — a mere 20,000 additional troops would not make a difference. The U.S. presence provoked violence, rather than diminishing it. The more the U.S. did, the less the Iraqis would step up to do. Iraq was in the middle of a civil war, and it was insanity to put American troops in the middle of it.

When President Bush consulted his own generals, the story was much the same. Almost every top general, including Abizaid, Schoomaker and Casey, were against the surge. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was against it, according to recent reports. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki called for a smaller U.S. presence, not a bigger one.

In these circumstances, it’s amazing that George Bush decided on the surge. And looking back, one thing is clear: Every personal trait that led Bush to make a hash of the first years of the war led him to make a successful decision when it came to this crucial call. – The Bush Paradox by DAVID BROOKS (via New York Times)

Here’s the problem with that ol’ Davie Boy. The move to the “surge” was made about 5 years too damn late. Not even to mention the multiple moving of the goal posts for the very reason of this war. This is just another rather lame attempt to justify this unconstitutional war.

Others: Commentary, Martini Revolution, GINA COBB, No More Mister Nice Blog, Daily Pundit, Bark Bark Woof Woof, Betsy’s Page, Connecting.the.Dots and The Mahablog (via Memeorandum)

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Things are changing in Iraq

I apologize for the stoppage of Blogging. But the Tim Russert story kind of jarred me quite a bit. in fact, I had to turn the TV to CNN, I just couldn’t not bear watching the stuff at MSNBC anymore. (Yeah, I know, I fired up John Cole for what he said, there’s a difference between me saying I had to change the channel, and taking a nasty swipe at a dead man.)

However, the world, the news, and life does go on, while I will miss Tim Russert’s show and his style of punditry, I must move on….

It seems that things are changing in Iraq.

The Report from the Washington Post:

The Bush administration’s Iraq policy suffered two major setbacks Friday when Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki publicly rejected key U.S. terms for an ongoing military presence and anti-American Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr called for a new militia offensive against U.S. forces.

During a visit to Jordan, Maliki said negotiations over initial U.S. proposals for bilateral political and military agreements had "reached a dead end." While he said talks would continue, his comments fueled doubts that the pacts could be reached this year, before the Dec. 31 expiration of a United Nations mandate sanctioning the U.S. role in Iraq.

The moves by two of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite leaders underscore how the presence of U.S. troops has become a central issue for Iraqi politicians as they position themselves for provincial elections later this year. Iraqis across the political spectrum have grown intolerant of the U.S. presence, but the dominant Shiite parties — including Maliki’s Dawa party — are especially fearful of an electoral challenge from new, grass-roots groups.

CNN’s Michael Ware, who is in Iraq offers this interesting perspective:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo54NhiyQig&hl=en]

If Ware is even correct and these talks continue to stall, I look for Bush to just pull our troops out and let Iraq go at it alone. I just do not think that Bush is going to dump the Iraq War into the laps of the Democrats. I just do not think that he wants that on his legacy. I could be wrong, but if this is case, I got a sneaking suspicion you will see a unilateral withdrawal of our troops out of Iraq, before Bush leaves office.

More via Memeorandum

SCOTUS says that Guantanamo Bay detainees have habeas corpus rights….

Yes I do know about the big story.

The right is howling about the this ruling being the end of America as we know it. The left is hailing it as a major victory. Bush said he disagreed on the ruling.

I have mixed feelings on it, I seriously doubt that this rule will affect much with the terrorists, which the United States has a watertight case against.

It will affect one’s that the United States does not have a watertight case against.  The United States will not be able to hold anyone, who is merely suspected of terrorism any longer.

Either way, I believe this debate will be raging long after the little man, who started this whole mess, is out of office.

The newest round of Democrat stupidity

Once again, the Liberals are taking McCain out of context.

For once, I agree with Jack Moss, when he says:

On the other hand Obama isn’t going to pull the troops out – no matter what he says – simply for political reasons. He hasn’t got a clue of the Geo/Political ramifications. But he simple won’t pull the troops out simple because “old dog” democrats won’t let him. While Iraq is quickly stabilizing, a withdraw would create expected chaos and there is no way Dems are going to let that happen on their watch.

The rest of what Moss says is pure Republican propaganda. However, his statement on Obama and Iraq is right on.

From the “WTF?!?!?!?!?!?” File……

This is seriously messed up…

Muslim Extremist’s Web Site Stirs Mixed Emotions in Charlotte, N.C. (via FOXNews.com)

 

The Video:

 

In a quiet, upscale neighborhood in Charlotte, N.C., rows of custom-style homes and neatly landscaped lawns represent the American dream.

But one local resident has shattered that image, calling for the death of American troops in Iraq and supporting Al Qaeda through his Web site, which he reportedly runs from his parents’ home.

Samir Khan is the man behind Revolution.Muslimpad.com — a radical Islamic site that praises Usama bin Laden and asks for Allah to “curse more American soldiers.”

The site posts videos of U.S. Humvees being blown up by roadside bombs in Iraq. It aims to inspire young Muslims to wage war against the West.

Terrorism experts say the Web site, written in English, is one of the premiere sites for Western audiences to get access to radical Islamist propaganda.

Khan, 22, declined requests for an interview, even when approached outside his home with cameras rolling. When asked if the messages on his site represent Islam, Khan would say only that “they represent Muslims.”

In an e-mail sent to FOX News, Khan lashed out at the "arrogance" of the media, saying it should focus instead on converting to Islam. "When you go down in to the earth six feet deep, nothing will matter except what Religion you died upon," he wrote.

Following a FOXNews.com report last month profiling his Web site, Khan railed against "the Kuffaar" — non-believers — who wrote the article and affirmed his belief that jihad is "an Islaamic obligation" rooted in Muslim texts.

Words like those stir mixed emotions in Charlotte, among the general public and among the 8,000 Muslims who live there.

Imam Khalil Akbar, a religious leader in Charlotte, condemned Khan’s site, saying its views do not reflect “mainstream Islamic thinking” and do not represent the Muslim community at large.

“I would reject categorically those kinds of encouragements to look up to people like bin Laden,” Akbar said.

Neighbors described Khan — who immigrated to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia when he was 7 years old — as “friendly” and “reserved.” They said he launched his Web site while taking classes at Central Piedmont Community College and selling Cutco knives.

Abdullah Mahmud, an acquaintance of Khan’s who attends the same mosque, the Islamic Center of Greater Charlotte, defended Khan’s viewpoints, saying his anger stems from the United States’ foreign policy and occupation of Iraq.

Mahmoud said the blood-drenched videos Khan shows of U.S. soldiers injured in combat “serve the purpose of making the reality of the Iraqi scene visible to people.”

“Those videos are not much different than videos involving American soldiers targeting Iraqi civilians,” he said. “You have to look at both sides here.”

One of Khan’s neighbors, Ron Williams, also defended Khan’s right to free speech.

“Our actions (in Iraq) were interpreted broadly in the Muslim world as an attack on Islam,” Williams said, “I defend his right to speak out.”

But Jarret Brachman, director of research at West Point’s Center for Combatting Terrorism, said Khan’s call for violence takes his anti-American views one step further.

“To be unhappy with U.S. foreign policy is one thing, but to advocate violence by promoting Al Qaeda is another,” he said.

“This is the most sophisticated and aggressive Web site in English that really puts out bin Laden’s ideology and the message that’s promoted by Al Qaeda,” he added.

Brachman said Khan’s site "raises the threshold for what it means to be a good, pro-Al Qaeda Web site" and is "the best in English."

A graphic prominently displayed on the site shows a picture of Abu Yahya al-Libi, a prominent Al Qaeda spokesman whom Brachman calls “Bin Laden 2.0.”

“He’s the guy poised to take over the movement after bin Laden fades away,” Brachman said. “The fact that Khan would display him like he does means he’s trying not only to show he’s an insider, but also to model himself after him.”

The exact dangers his site poses are difficult to assess, experts said.

“It doesn’t necessarily move someone to action immediately, but it primes the pump,” Brachman said. “It gets somebody motivated to think more about Al Qaeda and so over the long term this is a very threatening message that he’s promoting.”

This is so screwed up, it’s not even funny.I know what I’m thinking, but because I don’t want to go to jail. I shall refrain from posting it here…