Short takes is Freedom Fighter's way of cramming a lot into a small space..kind of like the young gentleman above. Here's a brief rundown of some of today's items of interest for Joshua's Army:Happy 60th birthday, Israel — well done for surviving by Melanie Phillips - The one and only Mel pens a poignant birthday note to Israel.
What is George Bush Doing in Lebanon? ZILCH to Stop Hezbollahstan Debbie Schlussel looks at the pending Hezbollah takeover of Lebanon and finds the Bush Administration's response lacking.
Getting To Know John McCain KarlRove gives us some little known background on the senator.
Israel Matzav: If the US and Israel have elections at the same time Carl In Jerusalem speculates on possible outcomes in Israeli politics with either an Obama or McCain presidency.
Obama Won't Rule Out Easing Clinton Campaign Debt - The Caucus In the end, it all comes down to money with these people, doesn't it?
Israel@60
A great seminar on the topic in the national Review,featuring Caroline Glick, Anne Bayefsky, Tom Gross, Daniel Pipes, and Meyrav Wurmser.
All Things Beautiful; We Are All Jews Now The Baroness returns ( for the first time in months) with an essay on the truism that an attack on jews i sgenerally anatack on western civilization.
Enjoy!
Josh,
ReplyDeleteClinton is blackmailing Obama to leave the race and stop race-bating elements of the bigoted American electorate.
Can't you read between the lines, old boy, or didn't you get that far in right wing propaganda school?
You probably think Rev. Wright's accusation about the U.S. Gov't, under your heroes Reagan and Bush, smuggling in cocaine to fund the Contras is "outrageous" and "offensive". But what you should be asking yourself: Does that mean it's untrue?
Hello Anonymous, thanks for dropping by.
ReplyDeleteActually,it's a toss up as far as who first played the race card, Obama or the Clintons. That's generally what happens when you have a party as dependent on grievance mongering and identity politics as today's Democrats, and different pols try to set one group against another for their own purposes...only in this case,as I've pointed out before, it wasn't so much blacks and whites as blacks and Hispanics.
By the way, if we accept what you're saying,that Hillary
is able to 'blackmail' Obama, it's a tacit admission on your part that a substantial part of the Democratic party is a fairly racist enterprise. Now I certainly wouldn't have written that myself, but I will say that it appears that the primary has indeed revealed certain..um...attitudes...more in Obama's camp than Hillary's I think but I digress.
Can't have it both ways,anonymous.
And by the way, speaking of propaganda - I'm aware that certain racist nutjobs like Jeremiah Wright still cling to the tired story about the guv'mint infecting black folks with AIDS and importing crack wholesale into the ghetto.
You should know that the paper that first printed that nonsense,the San Jose Mercury, totally recanted that ridiculous story,and the reporter involved was f-i-r-e-d.
And even it itwere true(and it isn't), I'd love to see som eevidence on your part that the evil guv'mint put a gun to people's heads and MADE them buy the stuff and light up those crackpipes.
You see, Anonymous,people like you and Jeremiah Wright actually have a much lower opinion Of black folks than I do.
To you and he,enough of them are essentially stupid enough to let other people control them and make those choices for them.
Now in his case, he's making money preaching this garbage and dissing his own people. What's your excuse?
Thanks for dropping by.
ff
Dear Josh,
ReplyDeleteI hope you're a real "freedom fighter" who's more into intellectual honesty and the pursuit of the unvarnished truth, rather than promoting a largely whitewashed ideological viewpoint.
For over 20 years, the MSM's has lacked the spine and courage to do its due diligence on this sensitive topic of official complicity in 80s-era narco-trafficking of coke into the U.S.
After checking the facts for yourself, perhaps you'll show your commitment to the truth by posting this subject under its own blog heading.
There's tons of official, slamdunk proof that Uncle Sam aided and abetted the narco-trafficking of cocaine into the United States in the 1980s--despite the denials to the contrary.
Google:
1) Paragraph 623 of CIA Inspector General Hitz report to Congress.
2) The "Oliver North" file at GWU's
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB113/index.htm
3) The Kerry Committee investigation
4) The curious memorandum of understanding between then-AG William French-Smith and then-CIA Director William Colby.
5) Lt. Col. Oliver North's own declassified notebooks at GWU's "National Security Arcive"
6) DATELINE television report, largely confirming journalist Gary Webb's Contra-CIA-Cocaine stories for San Jose Mercury News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyLJtkxPC6I&feature=related
7) Lastly, check "You Tube's" 60 MINTUES PIECE WITH FORMER DEA OFFICIAL.
Hello again, 'Anonymous'
ReplyDeleteSince you failed to address them, I'll take it that we can consider these points I made a given:
a)That you're admitting that a large part of the Democrat party is promulgated on identity politics and grievance mongering.
b)That both of the Democrat front runners were more than willing to play the race card and set different groups against each other regardless of the consequences for the country.(and these are the sort of people you want running the US??)
As for your final point, I've seen some of these sources, and frankly I consider them dubious...to say the least.
`Aiding and Abetting' is a legal term that has a specific definition in that context, and I respectfully
suggest that you consult that definition.
There's a HUGE difference between a few of the contras (who were in a life and death struggle with a communist tyranny) going over the line and taking advantage of transport to clandestinely slip a few loads of Inca marching powder into the US to fund their war and asserting that this was an ongoing program with full government knowledge and approval.It wasn't.
That's specifically why the so-called Kerry committee and all of the other ridiculous investigations launched by a hostile Democrat congress against a sitting Republican president and his administration turned out to be nothing more than time wasting, headline seeking hogwash.
And that's why the San Jose Mercury recanted the story and fired the reporter involved. Lying in print can be costly.
By the way, I do take a particular offense to your mentioning Colonel Oliver North in this context.
Putting aside the leetle fact that Colonel North has spent a good part of his life serving his country with distinction and putting himself in harm's way so that you and I can be free to shoot our mouths off,and putting aside what I know of him personally and by repute, there's the little fact that he was tried on these charges and ACQUITTED.I assume you're familiar with the Constitution and what it says about double jeopardy.
Your mention of him in this context constitutes slander..and I won't tolerate it,particularly from someone who's anonymous.
Lastly-and here's another major point you failed to address-can you provide me with any evidence on your part that the evil guv'mint put a gun to people's heads and MADE them buy the stuff and light up those crackpipes?
As I said, I have a much higher opinion of black folks than you and Jeremiah Wright do, since I assume they're just as smart as anyone else and can make intelligent choices for themselves...especially when the grievance mongers and race pimps aren't confusing the issue for their own enrichment and aggrandizement.
Cordially,
ff
Dear Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI imagine you're watching this space to see if I'm going to run your reply.
I won't - you'll recall you were warned about slander.
Also, your comment basically consisted of a cut n' paste from wikipedia, where any idiot can write or edit an entry. And this one in particular followed the proud Wiki tradition of presenting opinion and ad hominum attacks as fact...so much for your remarks about accurate sources! Moreover, you plagerized the material, presenting it as your own work without identifying the source, which is another reason I refused to print it.
Having played this game before, it took me all of two minutes to find it.
However, just to end this, I'll address some of the points you raised.
You're totally correct that just putting on the uniform doesn't exempt someone from criticism, or even an admirable person. Benedict Arnold, you'll recall, was a war hero. And did you know John Kerry served in Vietnam?
However, in Colonel North's case, as I said, what I know of him personally and by repute is almost entirely admirable. I also find your claim interesting that he enjoys a poor reputation among the military. I get a lot of military readers, both active and retired and you are the first one I've heard whom was other than complimentary when his name came up.
I will fully agree with you that Colonel North cut some corners in circumventing the Boland Amendment. However, as we both know, the Boland Amendment was an illegal and unconstitutional infringement of executive power as outlined in the Constitution. The proper thing to do would have been to challenge it in court ( which is what I probably would have done), but time being of the essence, another course was chosen.
As you freely admit - or rather, as wikipedia admits - North's 'conviction' for shredding documents and for taking an illegal gratuity (those infamous snow tires!!)was reversed by the same judge that originally 'convicted' North,because of the obvious violation of Constitutional law.
It's one thing when a higher court reverses a judicial decision, but You KNOW it's the big stupid when a judge has to reverse himself on such obvious stupidity. So I was correct - no conviction.
As for Colonel North's supposed involvement in drug trafficking aside from a few OPINIONS presented in places like the Columbia Law Review ( now there's an unbiased source) you have nothing but anecdotal evidence for your conclusion.
Zip. Nada. Nil.
I also notice that you once again failed to address this one major point:
Even if you were right about Colonel North and the CIA smuggling cocaine into the US on an organized basis,can you provide me with any evidence on your part that the evil guv'mint put a gun to people's heads and MADE them buy the stuff and light up those crackpipes?
Ah, well.
The original discussion we started with concerned the race card being played in the Democrat contest between Obama and Hillary.
I can appreciate that why you chose to get off that one so quickly and to fixate on Jeremiah Wright and your opinion that he was correct on the urban myth of the evil guv'mint pushing crack on helpless people who of course, had to take it.
You're entitled to your opnions - just not your own facts.
Regards,
ff