Monday, June 26, 2006


Another Example of a Democrat Taking Talking Points from Osama

via Drudge and the South Florida Sun-Sentinel (I read it for the coverage of the Dolphins).

John Murtha (D-PA) reportedly said the following to a group at Florida International University on 25 Jun:

American presence in Iraq is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran, U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said to a crowd of more than 200 in North Miami Saturday afternoon

Now where have I heard that before? Oh, yeah. From a 1998 interview with reporter John Miller, Osama bin Ladin said:

"We believe that the biggest thieves in the world and the terrorists are the Americans."

But Mr. Murtha wasn't done.

He said the more than 100,000 troops in Iraq should be pulled out immediately, and deployed to peripheral countries like Kuwait."We do not want permanent bases in Iraq," Murtha told the audience. "We want as many Americans out of there as possible."

He must have been reviewing the interview:

"After leaving Afghanistan, the Muslim fighters headed for Somalia and prepared for a long battle, thinking that the Americans were like the Russians," bin Laden said. "The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat. And America forgot all the hoopla and media propaganda ... about being the world leader and the leader of the New World Order, and after a few blows they forgot about this title and left, dragging their corpses and their shameful defeat."

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. In Mr. Murtha's case, some sooner than others.

UPDATE: Some commenters over at Wizbang are questioning what Mr. Murtha may actually have said because the paragraph is not a direct quote. I wrote the author of the article (Elizabeth Baier) to see if she can clarify exactly what Mr. Murtha said.

I'm not holding my breath for a response or anything.


This is not going to end well...

From Fox News:

Israel Threatens Palestinian Militants Over Captured Soldier

Anyone want to take bets on the likelihood that the Red Cross or Amnesty International will ask Hamas if they can inspect the conditions in which Cpl Gilad Shalit is being held?

Free Gilad.

Sunday, June 25, 2006


The Definition of Atrocity - Part II: The Russians

Michele Malkin, LGF, and Jihad Watch are covering the beheading of Russian diplomats that were kidnapped in Iraq.

This situation once again depicts the difference between the US and its enemies:

When a US soldier is suspected of committing a crime, we investigate and prosecute if necessary.

When a terrorist commits a crime, they justify it by a) quoting verses from the Koran, and b) blaming the victims.

And, yet, (heh) major (heh) newspapers disclose classified progams and plans that are part of our fight against these bloodthirsty primitives. To them I ask: Which side are you on?

On another topic.

I continue to hold out hope that the quick operations and timely recovery of the bodies of the 2 recently kidnapped American soldiers prevented these barbarians from producing a similar video.


The Definition of Treason: Part III

Parts I and II are now yesterday's news.

Part III involves, yet again, the revelation of classified material by a (heh) major (heh) newspaper (which shall remain namelss here).

Pronunciation: 'trE-z&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tresoun, from Old French traison, from Latin tradition-, traditio act of handing over, from tradere to hand over, betray
1 : the betrayal of a trust : TREACHERY 2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

Definition #1 might not even fit. At this point, does anyone really trust a major newspaper with anything (other than, perhaps, the New York Sun)?

But is it prosecutable under the Constitutional definition of treason?

Article III.
Section. 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

This FindLaw entry leads me to say, "No". It appears that Supreme Court precendent has established that there must be 2 elements to the crime (beyone the requirement for witnesses): 1) an overt act , and 2) the intent to overthrow the government. While the revealing of classified information is an overt act, it would appear that the unnamed newspaper's intent was to overthrow the current administration (despite their claims that it was "in the public interest"). I believe this pattern could be easily proven in court. And unless you buy into the fact that the President is the state ("l'etat, cest moi"), then the second element of the crime would be very hard to prove.

However, this would be much easier to prove. From the US Code, Title 50, Chapter 36, Section 1861 on the FBI's request for access to business information:

Section 1861(d): Nondisclosure. No person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section.

And for those who think that this may give the FBI too much freedom, the Congressional Oversight section immediately follows this one.


Football vs. Futbol

Well, the world cup is over for the US. They went out with a whimper, not a bang. You can criticize the players for not showing energy. You can criticize the referees for some questionable calls. The most criticism, in my book, goes to Bruce Arena who stuck with a lackluster line-up for far too long. Jim Litke of the AP agrees.

I disagree with his analogy, however. He compared the penalty kick to a free throw. It's worse than that. Free throws sometimes account for half of the shots taken in a basketball game. Unless they happen with 1.9 seconds left (think Dwayne Wade in Game 5), they're not going to have a major impact on the flow of the game.

The players for Ghana were flopping all over the field. There were at least 2 occasions when the ref could have given a yellow card for deliberately taking a dive. The penalty on Onyewu that drew the PK is akin to Michael Irvin drawing a pass interference penalty in the end zone. It gives you 4 chances from the 1 yard line, and you are pretty sure to score. It also deflates a defense that may have, up to that point, shut out an offense. It is one game-changing mistake that is hard to overcome.

So, the US will drop out of the top 10 in world rankings (being #5 was a stretch anyway). There will be a big turn-over in players for the next World Cup drive. And it's not even for sure that we'll qualify.

Bruce Arena is a great coach. But, he had his shot. I think it's time to start fresh with a new round of players.

Anyone know if Freddie Adu has become a US citizen yet?

Wednesday, June 21, 2006


Shameless Plug for the Carnival of the NFL

Pick me! Pick me!

I have a very large interest in political subjects, but the Carnival of the NFL would allow me to express my NFL fan-dom in an a-political environment.

1) Because I'm in the Army and deployed, the NFL has gone beyond an obsession to almost a religion.
2) I've been a Dolphins fan since the David Woodley years. That's dedication. I stayed up until 3AM watching Dolphins games on the Armed Forces Network.
3) I have spent entire weekends watching the NFL Draft.
4) I work in an office with a Redskins fan, a Cowboys fan, a Raiders fan, a Seahawks fan, a "Why, Edgerrin? Why?" Colts fan, and a cousin of the Cheifs' kicker (Tynes). There are no shortages of controversies here, and the NFC and AFC are equally represented.
5) I've already pre-ordered Madden 07.
6) By the time the season rolls around, I'll be back in Germany.

1) Yes, I'm new at blogging. But, I'm willing to learn!
2) I'm in the Army and deployed. When all else fails, mission first.
3) I promise I won't only report on the Dolphins (not that the guys in my office would let me). No, really. I promise.

What do you say?


Imagine the windfall for Adidas

The boys at Power Line posted a photo of John Pantsil - the Ghanaian footballer who put an Israeli flag on display after Ghana scored in their game against the Czech Republic.

They also covered the reaction from the Arab news media.

I guess they've lost some Egyptian fans.

Well, if you have stock in Nike, I'd sell before this picture becomes widely known: (via Drudge)

It's a reference to the English flag. Or, more accurately, the flag of St. George. It's the one that Christians fought under during the Crusades. There was also a local ban on displaying the flag related to the World Cup.

Do you think Nike may have lost some Arab fans?

Looks like a windfall for Adidas in Arab countries.

UPDATED: That didn't take long. The only surprising thing is that it's Christian groups complaining. At least the Daily Mail gets the Crusader reference.

From the article (via Drudge): The MP for Ealing North added: 'He should go out and wear Adidas instead. It's offensive on so many different levels and extremely nasty.'


NBA Champion: Miami Heat

(via Miami Herald)

Let's Go Heat! (As a Heat fan, I go back to the Rony Seikaly/Glenn Rice days)

It is odd that the definition of Champion doesn't mention winning until the 4th entry:

Pronunciation: 'cham-pE-&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Medieval Latin campion-, campio, of West Germanic origin; akin to Old English cempa warrior
2 : a militant advocate or defender
3 : one that does battle for another's rights or honor
4 : a winner of first prize or first place in competition; also : one who shows marked superiority

Just to spark debate, would you say that they are World Champions?

I would say yes. They are the best in the world at NBA-style basketball (see entry 10 under the definition of world).

I'd love to watch any national team try to defend an NBA team without getting a defensive 3-second call.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?