Harry Reid and Lindsey Graham want to do something about Quran Burning

Harry Reid and RINO Lindsey Graham are feeling compelled to do something about Quran burning in America. Both were on with CBS Face The Nation and they expressed their concern to Bob Schieffer. First up Harry Reid.

Politico: "Ten to 20 people have been killed," Reid said on "Face the Nation," but refused to say flat-out that the Senate would pass a resolution condemning pastor Terry Jones.

"We’ll take a look at this of course...as to whether we need hearings or not, I don’t know," he added.

Not to be outdone with showing concern, RINO Graham had this jaw dropper.

Let us first keep in mind that both of these bozos are completely incapable of resolving America's most pressing issues like our $14 trillion worth of debt, three wars and an economy that is being propped up with funny money. The idea that they can add more to their plate is beyond absurd.

Even if these two clowns were somehow able to solves those pressing issues, exactly what kind of action are they talking about? Graham's ‘Freedom of speech is a great idea but we're at war" line should chill us all to the bone. Is Graham suggesting that under certain circumstances Congress will just curtail one of our most important inalienable rights?

The other thing we should talk about is appeasement. While Reid and Graham believe they are doing the noble thing by standing against religious hate speech, they don't seem to realize that in doing so they are trying to appease a violent culture. If those Afghanis did not go on a murdering rampage, would Graham or Reid even be concerned?

Burning a Quran in America might be an ugly thing to do, but it is a Constitutionally protected thing to do. Just because it drives people on the other side of the globe to murder, doesn't mean we should change our way of life. Heck, what happens when these lunatics start cutting up because our women won't wear the burka, would Reid and Graham look into that too?

The better thing to do would be to tell the entire Middle East to grow up already! That's right, grow up! This is 2011 and cutting off heads, stoning women, and murdering people you disagree with is both primitive and barbaric. There is just no need for Western civilization to appease such evil behavior.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico
Via: Breitbart TV

Barbarism! Afghans kill 12 at UN compound over Florida Koran burning

The New York Times: MAZAR-I-SHARIF, Afghanistan — Stirred up by three angry mullahs who urged them to avenge the burning of a Koran at a Florida church, thousands of protesters on Friday overran the compound of the United Nations in this northern Afghan city, killing at least 12 people, Afghan and United Nations officials said.

The dead included at least seven United Nations workers — four Nepalese guards and three Europeans from Romania, Sweden and Norway — according to United Nations officials in New York. One was a woman. Early reports, later denied by Afghan officials, said that at least two of the dead had been beheaded. Five Afghans were also killed. [...]

Unable to find Americans on whom to vent their anger, the mob turned instead on the next-best symbol of Western intrusion — the nearby United Nations headquarters. “Some of our colleagues were just hunted down,” said a spokesman for the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, Kieran Dwyer, in confirming the attack. [MORE]

There is only one word to describe this and the word is barbarism! As expected some on the left are blaming that crazy pastor Terry Jones for provoking this.

Absolute nonsense!

Whatever you want to think about the crazy Koran burning pastor, in America he was well within his free speech rights doing what he did. There is no difference between his Koran burning sideshow and some hack artist making feces smeared pictures of the Virgin Mary. Both seek the limelight by shocking and offending.

What is different between Jones and the hack artist are the people they offended. For the hack artist, he only offended a bunch of passive Christians who only fume, fuss and boycott. Terry Jones on the other hand, offended a group that has long ago embraced a culture of death and intolerance, and they act out on both with alarming regularity.

Many in Western civilization want to put on their moral equivalence glasses and see Islam as no better or worse than Christianity or Judaism. This my friends is nothing but wishful thinking taken to the nth degree. Pick up a newspaper on almost any given day and somewhere in the world Muslims are killing each other or someone they disagree with, all in the name of Islam. Even their women and children have embraced a culture of death.

When I think of all the national treasure we spend to give the Afghans a shot at freedom and then read about these killings, I cannot help but feel we have completely wasted efforts. How can true democracy with and passion for individual freedom ever take hold in a place like that? Methinks not.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The New York Times
Via: Jewish World Review
Via: YouTube
Via: National Geographic

General David Patraeus to leave Afghan command?

According to Times of London and The Washington Post, David Patraeus will be replaced in Afghanistan.

RT:The Times of London is reporting from exclusive sources that General David Petraeus, the commander of the US-led international coalition in Afghanistan, is to be replaced.

“General David Petraeus, the most celebrated American soldier of his generation, is to leave his post as commander of US and Nato forces in Afghanistan. The Times can reveal that the Pentagon aims to replace General Petraeus, who was appointed less than eight months ago, by the end of the year. Sources have confirmed that the search for a new commander in Kabul is under way,” reported The Times.

The report said the US is seeking sweeping changes of top US leadership in Afghanistan with the aim of establishing a view the efforts were not dependent on Petraeus’ reputation. The goal is to replace him by the end of the year.

The reason for the shake up appears to be that the administration wants to try a political solution in Afghanistan. 

Reuters: Petraeus has been a towering figure in Washington and difficult to challenge politically. He had what was seen in the United States as a good track record in Iraq. And he was backed by Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — making it very hard for those within the U.S. administration who disagreed with his assessment to win President Barack Obama over to their point of view. 

Moreover, Obama had already sacked two generals — Generals David McKiernan and Stanley McChrystal — and could hardly dismiss a third. (If I remember rightly — and no doubt someone will correct me if I am wrong — no president since Abraham Lincoln has changed his generals so frequently in wartime.) Promoting Petraeus would be far easier.

His departure, especially with Gates on his way out, could create the space for Obama to recalibrate Afghan strategy, backing away from the military surge and focusing more on a political settlement - if he wants to do so.

Two quick thoughts here. First, Obama seeking a political solution in Afghanistan is no surprise.  Getting Afghanistan off the table before election will help his chances and certainly appease his base.  Second, if this report is true, the "Patraeus 2012" talk will start hitting high volume.

I am not sure where I stand on a President Patraeus.  We know he is a Republican, but is he the hard nose fiscal conservative the country desperately needs?  I simply don't know.  I would image as a general in the US military, his executive skills are beyond reproach. I do worry about how he handles himself politically.  The 2012 battle will not be for amateurs. 

Via: Memeorandum

Via: RT

Via: Reuters

Embarrassing: Peace talks with Taliban imposter

The New York Times: KABUL, Afghanistan — For months, the secret talks unfolding between Taliban and Afghan leaders to end the war appeared to be showing promise, if only because of the appearance of a certain insurgent leader at one end of the table: Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansour, one of the most senior commanders in the Taliban movement.

But now, it turns out, Mr. Mansour was apparently not Mr. Mansour at all. In an episode that could have been lifted from a spy novel, United States and Afghan officials now say the Afghan man was an impostor, and high-level discussions conducted with the assistance ofNATO appear to have achieved little.

“It’s not him,” said a Western diplomat in Kabul intimately involved in the discussions. “And we gave him a lot of money.”

American officials confirmed Monday that they had given up hope that the Afghan was Mr. Mansour, or even a member of the Taliban leadership.

NATO and Afghan officials said they held three meetings with the man, who traveled from in Pakistan, where Taliban leaders have taken refuge.

The fake Taliban leader even met with President Hamid Karzai, having been flown to Kabul on a NATO aircraft and ushered into the presidential palace, officials said. [MORE] 

Try as I could, I never understood the logic of negotiating with the Taliban.  It isn’t like the Taliban is an official nation, with an official leadership.  I think the reason why this happened was twofold. First, I don’t think the Bush administration thought this whole thing through. While talking out the Taliban was the right thing to do, I don’t think the Bush administration thought about what to do after the Taliban was removed. This mistake was further enhanced by the Obama administration’s political need to please the left’s desire to cut and run.

I can only imagine how ridiculous the west must look to the Taliban after this.  Considering how much money this guy got away with, I would not be the least bit surprise if someone tries to punk us again.

How embarrassing!

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The New York Times

Bob Woodward’s book “Obama’s Wars”

Bob Woodward’s newest book “Obama’s Wars” is out and already causing much buzz.  From the title one would imagine that the two wars that Woodward is referring to is Afghanistan and Iraq.  However, from the excerpts I think he means Afghanistan and Obama’s own struggles with his military leaders.

Here is an example of what I mean:

President Obama urgently looked for a way out of the war in Afghanistan last year, repeatedly pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan that they never gave him, according to secret meeting notes and documents cited in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward.

Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page "terms sheet" that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in "Obama's Wars," to be released on Monday.

The idea of Obama, a complete military neophyte, crafting his own Afghanistan strategy against the advice of experienced military leaders is pretty darn scary.  However and excerpt is even scarier. 

Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said, "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger."

We can absorb a terrorist attack? I don’t know about you all, but that sounds like a defeatist attitude.  As someone who witness 9/11 with my own eyes, I could never accept the concept of America "absorbing a terrorist attack".

Woodward’s book goes on to describe the infighting within the administration and with the military brass.  The quotes from the book, seems to explain to me why there was so much dithering on the Afghan strategy.  Obama was basically rejecting everything he was told and trying to force his own way.  Given how things have turned out with the economy and the rest of the administration’s endeavors, I no longer have much confidence in a success with Afghanistan.

Click over to the Washington Post to check out the rest of the excerpts.  There are quite a few there.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The Washington Post

Full Video: Obama speech from his surprise visit to Afghanistan

Obama made a surprise visit to Afghanistan yesterday. He went there to deliver sharp criticism to President Harmid Karzai regarding corruption in the Afghan government. In addition to meeting with Karzai, Obama took time to meet with our troops. Below is the speech he delivered to them.

NOTES:

I have to give the devil his due, Obama has the right look and set the proper tone for meeting with the troops. Dare I say it was a little Bush-like?  Perhaps Palin’s taunts about Obama being a law professor at the lectern struck a nerve?

I tried to watch the video from the point of view of someone serving in Afghanistan. From this perspective, I find no faults with the speech. Obama was did what a good Commander In Chief should do and that is motivate the troops. You will note that Obama is not using the Teleprompter and instead read notes with his “homey” voice. I found this to be the perfect fit. After all he is speaking to the troops, the glossy rhetoric of Hope and Change would be most in appropriate for people who risk their lives daily.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The New York Times

Via: The Right Scoop

Video: Patrick Kennedy has a Howard Dean meltdown on the House floor

Watch CBS News Videos Online

In case you all missed this one tonight, here is retiring House Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) having a Howard Dean moment on the House floor. What caused Patrick to loose it? 

From Sister Toldjah: The resolution in question is one sponsored by anti-war radical Rep. Dennis Kucinich in which the President would have to withdraw troops from Afghanistan within 30 days if “safety issues” were involved. Yeah, I know – but remember, this is Dennis Kucinich we’re talking about here. 

I know I shouldn’t ask, but do you think Patrick is hittin’ the sauce again? I know, bad Cliff, bad, bad, Cliff.

Via: Sister Toldjah

Via: The New York Post