Nic Robertson is getting pummelled

Michael Reagan joins the criticism of CNN (HT: NewsBusters).

It seems the hurrier they go, the behinder they get!

Related articles:

Hezbollah Whores
I knew I couldn't be the only one
CNN Admits being Hezbollah Puppet


Update:

CNN Reporter exposes Hezbollah's media tricks. If CNN is aware of these tactics - and you know they are - how can they report the way they do with a straight face?

I get the feeling

I'm no expert. I only watch the news and read blogs. So what the heck do I know? But I get the feeling ...

That Israel is finding out that Hezbollah is tougher and more organized than they thought.

That Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran are finding out that Israel is far more serious about this war than they thought.

That the Bush Administration has a better idea of what to do in the Middle East than past administrations from either political party.

That Islamic Terrorist Leaders are getting desperate.

That journalists think Israel is about to give up.

That Israel is in no way about to give up.

Be Wary of Statistics, Very Wary

My 9th grade trigonometry teacher used to tell us that when anyone shares percentage statistics with you, you should always ask, "Percent of what?" She was teaching us to be wary of statistics. They can easily be, and often are, manipulated inappropriately in order to fool you into believing something the presenter wants you to believe.

John Stossel exposes that exact tactic regarding public education studies in this article in the Jewish World Review (HT: Carol Platt Liebau).

Is it redundant to say, "Shame on the New York Times."?

Hooray for Condi!

The only way to ensure peace between warring factions is for one side or the other to be defeated and for the winner to impose terms of surrender upon the loser.

That sounds harsh, I know. And certainly the winners can be beligerent in victory and impose terms so harsh or humiliating as to set the table for future violence. (World War II may have been avoided if the terms following World War I hadn't been so humiliating to Germany.) But what other time in history has peace been established without a clear victory first?

Can't think of any? Me either.

Thankfully, the Bush Administration, unlike past administrations, seems to understand this. Secretary of State, Conoleeza Rice, has resisted the common urge to call for an immediate cease fire between Israel and Hezbollah.

An immediate cease fire would stop Israel from defeating the terrorist thugs that started this current war. It would also allow those same terrorists to regroup and prepare for another wave of violence.

Instead, Rice calls for more comprehensive terms for a cease fire. These terms are apparently unacceptable to Hezbollah. So the fighting continues.

Good. This buys time (and signals U.S. approval) for Israel to continue to take the battle to Hezbollah.

It's about time the U.S. stopped hindering a sovereign nation - an ally of ours - from defending itself from brutal murderers.

Just Move the Israelis to Europe, Right?

Wrong!

Michael Medved has a helpful article on Israel's rightful claim to the land they now call and have always called home. Read it. The Arabs' "historical claim" to the land postdates Israel's by a couple of eras. They didn't conquer the area until about 600 years AFTER the Romans destroyed Jerusalem.

Note the Medved article quotes a Princeton University scholar who in 1946 claimed "There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not."

On the other hand, the mideastweb.org article claims that King Herod used the term "Philistine Syria" to refer to the southern part of Syria. Romans later used the term "Palaestina" which became "Palestine" in English.

Perhaps the Princeton scholar was correct and "Philistine Syria" - Palestine - never was an autonomous country.

But one thing is certain from looking at both these articles. Jewish historical claims to the land go back much further than any Arab claims.

So what does that settle?

Nothing, except that it is ridiculous to claim that the source of the current troubles in the Middle East have anything to do with Israelis migrating to the area after World War II.

I knew I couldn't have been the only one!

In a post last Thursday I railed against CNN for propogandizing for the terrorist group Hezbollah.

It looks like I'm not the only one who noticed.

Newsbusters has an interesting post on the same subject (HT: Carol Platt Liebau). It appears Nic Robertson admits CNN only showed what Hezbollah wanted people to see. And apparently other networks are doing the same thing.

How pathetic!

Nobel Peace Laureate: Killing Protects Life

Betty Williams, Nobel Peace Prize Winner, suggests that to fulfill our duty as humans to protect human life we must sometimes take human life.

I agree with the general premise that sometimes we have to kill the bad guys to keep them from killing the rest of us. It's sad. But it's been proven true throughout the history of mankind.

I part with Williams, however, in that she wants to kill President Bush.

If only those so opposed to America and its current president would have such passion against the terrorists who are ACTUALLY TARGETING INNOCENT CIVILIANS!

Senator Specter Wants to Sue President Bush!

As a staunch supporter of President Bush, I can see why many Republicans would be upset by this proposed legislation (HT: Sweetness & Light) by Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Spector.

But it doesn't really bother me.

I don't have a problem with the various branches of government challenging the authority - or alleged over-stepping of authority - of the other branches of government. That's what checks and balances are all about.

Some people are likely to get in a huff because of the timing. After all, we're in the middle of a war! But it's times like these when the issues of authority are most likely to be tested. What other times are you likely to have the President, the Congress, and the Courts struggling with issues concerning national security?

Besides, I think this particular episode shows the strength of the American experiment. We are confident enough in our present position and in our future that in the middle of World War III we do not shy away from constitutional challenges of authority.

In particular I think this shows the strength of the Republican Party. President Bush campaigned hard for Arlen Specter against the wishes of many conservatives in the Republican Party. Yet Specter still feels free - in his mind, obligated - to pursue such legislation.

Which is the Big Tent Party, again?

We're Killing Iraqi Civilians!

Dan Hallagan aka "Aslan" at Logic Times has a brilliant essay on the subject.

Blogs like Logic Times are the epitome of the value of blogging. Where else can a Fat Man sitting in front of a PC find such excellent commentary?

I only wish "Aslan" would post more often!

Minimum Wage Sense

I always use the following economics 101 arguments when discussing raising the minimum wage:

• At the very least, increased wages will only increase the cost of goods for everyone and therefore negate the intended benefit to those working for minimum wage, which is to increase their purchasing power.
• Some businesses, however, may not have the luxury of simply raising their prices.
• Those businesses will be forced to either stop hiring - definitely a bad thing.
• Or, they will be forced to reduce their profit (I know that's a bad word for some people).
• Some businesses operate on a very thin profit margin. They may actually be forced to close their doors.

But Betsy Newmark has a great post that adds some very good information on the subject. I really hadn't appreciated just who it is, exactly, that works for minimum wage. I guess I just accepted the inference that it was poor people trying to raise a family on low wages.

Maybe, as with most subjects, there's more to it than that.

Horrible Weekend!

I had planned on blogging like crazy this weekend. But unforseen events made that impossible.

I'll be back to full-bore blogging soon! I promise.

CNN's Hezbollah Whores!

CNN EXCLUSIVE!

ONLY ON CNN!

That's the way it was billed Tuesday night, July 18, 2006. As the lead story on CNN's top 3 prime time shows, CNN Senior International Correspondent, Nic Robertson, was given the headline-grabbing lead story for each of the flagship shows.

First, Wolf Blitzer, on The Situation Room gave Robertson's report top billing calling him the bravest and best war correspondent in all of journalism. Immediately following The Situation Room, Paula Zahn, on Paula Zahn Now also gave Robertson's report top billing. Naturally, on the next show, Larry King Live, CNN's Larry King did exactly the same thing.

I fell asleep before I could see Anderson Cooper 360. So I don't know if Anderson Cooper followed suit or not.

So what, exactly, was this ground-breaking scoop that could only be uncovered by CNN?

The report consisted of Nic Robertson following a Lebonese man around a neighborhood in southern Lebanon that had been bombed by Israel. Breathlessly they ran through streets and allies with microphone and camera as the Lebonese man shouted, "Where is the U.N.? Where is the International Community?"

Robertson was quick to remind the man that these were civilian neighborhoods, not military installations as Robertson himself repeated often in his report. A quick aside: How many of us thought Hezbollah was a military establishment? I always thought they were a terrorist group that hid among - that's right - CIVILIANS!

As Robertson credulously pointed out - often - that these were indeed civilian neighborhoods (with fine-print-speak that he hadn't had time to investigate the site himself), the Lebonese man grew ever increaslingly angry at - you guessed it - ISRAEL.

It wasn't until the third or fourth showing of this footage did CNN allow the viewers to see this Lebonese man vowing to fight Israel to the death and that "they" would, "Never give up! Never give up! Never give up!"

For this, Wolfe Blitzer dubbed Nic Robertson the bravest war correspondent on earth.

This same segment was aired again at the top of the Paula Zahn Now show. However, and to her credit, during a live interview with Robertson following the report, Paula Zahn asked Robertson how he could be sure he could trust this Lebonese man as a news source.

... Deer-in-the-Headlights look ...

Nic Robertson finally sputtered on about having seen the rubble himself and not seeing any military equipment. He reminded the viewers of his vast experience with scanning rubble in war zones. But he never answered the question about this Lebonese man. Zahn didn't follow up on it, either.

Next was Larry King Live. Of course Nic Robertson's story of the evil Israelis bombing innocent civilians was again the lead story. As is his M.O., Larry King asked zero probing questions of Robertson.

But then a funny thing happened. Larry King segued into a report by Christiane Amanpour by lauding the efforts of Nic Robertson in his hit piece on Israel. As Amanpour commented on Robertson's report, she let slip an interesting tidbit of information that the viewers had here-to-fore not been informed of - but of course most of us already knew.

This Lebonese man was a Hezbollah Media Representative!

That's right. This "civilian" who was so outraged with Israel's actions is one of Hezbollah's press agents. You remember Hezbollah? Evidently CNN doesn't. They're the ones who attacked Israel and got this whole mess started.

Do you think Hezbollah would like to paint Israel as the bad guys? Of course they would. That's what they've always done. The only thing they need is a willing dupe who will swallow and regurgitate whatever Hezbollah feeds them.

Let's see...

Who could possibly be so easy?

Yes. Of course. CNN!

They've been whores for tyrants and terrorists for decades. They've been so loose with their morals for so long they've reached the place where they can't say no.

No posting today

Covered up at work - aaarrgh!

And I was going to go off on CNN's "Hezbollah Whores", too.

Oh well, I'll get to it tomorrow.

The Greatest Danger to Israel

Jack Kelly argues that the "great danger in the Israeli-Hezbollah war is not that it might escalate, but that it might not."

He makes the point that Israel has a rare opportunity to eliminate Hezbollah. World opinion, he argues, will not be the deterant to Isarael that it has been in the past.

It does seem that, so far, there has been no full-throated opposition to Israel's offensive against Hezbolah.

Carol Platt Liebau Rips the U.N.

Check out Carol's post regarding the United Nations' Human Rights Commission.

Moon the NYT

Don't you sometimes just want to MOON the New York Times?

Day by Day does it with class today!

Israel gets it

Consider what the Iranians are saying about Israel.

Consider what the Iranians are doing to aquire nuclear weapons.

What would you do if you were responsible for the protection of Israeli citizens?

At least the Israeli Air Force Chief Major General, Eliezer Shkedy, understands the nature of the threat. Here is an excerpt from his interview with David Horovitz for the Jerusalem Post (HT: Hugh Hewitt) :

Let's change the subject: What can you tell us about Iran?

There are three indisputable aspects: Their leader, President Ahmadinejad, talks of the Jewish people and the State of Israel in terms that no other world leader would dare use.. You recall his conference on "The world without Zionism." Then he moved onto the Jews, to Israel.

Two, he is trying to develop capabilities to deliver his attacking capabilities - land-to-land missiles with ranges to reach central Europe, Russia, China, India, certainly Israel. Missiles from planes. Planes that can carry this weaponry.

Third, he is trying with all his might to reach a nuclear capability. There's no argument about his intentions. The nature of the centrifuges that he is producing is incontrovertibly not for peaceful purposes.

This combination of thinking, capability of delivery and nuclear weaponry can come to constitute an existential threat to Israel and the rest of the world. It is no coincidence that the president of the US speaks as he does about Iran, and other world leaders do, too. (Emphasis added)


At least Israel understands the threat. I'm convinced the rest of the world does, too. The sad fact is that, even with an understanding of the threat, some supposedly advanced nations refuse to support Israel's right to defend itself.

Thankfully, so far, the United States has stood firm with Israel. I hope we continue to do so regardless of what others might say. We simply cannot allow the desires of Islamic radicals to be fulfilled.

Isn't this what got them in trouble in the first place?

MSM has been framing the news in "how you should feel about this" terms for decades. That's not so much what has gotten them in trouble lately, though. It has much more to do with the fact that what they want us to think is so far removed from what America is all about.

Americans don't mind opinion or emotion when discussing current events. Conservative talk radio is openly biased with opinion and emotion. And it's extremely popular with the public. What Americans do mind, however, is the continual drumbeat of America bashing that has been the main course of traditional journalism for more than a generation.

Americans are proud of who they are and the country they live in and what it stands for. If you continually throw mud at what we believe is the greatest country on the face of the earth you will, in the words of Merle Haggard, get on "The Fightin' Side of Me".

We need more of this, too!

This story reminds me of when presidential candidate Bush was overheard calling someone an a--hole. What could have been embarrassing and hurtful to the campaign turned out to be a refreshing look into the real man. It actually helped.

Straight talk is all too rare in politics. When what is said makes sense, most people aren't offended by the rough language.

By the way, what's up with private conversations taking place in Russia involving U.S. officials finding their way into the public domain?

Not a Good Idea

According to this Townhall article, the U.N. wants to send peace keeping troops to Lebanon.

This is a terrible idea!

It strikes me as outdated policy to try to preserve Hezbollah in Lebanon. Why in the world would anyone want to preserve the status quo where Hezbollah is simply asked to stop shooting at Israel so that Israel can be pressured to stop defending itself?

Rather, now that the blinders are off and the true nature and desire of Islamic Fundamentalists Terrorists groups like Hezbollah and Hamas are clear for all to see, why don't we allow Israel to defend itself fully? Why not allow Israel to completly destroy Hezbollah? Wouldn't that be a sure fire way to stop them from lobbing missles at Israeli civilian targets?

By the way, has anyone noticed that it's Hezbollah that is firing rockets indiscriminantly into civilian areas? Israel, on the other hand, is for the most part hitting legitimate military targets.

The time has come for the enemies of peace to be defeated. They have proven they cannot be negotiated with. They have gotten nearly everything they've ever demanded from Israel. And still they initiate unprovoked attacks. It's no longer a matter of negotiated settlements. Let one or the other side be soundly defeated. Then let the winners determine the terms of peace. Historically, that's the only way peace has ever been established between warring peoples.

We need more of this!

By avoiding the Religious War temptation (see previous post), the Bush Administration hopes to be able to defeat the terrorists while winning the hearts and minds of the Muslem community. A difficult task to say the least! But it may be our only hope.

In an open letter to his "Palestinian Arab Brethren", Youssef M. Ibrahim encourages the Palestinians to lay down their arms and make peace with Israel (HT: Jack Kelly).

Right now violent conflict seems to be escalating in the Middle East. That's understandable - predictable, actually. The Bush doctrine threatens to replace despair and hatred in the region with freedom and opportunity, thereby destroying the very base from which the Islamic Terrorists operate.

Increased violence is a natural consequence. These madmen do not wish to go down at all, much less go down with a whimper. They would rather bring the whole region (world) down with them than allow their people to enjoy freedom and peaceful coexistence with the West.

These are critical times. If the West can maneuver through the coming minefields successfully, the world will see something it has come to believe impossible - Peace in the Middle East. If not, the mess and carnage can hardly be imagined.

The West has done a pretty good job of showing it is not Satan incarnate in the manner in which it has conducted itself so far in the War on Terrorism. Rather, it has shown itself to be compassionate and caring as well as devestatingly effective militarily.

What we need now - what the entire world needs - is for reasonable, moderate Muslems to come forward like Mr. Ibrahim has done concerning the Palestinians. A substantial number of well known, respected Muslems need to speak out publicly in favor of peace and life over death and destruction.

If this happens, I believe we will have reached a critical mass that will result in Islamic Terrorism being rejected overwhelmingly by Muslems worldwide.

Oh, how I pray this comes to pass!

UPDATE: Could Hezbollah's actions against Israel backfire and cause them to lose support in Lebanon?

SDI Will NEVER Work!

Neither would electric light bulbs - until they did work.

If something is worth while, you have to keep working at it until you get it right. It looks like the recent THAAD missle test at the White Sands Missle Range proved we are making progress.

Perhaps one day those currently scoffing at the Strategic Defense Initiative will be eating their words ...

... in the relative comfort and safety afforded them by the successful deployment of an effect missle defense system!

Religous War?

I've heard people say that we (the West) may not be fighting a religious war, but the Islamic Terrorists are. It's hard to argue against that statement. Some advise the West to stop kidding themselves and admit this really is a religious war and fight it accordingly.

Don't embrace that advice too quickly. At the very least, read this article at The American Thinker first.

Religious wars are ugly, very ugly!

And dragging the West into a religious war may be the only chance the Islamic Terrorists have of winning.

Can you believe this guy?!?

Can you believe it? I can.

Jacque Chirac is already condemning Israel for their response to unprovoked acts of war from Hamas and Hezbollah. (HT: Little Green Footballs)

In an earlier post I poked a little fun at Europe for suddenly liking the U.S. once North Korea started testing long range missles. One Salient Oversight took exception in the comments to that post.

Salient, it's things like this stunt pulled by Jacques Chirac that makes Europe in general and France in particular such a favorite target for American ridicule.

UPDATE: Thankfully, it looks like President Bush isn't consulting Chirac regarding Israel!

It's about 1948 not 1967

The current, coordinated attacks on Israel by two of its neighbors has proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the Arab/Islamic world's fight with Israel has nothing to do with occupied territories or the plight of the Palestinian People. It has everhthing to do with Israel's right to exist as a nation on planet Earth.

According to Charles Krauthammer, that's what it's always been about.

The Arab/Islamic world has NEVER recognized Israel's right to exist as a nation. And they have ALWAYS plotted and fought to erase Israel from the face of the earth.

In 1948 Israel became a sovereign nation. Arabs/Islamics have tried ever since to destroy this new nation.

In 1967, in response to attacks from surrounding countries, Israel occupied the Gaza strip and Lebanon. Arabs/Islamics have used these occupations as a propoganda tool against Israel ever since. The West, unfortunately, has been gullible enough to take up this false cause.

Shame on us!

I agree with Michael Medved's articles here and here. We, the United States of America, have put one of our greatest allies, Israel, at great risk by pressuring them to negotiate away their security in hopes their maniacal neighbors would be appeased.

Did I say, Shame on us?

Now that every single occupation issue has been removed from the table (Israel has removed itself completely from all occupied territories), Arabs/Islamics now attack Israel from those very territories.

It is abundantly clear that Israeli occupation of Palestinian and Lebonese territories was never the issue.

Israeli existence is the issue.

That has always been the issue. It's time we realize this and act accordingly.

UPDATE: Betsy Newmark has more here.

UPDATE II: Carol Platt Liebau adds her thoughts here.

Light posting this week

I've been tied up in meetings since yesterday morning and will be for the rest of the week.

Posting will be very light.

To Preempt or Not to Preempt

After 9/11 President Bush took the United States in a new National Defence direction. He boldly and effectively argued that the citizens of the United States should not wait for another devestating attack before we act against those out to destroy us.

America, and the world, responded favorably. After invading Iraq in the first true test of this new policy, the American public was faced with a choice. Should we, as George Bush argued, maintain the policy? Or should we, as argued by John Kerry, withdraw from Iraq and revert to a defensive posture?

America decided to "stay the course" much to the dismay of leftists and liberals worldwide.

The Iraq War is in its final stages. It has been a difficult war, true enough. But if you looked beyond the establishment media you would have learned that the United States and its allies have executed this war quite well, thank you.

However, the media-aided left has relentlessly attacked our war efforts in an attempt to destroy domestic support for the Bush Administration's successful new foreign policy of preemption. And their efforts have had some success.

We now have been faced with a perfect test of our resolve to preempt. North Korea has boldly pronounced its nuclear weapons ambitions and accomplishments and even test fired long range missle systems. Iran is stubbornly pushing its way into the nuclear club as well. There could be no stronger case made for preemptive action! Not to mention Syria continuing to pour terrorists into Iraq to kill our soldiers.

According to Bush's preemption doctrine, the United States could destroy North Korea's missles before they are launched. That would be in line with his publicly stated and acted upon policies. It would no doubt be acceptable to most Americans. Newt Gingrich and others have advised taking this course of action against North Korea.

But George Bush chose not to do this. Why?

Has the left successfully weakened our nation's resolve to the point that we do not have the will to act so forcefully in our own self defense interests?

I wish I could say no. But even though conservatism has been enjoying greater success in America over the past few decades, the left still has lots of weapons with which to fight against a strong, successful America.

It would be foolish to underestimate the power of the press. From the beginning of the campaign in Afghanastan to today, the media has predicted failure, world wide condemnation, and highlighted every stumble no matter how slight.

People grow weary of this. Nobody wants to be told every day, year after year, that their team is losing and everyone hates them. Soon even the most supportive will be ready for it all to be over. With that mood it's hard to gather support for yet another aggressive campaign.

No wonder the Bush Administration has not been more aggresive against North Korea, Iran, and Syria.

But I think this is a mistake.

I think preemption in Iraq has been very effective. The fierceness with which the Islamic terrorists are fighting against the positive changes in Iraq is proof positive. If freedom in Iraq would not be so good for America and so devestating to the terrorists, they would not be wasting their time with it.

The fierceness with which America's other enemy - the left - has fought against this policy of preemption is further proof that the policy is correct. The left has consistently sided with the enemies of America. There is nothing to indicate they've had a change of heart now.

I say press on all the harder regardless of what the left and the media have to say. We're already in the heat of the battle. Why stop now? We're winning for goodness sake! I think the American public could easily get behind a policy that takes out North Korea's missles, destroys Irans ability to develop nuclear weapons, and smacks Syria down for aiding in the deaths of American troops.

The left has only one card to play - "America is bad". There's no way that can compete with "America is Great!"

I think, given a straight forward explanation of the situation, a sizable majority of Americans would gladly support preemptively draining the swamp that breeds the reptiles that seek to do us harm.

Preempt already!

Gingrich in '08 ?

Gingrich for President in 2008? I hadn't thought about it until I read Mary Katherin Ham's article at Townhall.com.

Hmmm...

Prove America is Great and Honorable

The United States of America is, in my opinion, the greatest country in the world. It is full of genuinely good people. I see them everywhere I go. Down to earth, honest to goodness gentle, loving people who are kind to one another, helpful and caring to the core of their being.

The great freedoms and success enjoyed by the citizens of the United States of America are not what caused this country to be so full of such good people. It's the other way around. We are great as a nation, and we enjoy such freedom and success because of the good people of this country.

It's not that this great country attracts good people, even though this is true. Rather, it's that good people keep this country on the right track.

But with all this goodness and freedom, it is also true that there are evil people in this country. There are heinous crimes committed all the time, gruesome murders that defy comprehension.

Thankfully, these crimes are the exception and not the norm. People wouldn't be flocking to this country from all over the world if brutal murders were a common, accepted part of American life.

We also have the greatest military in the world, perhaps the greatest military that has ever existed. Is there any that can withstand its might? And with all this dominant power our military conducts itself with unprecedented honor and humaneness. Ours goes out of its way more than any other military in history to avoid killing innocent civilians. We design our weapons and our tactics with this ideal as one of our top priorities.

What other military can legitimately make this claim?

Even while fighting an enemy that hides itself among civilians and actually targets civilians, we stay true to this lofty and honorable ideal. Again I ask, what other country or military can compare to this?

But just like our general population full of genuinely good people, our military population is bound to have a very small percentage of evil people. Certainly there are those in the military who, without any moral compass or guiding goodness, would commit brutal crimes against humanity.

So it is no surprise that in open warfare there will be occasions where genuinely evil people mixed in with the population of genuinely good military personnel will commit horrible crimes hoping the fog of war will provide them cover - especially in urban warfare where battles rage in the midst of civilian populations.

But the fact that it is understandable on a statistical level makes in no more acceptable on any level.

Reading the story on Townhall.com about the arrest of U.S. Soldiers for the rape and murder of an Iraqi girl and the murder of her mother, father, and little sister sickens me more than I know how to describe.

What kind of sick, twisted mind would premeditate this crime? What kind of sick, twisted mind would go along with a freak who suggested such a thing? Perhaps everything that happened wasn't premeditated. Maybe they didn't intend to murder from the beginning. But apparently they intended to rape from the beginning! And only a sick, twisted (have I said that enough?) mind would allow itself to go so out of control as these men allegedly did.

Now, there have been other claims of brutality on the part of the U.S. during this war. But usually those claims prove to be either entirely false or laughably overstated. But something in my gut tells me this one may be true.

I hope I'm wrong. I will not try to consider these soldiers innocent until proven guilty. I actually WILL consider them innocent until they have been proven guilty. They deserve that. We all deserve that.

But if this IS true, I hope the punishment is very extreme and very public. I hope the President addresses this particular case publicly, emotionally, and forcefully. It cannot be ignored by the administration or swept aside with token attention.

We are the greatest country in the world. We have the greatest military in the world. We are a force for good in the world. This case damages our country in the eyes of the world and in the hearts of our very own citizens.

And it should.

The burden we now have is to prove that we still are the greatest country in the world. We have to prove that this crime is not acceptable to the United States of America. We have to prove to the world that we are different. It has to be clear to everyone at the end of the day that in the United States of America this kind of behavior is abhorent, unusual, and despicable.

Our enemies will be using this incident, proven or not, to paint all of America as brutal murderers. We will be described as unholy imperialists trying to take the world over by force.

I encourage everyone to consider a few things when listening to such garbage:

What does your heart tell you? Does it tell you that America is an evil regime? A danger to the rest of the world? Or, generally, does America try to do good in the world?

Has your experience in the United States been one of brutality on a regular basis? Or, like me, would you have to say that nearly everyone you know is a genuinely good person and you feel unusually blessed to be lucky enough to live here?

What does it tell you about someone who would take an isolated instance of pure evil and use it to portray an overwhelmingly good country as evil? I remember my freshman trigonometry teacher, Mrs. Watkins, telling us to be very wary of statistical presentations and to ALWAYS CONSIDER THE SOURCE of every argument.

I hate that this brutal, evil crime happened. My God, we are trying to save those people not brutalize them!

But I still love this country. I still believe in our core values. I still believe that we are trying to accomplish very worthy goals in Iraq and the Middle East.

For those that agree with me, I encourage you to be strong and steadfast in your beliefs. Do not be discouraged by the coming onslaught of "America is the bad guy" rhetoric. Rather, be more determined to rebuke such nonsense.

Let us prove we are the greatest country in the world by rejecting the actions of these soldiers but also by not losing our resolve to complete the work set before us. Let us prove to our allies that we can be counted on. Let us prove to our enemies that we will continue the fight and not be discouraged.

Update:

Sweetness and Light had much more on this story a couple of days earlier.

Suddenly Star Wars is Worth a Look

Wretchard wonders if North Korea has made a few believers - at least hopers - in Reagan's much maligned Strategic Defense Initiative.

Funny how Old Europe was all "America ain't so great" when they perceived the Big Bear we had protected them from for 50 years was no longer a threat (I always maintained that was the stupidest thing imaginable.). But now that some nut-with-nukes is taking target practice with long range missles, America suddenly seems like the good guys again.

I thought Europe was supposed to be the grown ups we were to emulate. Seems to me they act more like a fickle teenage girl. You never know what they want because they never know what they want. But they're definitely all about the preening!

You know what? I'm going to apologize for that comparison. Teenage girls have never been as fickle - or as preenish - as Old Europe!

Ban all Power Tools!

Jack Kelly wonders if there will be a movement to ban all power saws after this incident.

You gotta love Jack Kelly. Check out his Irish Pennants blog every chance you get.

New Media Changes Everything

I received one of those "chain" emails today. It claimed to reveal some dastardly editing on one of the inscriptions on the World War II Memorial in Washington, DC.

With the effective, emotional tactic of portraying an elderly couple from the greatest generation angered and hurt, the "appalled observer" claims that the engravers of the WWII Memorial deliberately omitted "so help us God" from the text of FDR's speech announcing that Pearl Harbor had been attacked.

Naturally, I was upset! Here's that blasted PC crowd again - liberal scoundrels, all - trying their best to remove all references to the Divine Lord from our nation's history.

There's some considerable truth in that statement. However, before I forward emails like that to all my friends and family, I like to do a little fact checking.

God bless the internet!

I found the inscription information for the memorial at the National WWII Memorial web site under the Inscriptions link.

*****
Eastern Corners PEARL HARBOR DECEMBER 7, 1941, A DATE WHICH WILL LIVE IN INFAMY…NO MATTER HOW LONG IT MAY TAKE US TO OVERCOME THIS PREMEDITATED INVASION, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, IN THEIR RIGHTEOUS MIGHT, WILL WIN THROUGH TO ABSOLUTE VICTORY.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt
*****

Sure enough, just like the email told me, the quote from FDR is missing "so help us God". There IS a conspiracy!

Still, I thouht it wise to check the actual text of the actual speach itself. What I found was that the phrase "so help us God", while definitely a part of FDR's speach, was actually three paragraphs below the text used for the WWII Memorial inscription.

Hmmm.

Certainly the designers of the memorial could have used the paragraph that included "so help us God" (I bet it was considered.). And perhaps there were those who opposed that paragraph because of its reference to our Lord and Savior. But it's simply not true and definetly unfair to suggest that the designers deliberatly edited the phrase out of the text used on the WWII Memorial.

So what does all this mean?

It means that we now have the tools and information at our fingertips to investigate nearly every claim by anyone who wants to convince us of anything.

That. Is. Powerful.

No longer can the general public be expected to lap up everything the MSM spoon feeds us. The same tactic used in that chain email has been used by old media for decades. Throw some half truths in with some pointed inuendo and wrap it all in credulous emotion and you have the recipe for what has passed for the bulk of main stream journalism for years.

So here's the new deal:

• Someone is trying to convince you of something
• Consider the source of everything you hear or read
• Fact check everything they are telling you
• Spread the word
• The more people involved the better
• They won't be able to ignore us or shrug us off
• They won't be able to pull another Rathergate
• The public will be better informed and better served
  

I love this stuff!

Are the majority of Americans against the War?

It's a muggy night in Houston
And all the intersections are like full service stations

Listening to Somewhere North on the 40 Acres CD by Caedmon's Call during lunch today my mind drifted from the song to thoughts of this particular form of entrepreneurship.

Initial images of desperate, scary men forcing themselves on trapped and helpless drivers gave way to the question: Could this be a legitimate business? Could someone with the right attitude and proper authorzations actually make a living doing this? Could you establish yourself as a service and not an annoyance?

Of course you could. You could provide the service without demanding payment. You could smile and do the job for free and accept any tips the drivers may offer. I'd almost be willing to bet a majority of the customers would be more than willing to tip a pleasant and efficient service provider if they presented themselves well.

I could see the happy helper smiling and washing and creating a pleasant experience for the busy city drivers. Why, they could even spread the joy by wishing people well as they finished their work.

"Have a great day" they would say with disarming warmth.

They could even encourage people to feel good about their communities.

"Go Wildcats!"

"How 'bout them Hornets!"

Or even the nation: "Pray for our troops."

-- STOP RIGHT THERE --

That would never work.

I believe the vast majority of Americans would in no way be offended by this kind of remark. I think most would actually appreciate it. But surely there are those who would not only be offended, but would be pushed to the brink of an outright fit at the thoughts of supporting the American military while they are actually engaged in battle!

Most entrepreneurs would simply avoid any potentially controversial subject that might solicit a negetive reaction from their customers. They'd play it safe instead. And who could blame them. They want to make a living not get into political arguments.

Isn't that the way it is with almost everybody? Most people avoid discussions that might become argumentative - Ann Coulter notwithstanding.

With all the screaming from the left against the War in Iraq in particular and all things Bush in general, its understandable that some would get the idea that America is losing its resolve in this conflict.

But is that really true?

I'm no expert (on anything), but I have this gut feeling that the majority of Americans understand what is at stake in this war. I believe most Americans believe this war is justified and worth fighting. And I believe most Americans think the right man and the right party are in charge at the right time.

I'm an average Joe. My circle of friends are neither elite nor uninterested. They're normal Americans, mostly blue collar. I live in a part of the country that is overwhelmingly registered as Democrat. Yet almost everyone I talk to believes we need to stop Islamic terrorists and stop them now.

If that's true then why aren't more people saying so? Well, just like any entrepreneur (or any normal human being), most people simply don't want to argue about it. Besides, in the last national election the War in Iraq was the number one issue. I think it's fair to say that Americans have spoken on this issue.

So don't be fooled by the continual shrieking from the liberals in America. It's their right to speak their mind. It's their job to try to convince as many people as they can of the rightness of their cause. But just because they're the loudest, that doesn't mean they're the majority.

My contention is that the majority of Americans know we're doing the right thing and they know which party will continue to do the right thing. I think they are polite enough, however, to express their opinions on election day rather than argue about it all the time.

Just Do It !

I created this blog over a year ago. This is my first actual post. How pathetic is that?!?!?

I thought I'd learn more about blogs before I jumped in. I thought I'd read and comment on other blogs to get my feet wet. Well, I've done some of that. But my goodness, it's been over a year.

Am I REALLY that much of a slacker? (Yes!)

I've read and commented on other blogs. But I haven't investigated how to blog on my own at all. I'm somewhat of a techno-tard (Is that a word? Can I "coin" it if it isn't?), so I have been and still am more than somewhat intimidated by the prospect. Besides, commenting on other blogs was so easy.

That's been the biggest problem. It's so easy to read other blogs. And it's so easy to comment on some blogs. Heck, I even got a "Hat Tip" credit on Carol Platt Liebau's blog once. Man, I felt like a celebrity or something! Why in the world should I do all the work of creating and maintaining my own blog when my skill and intellect can be recognized world wide via Carol's blog?

The other problem hits a lot closer to home. Reading all these blogs has shown me how many truly talented, intelligent, and thoughtful people there are in the world. Geez, there are so many great thinkers out there! How could I possibly add anything worth while? How could I possibly compete? Besides, so many of them seem to do so much research on each topic. I KNOW I can't compete with that! And so many of them are professionals in the particular area they choose to blog about. What am I an expert in???? (Nothing!)

But the more I posted comments on other blogs, the more I began to feel like I've been cheating. I've been using someone else's space to vent my feelings (That's all they are, afterall. I think I've already established I'm not an expert on anything.) But more importantly, I've been cheating myself. I've allowed someone else to determine which subjects I comment on. Sure, there's a certain set of current events and issues that a lot of people are going to want to comment on. But what about the issues I care about that don't get blogged very often? What about those unique perspectives I may have on today's hot topics?

OK, so there probably won't be a boat load of those unique perspectives comeing from me. But you never know.

A blog offers me my own personal space. I can write about whatever I want. I can explore my own thoughts. I can be serious or poke fun. I can jump from politics to sports to religion. It's my blog. I can do what I want with it!

When I first created this blog I expected my first post would be a "get-to-know-me" kind of thing. I thought I'd put together some well-organized, insightful, brilliant (of course!) autobiographical sketch that would make millions of people inistantly interested in everything I had to say. But instead, after over a year, I've decided to JUST DO IT! Whatever was on my mind as of a few minutes ago would make up the content of this historic first post.

I still have no idea what Fat Man's Corner will become. But I guess, for now, I could at least introduce myself and mention a few areas of my personal interest:

Hi, I'm Greg Helton. I'm from Ohio. But I've lived in Salyersville, KY for the past 21 years. The hills of Eastern Kentucky have been good to me. I have a beautiful, loving wife, three gorgeous children, and two perfect grandchildren (Yes. They. Are. Perfect!).

Pleased to meet you.

Interests:

• Politics - This is what introduced me to blogs in the first place
• Family - I thoroughly enjoy mine!
• Religion - Christian
• Sports - Especially at the High School and College levels
• Sports Officiating - I've been a referee/umpire for 10 years or so
• Music - Raised on Country & Bluegrass, Came of age on Classic Rock, Love Contemporary Christian
• Movies - When I have time, I enjoy many genres

Oh well, I can see the creative urge is petering out right about now (several minutes ago, actually). So I'll wrap it up.

This here's my blog. I have no idea what I'm gonna do with it. But it's mine and I love it already. I hope I'll be able to engage others with it as well as use it as therapy for myself.

Thanks and God bless,

Greg