The American Gazette

Commonsense political and social commentary from "Flyover Country"

Location: Rural Michigan, United States

Friday, October 29, 2004

Deconstructing bin Laden Videotape

Oh American people, my talk to you is about the best way to avoid another Manhattan, about the war, its causes, and results.
bin Laden will now save the left from the trouble of trying to figure out why he hates us.
Security is an important pillar of human life. Free people do not relinquish their security. This is contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom.
Yes, security is an important pillar of human life, and a free people will not relinquish their security, that is why we chased you and your minions from Afganistan. The only contrary claim here is that you believe in freedom.
Let him tell us why we did not strike Sweden, for example. It is known that those who hate freedom do not have proud souls, like the souls of the 19 people [killed while perpetrating the 11 September 2001 attacks], may God have mercy on them.
Sweden and America, now that is a good analogy. Those who hate freedom and deliberately mass murder civilians never expecting an attack are not proud souls, and God will not have mercy upon them. They are screaming in hell.
We fought you because we are free and do not accept injustice. We want to restore freedom to our nation. Just as you waste our security, we will waste your security.
What nation would that be? It is clear here that bin Laden is not referring to any individual country, he is referring instead to a "Nation of Islam" Of course that would mean his version of Islam where only the most strict interpetation of Shai'a law is acceptable. And just how did we "waste their security"? By helping the Mujahideen fight the Soviets? By stopping Saddam from making Kuwait part of Iraq and stopping him from threatening Saudi Arabia? By protecting and stopping genocide of Muslims in the Balkans? I am most confused about this.
I am amazed at you. Although almost four years have passed since the [11 September] incidents, Bush is still practising distortion and confusion.
Oh, now we are going to get to the heart of the matter.
He also continues to conceal from you the real reason [for the 11 September attacks]. Thus, the motives still exist for repeating what happened.
Oops I was wrong, he is not going to really tell us anything, the left can continue to tie themselves into knots about the why of it all, and while their at it still blame Bush. It's really a Bush conspiracy.
I will speak to you about the reasons behind these incidents. I will honestly tell you about the minutes in which the decision was made so that you will consider. I say to you that God knows that the idea of striking the towers never occurred to us.
Really? Never thought about striking the WTC until 2001? What about 1993?
Your security is in your own hands
You bet your ass it is.
But, after things had gone too far and we saw the injustice of the US-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I started thinking of that.
Ok, the thought to cause mass murder goes back many, many years. It didn't just start in 2001. I'm shocked, simply shocked! And I am simply shocked that it has something to do with Israel.
The events that influenced me directly trace back to 1982 and subsequent events when the United States gave permission to the Israelis to invade Lebanon, with the aid of the sixth US fleet.
Not a word about what else was going on in 1982, when the US was assisting the Afgan Mujahideen. Apparently the great evil of the US is not in intervening, it is only with intervening on the side of Israel.
At those difficult moments, many meanings that are hard to describe went on in my mind. However, these meanings produced an overwhelming feeling to reject injustice and generated a strong determination to punish the unjust ones.
Again, the feelings of injustice was created by the US supporting Israel at a time when they were being bombed from inside the borders of Lebanon. Let us not forget that it was primarily the PLO that did this, after having been allowed to stay in Lebanon after the Israeli's withdrew in 1978, under pressure from then President Carter. A UN force was then put in place to enforce "peace" and a fat lot of good that did. While the American government condemned both the PLO and Israel for the continuing conflict, the UN in general only condemned Israel. In 1981 the US under President Reagan assisted in negotiating a cease fire, which the PLO repeatedly violated. The final provocation for Israel occured when a terrorist group led by Abu Nidal attempted to assasinate Shlomo Argov, Ambassador to Great Britian. The following two days the IDF attacked ammuniation dumps and PLO bases in Beurit. The PLO then began massive shelling of the civilian population of Galilee. It was this shelling that prompted the full scale invasion of Lebanon. If bin Laden is right at all, it that security of your people should be the most important thing a government does, the Israeli government did what should be expected of them. And just as a post script where was it Abu Nidal was eventually found? That would be Iraq.
While I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me to punish the unjust one in a similar manner by destroying towers in the United States so that it would feel some of what we felt and to be deterred from killing our children and women...
I'm getting it even better. Only the deaths of Muslim women and children is wrong. It is perfectly acceptable to murder Israeli women and children. And somehow this madman thought that if he attacked US women and children we would be deterred from assisting Israel or in protecting ourselves. I can't help but note that he has a point. Prior to 9/11 this country had repeatedly shied from confronting the type of terrorism that has been the hallmark of Islamic fanatics, even when they bombed sleeping Marines, killed our Marines when we attempted to intervene in a Civil War so people would quit being starved to death, when our citizens were being kidnapped, when citizens of this country were held for 444 days or even when a US official was assasinated. Prior to 9/11 all indications were that if the US was attacked we would roll over and die.
We did not find it difficult to deal with Bush and his administration, because it is similar to regimes in our countries, half of which are governed by the military and the other half of which are governed by the sons of kings and presidents; and we have a long experience with them.
Flash to Michael Moore's movie, in which the Bush family is complicant with the House of Saud. It is not a large leap here to understand what it is that bin Laden is attempting to feed the American people, he is whispering in our ear Michael Moore is right.
In both categories, you find many who are characterised by hubris, arrogance, greed, and unlawful acquisition of money. This similarity transpired since Bush Senior's visit to the region.
Oh God, the Bush's have been infected by the despots of the Middle East! Just ask Michael Moore, as he draws a link between the despotic House of Saud and the Bush family. Their really part of a conspiracy to defraud the American people, and of course the people's of the Middle East, who really just wish to live in peace if only that pesky Israel and it's pesky Jews would go away.
While some of our people were dazzled by the United States and hoped that these visits would affect our countries, he, instead, was affected by these royal and military regimes, envying them for remaining in their posts for scores of years, embezzling public money without being held accountable or monitored.
You mean there are people in the Middle East who thought that the US could positively impact the region with our beliefs. No way! But it just didn't work out that way darn it, instead the Bush's became like the despots of the Middle East. See above.
Accordingly, he transferred dictatorship and the repression of freedoms to his son by introducing the Patriot Act under the pretext of fighting terrorism.
The election was stolen! I hear Democratic talking points here, with a bit of a twist. Bush I stole the election for his son, and somehow introduced the Patriot Act while he wasn't in the government, and this was done to assure his son could be a real dictator. And of course this was done under the pretext of fighting terrorism, which apparently doesn't actually exist. bin Laden is trying to use Democratic talking points but just doesn't quite get the context right.
Bush Senior deemed it appropriate to assign his sons to states. He also did not forget to convey the [election] rigging experience from the leaders of the [Arab] region to Florida to benefit from it at critical times...
The Democrats have it wrong, it was not Bush II who stole the election, it was Bush I who learned how to do these things by absorbing the way the despots of the Middle East do things. And Bush I didn't just manage to steal the Presidental election, he managed to steal the elections of two Govenor races in Texas and Florida so he could make sure and place his two son's into government. When the number one wanted terrorist sounds eerily like the Democratic party something is seriously wrong.
We had agreed with the chief amir [leader - of the 11 September hijackers] Mohammed Atta that he should accomplish all the operations within 20 minutes before Bush and his administration could take notice.
20 minutes? Um, right. Or maybe they figured they could simply kill him or top administration figures first. It's hard to figure out what is happening when your dead.
It never occurred to us that the supreme commander of the US armed forces would leave 50,000 of his citizens in the two towers to face those great horrors alone, at a time when they needed him badly.
Oh goody, more Democratic talking points! And shades of Michael Moore! The US was being attacked and the dumb President gave them even more time! What a moron, how stupid can one man be? Americans turn from Bush, he gave the terrorists more time!
This is because it seemed to him that being preoccupied with the little child's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than being preoccupied with the planes and their ramming into the skyscrapers.
Calling Michael Moore, your propaganda is being used by the worlds most wanted terrorist! You stupid ass.
This gave with three times the period required for carrying out the operations, praise be to God.
Again, it's really all Bush's fault. Those few minutes of finishing a book so he didn't scare the piss out of a bunch of kids gave the terrorists 60 minutes to complete their killings, instead of only 20 minutes. Once again yelling for Michael Moore, come see your good works Micky.
Your security does not lie in the hands of Kerry, Bush, or al-Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands. Each and every state that does not tamper with our security will have automatically assured its own security.
bin Laden now assures us that even though he just lifted pieces from Michael Moore and the Democratic talking points it really doesn't matter who is President, and al Qaeda doesn't really matter either. The American people simply have to abandon Israel and not fight back against terrorism. Give the terrorists what they want and they will leave us alone. Of course that means total surrender but what of it? Sounds like the liberal left loonies, no wonder bin Laden lifted all their talking points.


Russ Vaughn asks us "The Question"

The Question

The question you must ask yourself
As you head off to your poll,
Is who you trust to lead us now
That survival is our goal.
We tread the path of Jihad’s wrath,
Where misstep could spell doom,
And future times of horrid climes,
In Holocaust’s gray gloom.

What then again I’ll ask of you,
Should be our true agendas,
Privilege and prosperity
Or ways to best defend us?
Affluence won’t concern us much,
Other problems will confound us,
When our cities lie in smoking ruins,
With destruction all around us.

What sort of man I ask you now
Do we really want to lead us?
A nuanced pol, who talks and talks,
While Jihadis grimly bleed us?
Or a fighter, who will walk the walk,
Take the battle to them there,
Force their hand and make them stand,
Destroy them in their lair?

This veteran says let’s fight them there;
Lure all those fanatic fools,
To where they face armed fighting men,
Not children in their schools.
I know how I shall vote this time,
I’ll vote to win this war;
Not to let John Kerry lose it,
As he did mine long before.

Russ Vaughn
2d Bn, 327th Parachute Infantry Regiment
101st Airborne Division
Vietnam 65-66

No Mourning for Mainstream

A new wonderful poem from Russ Vaughn.

No Mourning for Mainstream

Ah, once so grand you owned this land,
With your wisdom you did ply us,
Until old dears this election year,
You at last unmasked your bias.
Yes, once were you our only view,
No challenge did you face.
You had your say and called the play,
‘Til the Blogs got in the race.

We’d like to see fair honesty
But our breath now we’re not holding
Because we know how really low
Are the odds of that unfolding
So what is left when we’re bereft
Of hearing truth from you?
We’ll place our bet on the Bloggers’ net
To let the truth come through.

That pajama’d host really wants to roast
Your assets that’s for certain.
To debunk the myth of your monolith,
On your act to drop the curtain.
Alas old dears, you’re done we fear,
Your dynasties doomed to tatters,
And ‘tween the coasts your opinions toast,
About anything that matters.

Russ Vaughn

Saturday, October 23, 2004

The entire Stolen Honor video online

The video Kerry and his mouthpieces are desperate for you not to see. I am emailing the link to as many as I can that I know still plan on voting for Kerry. I urge everyone to do the same, buy the video or whatever you can do to get this out to as many people as possible.


Friday, October 22, 2004

Organization of Islamic Conference

9. The Conference commended with pride the resistance of the valiant Palestinian people and their legitimate leadership headed by gallant President Yasser Arafat against Israeli aggression. It called for an immediate end to the siege imposed on the Palestinian people and President Yasser Arafat so that they can move freely in and out of the Palestinian territories. It condemned recent Israeli threats on President Arafat’s life and reaffirmed its continued political, financial and moral support for the Palestinian people so that they can regain their inalienable national rights, including the right of return, self-determination and an independent Palestinian State with Al-Quds Sharif as its capital.

Al-Quds Sharif-And what place is this? It is of course Jerusalum. Some background on why the Muslims call Jerusalem by another name and to highlight that no matter how you cut it Modern current Islam is all about moving backwards several centuries.

In the year 72 of the Hijra(Muslim calender) or 691 CE Abd al-Malik, Umayyad caliph from 685-705, built the Dome of the Rock. The Dome of the Rock, along with the adjoining building Aqsa Mosque was the first great religious building in the history of Islam. Under Caliph Abd-al Malik a process that Arabic historians call organization and adjustment began. At first glance it may seem odd the first great religious building in Islam was done in Jerusalem, but a deeper look into the culture and religion finds a potent religious and political statement.

Jerusalem is the most sacred city on earth to both Judaism and Christianity, and the choice of this city for the first great religious shrine in Islam is significant. Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Qur'an. Even the name Jerusalem is not in early Islamic writings, when it is mentioned it is called Aelia, the name the Romans imposed on the city after destroying the city and the temple in the last Jewish war, in an effort to desacralize the city for Judaism. The site chosen for the Dome of the Rock is over the Temple Mount, the scene of major events in both Judaism and Christianity. The actual spot on the rock, which according to rabbanic tradition, Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his son Isaac. And in later times the Ark of the temple rested.

In essence the building of the Dome of the Rock over these sacred sites of both Judaism and Christianity declares Islam as the final dispensation. This was not a new phenomonom, various religions throughout humanity have done the same, as a very visible means of replacing old Gods with the new. The express purpose of building on this site is reinforced by the Qur'anic and other inscriptions that decorate the inside. One verse occurs over and over again. 'God is one, without partner, without companion. Other inscriptions continue in the same vein.
'Praise be to God, who begets no son, and has no partner in [his] dominion; nor [needs] he any to protect him from humiliation: yes, magnify him for his greatness and glory!.
'He is God, one, eternal. He does not beget, nor is he begotten, and he has no peer.'
'God bears witness that there is no God but he, and so too the angels, those who possess knowledge, and stand firm in justice. There is no God but he, the omnipotent, the omniscient. God's religion is Islam...Let whoever disbelieves in the signs of God beware, for God is swift in his reckoning.'

By building the Dome of the Rock shrine over the most sacred sites in Judiasm and some of the most in Christianity Abd al-Malik asserts the primacy of Islam over both of these religions, as well as the idea that Islam is the descendent of both, but the "corrected" version.

For awhile after the Dome of the Rock was built Jerusalem was called Bayt al-Maqdis, related to the Hebrew Bayt ha-Miqdash the Bibical name of the Temple. In time both this name and the Roman name Aelia were replaced by the name al-Quds, 'the city of holiness'. A Qur'anic verse (17:1) tells how God took the Prophet on a journey by night from the sacred mosque(in Mecca) to the farthest mosque. One early tradition places 'the farthest mosque' in heaven. Another places it in Jerusalem. It is notable that while the later tradition has become the accepted one among Muslims this verse is not in the Dome of the Rock, and other early traditions denied this event took place in Jerusalem. The Al Aqsa (the furthermost) Mosque, neighbor to the Dome, is the site Muslims believe the Prophet ascended into Heaven. It was built after the Dome of the Rock in 715. It is the third most holy site in Islam. For further information on this please see It is telling that in regards to the idea that Jerusalem being holy to Islam prior to the building of the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqua, to realize that in the beginning of Islam the Prophet directed adherents to pray towards Jerusalem, but when the Hebrews did not convert to Islam that directive was changed to praying towards Mecca. To even the most casual it should be apparent that Jerusalem was quite literally turned away from, and only became important when it was politically necessary.

In other ways the time of Abd al-Malik and the building of the Dome of the Rock was a time in which Islam rose to prominence over the old Roman empire and the old Persian empire. The Dome is a visible reminder of that. An assertion of the new power player. So the Dome of the Rock is both a political and a religious statement.

The continued use of the name Al-Quds Sharif instead of Jerusalem continues the belief of Muslims that Islam is the last word of God and that Judiasm and Christianity were errors of belief corrected by the prophet Muhammed. In today's world the use of Jerusalem and the Palastinines is just as political and just as politically religious as it was 1,300 years ago. It is a wedge issue intended to rally the troops of Islam, as well as an overt way to denigrate the religious traditions of the other great monotheist religions.

I can't help but wonder how Muslims would feel if the Chrisitan world took to calling Istanbul by it's prior name under the Byzantine Christians-Constantinople. Then include Christians throuhout the world demanding that the Turks turn the Hague Sophia back into a church. Also known by it's other name St. Sophia, it was one of the great achievements of Eastern (Greek)Christianity. Originally built by Constantine the Great, it was burned twice and rebuilt gloriously in 530 by Emperor Justinian, it was later looted by the Western (Latin) Christians, a shameful episode for Christianity. Later after the Muslim Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople they added four minarets to it and turned it into a Mosque. Today it is neither a Mosque or a Church, it is a museum. Simply an aside it is interesting to note to me anyway, that Hague Sophia was built atop an older temple. The site was originally a temple to Apollo. I note that simply to highlight again, that throughout history it was quite normal for the victor to build overtop of the loser's religious sites with their own religious building. Always it was done as a political and religious statement, and it is worth understanding that in times past the religious and political were not separated as they are in today's World, well at least in our part of the world anyway.

While Western Christianity has matured and been able to make that separation through first the Reformation and then the Enlightment, not to mention the deaths of millions of people through those struggles, Islam has not been able to achieve that crucial distinction. And thus we come to the crux of the matter and the refusal to call Jerusalem by it's proper name. Right now in terms of terrorism and those speaking for Islam be that verbally or by blowing up whoever is handy, the simple statement of Al Quds Sharif instead of Jerusalem should make us sit up and take notice. It is a complete rejection of compromise in terms of religion and politics.

It is a centuries old belief that Islam is the last true religion and two others it was built upon are relegated to the dustbin of history as far as the adherents of Islam are concerned, and the forces at work today will not stop or rest until they make that a reality. And yet somehow John Kerry thinks he can have a summitt with people who do not want to make a compromise, who are not interested in allowing religions to co-exist except under the old concept of dhimma, in which other religions were allowed to live in peace on the condition of submission to their rulers. It should be noted that while Europe was in the dark and middle ages the religious tolerance of the Muslim world was superior to that of Christian Europe. However with the advent of Whabbism, the strict and severe form of Sunni Islam, that is no longer the case. It is Whabbism that spawned the Taliban as well as Al Queda. When people say that this particular practice of Islam is not what Islam is all about, I say they are correct. But correct only to a point, because the reality is that the Islam they are harking back to is centuries ago, and not today. The radicals of today are not practicing the Islam of the 10th century or even of the 16th century, but then most Christians, Jews or even Hindu's are practicing their religion in the form it was in the 10th or 16th century either. Those battles have been fought and are done. Left to us in the history books to learn about, and perhaps to learn from.

What matters today is that we are fighting a particular practice of Islam that pulls out it's past only that which fits it's current ideology. They use particular rallying points that are useful to it's pursuit now. Al Quds Sharif is one of those harkening back to the past that is useful to today's battles, not any different then Saddam Hussein attempting to paint himself as a modern day Nebachadnezzer.

We must never forget exactly what it is we are fighting. And that is radical Islam. And we must not allow those who would kill you and me simply for the twin sins of being American and not Muslim to make this more or less than that. To effectively fight this evil we must be able to understand the keys these people use in order to turn millions to their cause.

Let me relate a personal story. As a nurse I work with physicians of various nationalities, religions etc... One of those physicians I worked with is a Muslim. This is a man I immediately liked, a good man and a good physician. We spent a fair amount of time chatting during rounds and while we were both sitting and charting. This physician is from Jordon. We both have a keen interest in history with one very significant difference, one I did not recognize at first. One day while we were chatting and charting we settled into talking about history, a very common occurance, however prior to that each of our history conversations had focused on events in the middle east. That particular day he told me he would like to get me some old Roman coins "you can find them all over Jordon" he said. That comment led me to start discussing the Roman empire and then one of my favorite docs said something that I found totally and utterly amazing. His comment? That he didn't care about the history of the Roman Empire, in fact he did not care about the history of Europe at all except for the part when Spain was essentially Muslim. That shocked me a great deal. This doc is well educated and from a wealthy family in Jordon as is his wife. Yet he just completely dismissed huge chunks of relevent history, not only to Europe but to the Middle East as well. And I said so. His response was basically that the light of Islam had far eclipsed the Romans as well as the Persians and that without Islam Europe would not have come out of the dark ages and therefore the only real important history had to do with Islam and it's empires. I was truly speechless. I never was able to see him in the same light again. Don't misunderstand me, I still thought by and large he was a great guy who provided outstanding care to all of his patients regardless of who or what they were, but I also understood that in his world he could do that and still be able to hold to the view that Islam and it's achievements were the only thing that truly counted, all "others" are not even worthy of thinking about.

How many Muslims, particularly those in the Middle East feel the same way? I'm betting more do than don't. And when a culture is so ethnocentric it is very simple for fanatics to gain adherents by harkening back to "glory days". One sees it over and over again in history, with perhaps the most shameful being the rise of Nazism. Like the Nazi's the Islamofascists use symbols and powerful imagery, the difference being they use the symbols of the times of the Caliphs.

As we are days from the Presidental election it is worth remembering the history of Neville Chamberlain and the policies that brought about WWII.

John Kerry is today's Chamberlain.


Debunking the myths of Iraq

New Site with good content. Please take the time to look over the site, especially the area regarding myths.

Monday, October 18, 2004

Why vote for Bush and not Kerry.

First a thanks to Mr. Hewitt for the opportunity for so many to support why it is important to elect George Bush.
I offer some quotes from Thomas Jefferson that I believe President Bush understands while John Kerry does not. I believe that is because President Bush adheres closer to the founders vision, while John Kerry does not understand that vision.

Love your neighbor as yourself and your country more than yourself.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Jefferson Smith, February 21, 1825

The boisterous sea of liberty is never without a wave.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Richard Rush, October 20, 1820

Whatever enables us to go to war, secures our peace.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Monroe, October 24, 1823

T]he flames kindled on the 4 of July 1776, have spread over too much of the globe to be extinguished by the feeble engines of despotism; on the contrary, they will consume these engines and all who work them.
Thomas Jefferson, September 12, 1821

Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage on them.
Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking up Arms, July 6, 1775


Is John Kerry Barred from Office per the Constitution?

This is a very thought provoking article worth the read.


Sunday, October 17, 2004

America Coming Together hands out flyers alleging GOP will suppress black vote

Lets take a look at America Coming Together shall we?

America Coming Together
America Coming Together (ACT) is one of five 527 committees engaged in supporting a Democratic candidate in U.S. presidential election, 2004. ACT "is responsible for get-out-the-vote efforts." [1]
"Democratic groups have created an operation that combines close coordination with a division of labor designed to avoid duplication of effort and maximize resources." The other four allied groups are the Thunder Road Group, which "will concentrate on research and rapid response"; the Media Fund, "the principal vehicle for pro-Democratic television commercials by the coalition"; America Votes, "the umbrella organization that will stitch together the activities of various progressive organizations"; and Joint Victory Campaign 2004, "a combined fundraising committee." [2]

In August 2003, hedge fund investor and philanthropist George Soros announced he would donate $10 million to ensure that Bush was not re-elected. [3] The initial newstories indicated that the PAC would be named America Coming Together and would campaign in 17 key states.
An AP article identified the states as Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. [4]
In a statement announcing the grants, Soros stated "The fate of the world depends on the United States and President Bush is leading us in the wrong direction. ACT is an effective way to mobilize civil society, to convince people to go to the polls and vote for candidates who will reassert the values of the greatest open society in the world."
Feminist Daily News Wire reported that the group would form a coalition comprising women's rights, labor, and environmental groups and aimed to raise $75 million by the November election.[5]
Ellen R. Malcolm, President
Steve Rosenthal, Chief Executive Officer
Minyon Moore
Gina Glantz
Carl Pope, Treasurer
Cecile Richards
JoDee Winterhof, ACT Political Director
Donald Redmond, National Field Director
ACT Contributors
Open Secrets: Advocacy Group Spending ("data is based on records released by the Internal Revenue Service on Monday, March 08, 2004"):
The three largest contributors to date are:
Soros Fund Management ($5,000,000.00)
Joint Victory Campaign 2004 ($3,000,000.00); and
Progressive Corp. ($2,995,000.00).
According to the March 10, 2004, Washington Post, "The Democratic 527 organizations have drawn support from some wealthy liberals determined to defeat Bush. They include financier George Soros and his wife, Susan Weber Soros, who gave $5 million to ACT and $1.46 million to; Peter B. Lewis, chief executive of the Progressive Corp., who gave $3 million to ACT and $500,000 to MoveOn; and Linda Pritzker, of the Hyatt hotel family, and her Sustainable World Corp., who gave $4 million to the joint fundraising committee." [6]

The two that do not have a separate biography link are JoDee Winterhof, though it was not hard to find information. She left Sen. Harkins office to work for Partnership for America's Families which then partnered with America Coming Together. I was unable to find information on Donald Redmond.

In essence what we have is a group that was founded by George Soros, liberal contributor extraordinare, linking with a labor funded organization and run by long time Democratic Political operatives. Making the claim that Republican's will do everything in their power to keep black Americans from voting as if this were 1965. AND they get to do it while claiming they are a nonpartisan issue group. I believe the only real issue they are working for is to defeat George Bush by any unethical, immoral way to do so.

The liberalism that was nurtured in the 60's that grew out of communism of the 30's and fully blossomed in the 70's is attempting to fight to the death. Instead of unskilled student agitators, these people are now the savvy political operatives that is attempting to crush the real Republic given to us by our Founding Father's.

Of course Kerry is repeating this line over and over, a lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get it's shoes on, I don't remember whose quote that is, but it certainly fits here. I also want to know how it is that John Kerry is allowed to campaign in churches. Of course I don't know why I expected anything different when Al Sharpton is embraced by Kerry.

Race baiting is race baiting. I was not brought up to be allowed to behave like John Kerry. My mom in particular, brought me up to understand that all people have the same rights and responsiblities as others. But apparently John Kerry's parents never taught him any type of morality. At least not a morality I recognize.


Head of the Fraternal Order of Police ask Kerry to stop misrepresenting Police Support

Maybe Chuck Canterbury, President of the FOP, is just missing the nuance of Kerry.
Hattip littlegreenfootballs.

Zarqawi Vows Alleigence to Al-Qaida

The declaration, which appeared on a Web site often used as a clearinghouse for statements by militant groups, began with a Quranic verse encouraging Muslim unity and said al-Zarqawi considered bin Laden "the best leader for Islam's armies against all infidels and apostates."

A*pos"tate\, n. [L. apostata, Gr. ?, fr. ?. See Apostasy.] 1. One who has forsaken the faith, principles, or party, to which he before adhered; esp., one who has forsaken his religion for another; a pervert; a renegade.2. (R. C. Ch.) One who, after having received sacred orders, renounces his clerical profession.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

It is worth understanding that though Islam has a history of tolerance within their faith, having never established an orthodoxy, those who are Islamic terrorists follow a more strict understanding of Islam Whabbism, believe all others of the faith that are not following that strict interpetation than they are in a state of apostaty-being considered idoltors. It therefore follows that those who are Islamic terrorists have no compunction in murdering other Muslims. Anything to gain power to remake the world in the way they see is right. Regardless of who dies in order to achieve those ends.

By this simple statement Zarqawi is making it clear to other Muslims that those who do not adhere to a specific reading of the Qur'an are Apostate and subject to the same treatment as infidels.

That said I can guarantee that those in power and those in MSM are not going to say anything regarding the religious aspects of this war. It is not politically correct. But it is a religious driven war and to put our heads in the sand over it will not help.


An Interesting look into the left or why Kerry has swung more into an anti-war position

Berkeley Daily Planet Edition Date: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 Boston’s Low Protest Turnout Reveals Left’s Hunger for ‘Anybody But Bush’ By CHRISTOPHER KROHN Special to the Planet (07-27-04) BOSTON — Was it the Boston Common or the Boston Morgue this past Sunday? Only about 1,500 protesters showed up at what was to be the marquee protest event during this Democratic National Convention (DNC). The absence of many protesters at the march may be the greatest indication yet that the American left, if not embracing John Kerry for President, simply does not want to get into any political food fights this year and possibly end up with another four years of George W. Bush. Sunday’s event was organized by International A.N.S.W.E.R under the banner of “No War in Iraq, End the Occupation Now.” One fact is very clear, in and around the streets surrounding the Fleet Center, hub of convention proceedings which began yesterday: Boston of 2004 is not Chicago of 1968. Thousands of protesters did not come to Boston to protest the Democrats, or their presumptive nominee. Thousands did come to lend their voices, bodies, and money to upending an incumbent president’s bid for a second term. Most of the protesting Sunday was anti-war. Most of the delegates, 95 percent according to the Boston Globe, are anti-war. Yet the “Strong at Home, Respected in the World” Democratic Party platform pays but lip service to the fundamental concern not only of the left, but of the party faithful: the war in Iraq. That platform states: “People of good will disagree about whether America should have gone to war in Iraq, but this much is clear: This administration badly exaggerated its case, particularly with respect to weapons of mass destruction and the connection between Saddam’s government and Al Qaeda.” Later the document says “having gone to war, we cannot afford to fail at the peace.” This latter statement rankles many anti-warriors, since the platform offers no timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. But where will so many anti-war Democrats turn? Many see a Bush defeat as the only possibility of bringing the soldiers home, but there are no assurances, no language within the platform document with which to make the future president accountable. The absence of much vocal dissent here in Boston, so prominent in Los Angeles at the 2000 Democratic National Convention, is another indication that Democrats—left, right and center—are not willing to risk anything going wrong as the final leg of the campaign officially begins here in Boston. Some protesters said press accounts this past week have described Boston as a potentially dangerous place for anyone, and that might very well might have kept protester numbers down. Yes, $60 million was spent on convention security. Over 3,000 police, sheriff’s deputies, state highway police, and National Guard troops are a ubiquitous sight, stationed on most downtown street corners in this city of 589,000. Helicopters hover overhead. Dozens of riot-clad police form lines along the sidewalk in front of Faneuil Hall, the Massachusetts Statehouse, and Kerry’s Beacon Hill home. But in interview after interview with people who describe themselves as leftist—Democrat, Green, Anarchist—virtually everyone agreed that Bush must go. And nothing for these civil liberties-minded, peace-and-social-justice-practicing, anti-war activists seems to be getting in the way of saying adios to George W. Bush. Probably no place was this yearning for change in Washington, D.C. more visible, and sincere, than at the national Vietnam Veterans For Peace Convention which ended here Saturday night. This annual four-day convention drew more than 400 veterans and much of the talk was about changing presidents. Pacifica’s Amy Goodman and Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation President Bobby Muller were the keynote speakers at the closing dinner. The overt and covert subtext of their talks was about regime change in Washington. Also participating in the conference were Daniel Ellsberg, of Pentagon Papers fame, who lives in Kensington, and San Francisco Global Exchange Executive Director and Code Pink activist Medea Benjamin. Separate interviews with each of these activist legends (Muller is perhaps less well-known in the Bay Area) revealed a determined and forthright unanimity that George W. Bush has got to go. Ellsberg, the former Marine, former Defense Department analyst turned whistle-blower and current full-time peace activist, was the most forthright in his support for Kerry: “I am urging everyone here not to vote against Bush but to vote for Kerry.” Democracy Now’s Goodman was perhaps most circumspect. “I’m a journalist,” she said, when asked if she supports Kerry. “I think people can determine what politicians will represent them. The question for many,” she added, “is who can be held accountable?” Medea Benjamin and Bobby Muller find themselves somewhere between Goodman and Ellsberg. Benjamin said of the impending protests, “the left is very confused about how to react to the Democratic convention.” Choosing her words carefully, she said, “We walk a fine line in trying to get Bush out of office and yet be critical of Kerry’s support for trade agreements, the Patriot Act, and the war.” For Muller this election is quite personal: “I’ve known Kerry for 33 years and he’s a damn good guy.” Super-dissenter Benjamin said she was “so tired” of protesting against Bush and not getting anywhere. “I’m invigorated by the prospect of protesting against a Kerry Administration and having a possibility of being heard.” Three of the four spoke of the dangers which Bush has created at home and in the world. “When I think of Kerry I don’t think of Veteran benefits, I think of war,” said vets activist Muller. “He (Kerry) can walk us back from this untenable, cataclysmic position we are in within the world community.” Ellsberg called the world situation both “a crisis” and “an emergency.” Benjamin said, “A second Bush administration would harden the left…with Kerry we have more of a chance.” Goodman seemed to think that Bush’s standing in the polls is the result of a press which hasn’t held him accountable. She spoke of the dangers posed by what she calls “sound-bite media.” She said, “We need a media not for pundits, who know so little, but a media for people speaking for themselves.” Goodman cited a study in which the major television programmers—NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS Newshour—had 393 pro-Iraq War interviews and only three anti-war interviews in the month leading up to Bush’s war in Iraq. “The sound bite media is fiercely political,” she said. In the streets of Boston Sunday anti-war passions mixed with tacit support for Kerry. The marchers were critical of the Democrats, but restrained. Only one arrest was recorded that day. For the most part, the issues raised on signs were like those seen at Bay Area rallies over the past couple of years: “No to War, Stop Fascist and Anti-Gay Violence, Say No To Racism and Police Brutality, Free Mumia Abu Jamal, People Not Profits.” Along with the small turnout, the ‘whose-streets-our-streets’ fervor of past demonstrations was significantly muted. “It’s mainly, do what it takes to get Bush out of office,” said International A.N.S.W.E.R. member and day laborer, Adam Luce of Boston. “Kerry is the best option of getting Bush out.” Luce added, “I am left-wing, but realistic.” Jessica Ramer, a math teacher from Pompano Beach, Florida, disdains Bush but is not ready to commit to Kerry. “I’m here to let the Democratic Party know that they can’t have my vote until they change their policy on Iraq.” When pressed by a reporter saying that polls indicate a vote for neither Kerry nor Bush would most likely add up to a vote for Bush, Ramer responded, “I’m still wrestling with the question of who to vote for, especially since I am from the swing state of Florida.” Paula Sutton, an archeologist from Alaska and a Dennis Kucinich supporter, was walking with the protesters. She was concerned about the war, but she is waiting to declare her full support of Kerry because “we are seeing if we can influence the Kerry agenda. We need to take a stand on the war in Iraq.” When pressed about who she would end up voting for, Sutton conceded, “Basically it has come down to, we’ve got to get Bush out of office.” Tom Sager, retired and a Veterans For Peace member from Rolla, Missouri, said he’s not of a mind to vote for either Bush or Kerry right now. “Kerry has said he will send more troops and stay the course. I’m definitely not going to vote for Bush…(Ralph) Nader and (David) Cobb (Green Party nominee) are other choices,” he declared. When asked whether a vote for Nader or Cobb might be a vote for Bush, he replied, “I really have not made up my mind on that, probably won’t know until I walk into the (voting) booth.” Many who might have been in the streets in past protests were not present at this one. The mood here is that the left is feeling an overwhelming sense of duty to help in denying George Bush another four years, so many are getting behind Kerry with great reservations. Global Exchange’s Benjamin puts it this way, “I have the luxury in California of voting with my heart, but if I lived in a swing state I would vote with my head and vote for Kerry.” She then paused to reflect for a moment, “And I can’t remember the last time I voted for a Democrat.” Vietnam veteran Muller says, “If we don’t create political space for Kerry, it is totally unrealistic to think he is going to shift government institutions unless we create a base, a parade of popular support.” Perhaps David Cline, president of the national Veterans For Peace, who served in Vietnam and has three purple hearts to show for it, summed up the citizen-activist ambivalence best. He said, “We want to beat Bush and get our foot up Kerry’s ass.” This Thursday, the day of Kerry’s nomination, there will be another informally organized opportunity for protesters. There will be random acts of civil disobedience, according to a Boston group, The Bl(a)ck Tea Society, which is helping coordinate talks, parties, housing for activists, and direct action trainings.

Bobby Muller at an event organized by A.N.S.W.E.R? Naw, can't be.


Bobby Muller, friend to John Kerry-On Campus

Students get reality check on draft
By Amanda HooperReporterSeptember 22, 2004

Nobel Prize winner and Vietnam War veteran, Bobby Muller spoke, sometimes shouted from his wheelchair on stage to University students and faculty last night. "What the hell do you know out here?! What do you know about Islam?!"
"I don't fault you for not knowing. I fault us as a society," Muller continued on.
He spoke about American foreign policy, the war on terrorism, and the possibility of a draft in the near future. He stated that education and dialogue are vital to understanding the problems the U.S. faces today.
"The number one reason we suffered the tragedy of the Vietnam war was that we didn't understand the Vietnamese people," Muller said, drawing on his experience to relate to the war today. "The Vietnam war experience was huge. What is ripping me apart is, given the public discourse today, it's like it never even happened."
Bobby Muller was a Marine Lieutenant paralyzed from a bullet wound to his spinal cord in Vietnam. He subsequently became an anti-war activist and in 1997 won a Nobel Peace for his work as co-founder of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines.
Last night's event was sponsored by the Honors Program, the Honors Student Association and the Hendel Fund.
"We decided to sponsor the event since it is so relevant today with the upcoming Presidential election, the draft talk, and America's role in the world right now," said Honors Program Assistant Kevin Fleming.
Muller recently founded the Alliance for Security to encourage citizens to talk about the consequences of war, ask questions and demand answers.
He is traveling on the Tour of Duty to speak to young Americans. Campuses are a key target for the tour because young Americans will be most affected if a selected service draft is reinstated.
According to Mulller, the manpower the U.S. needs to continue the engagement in Iraq and protect the nation around the world are stretching our military thin.
"This ain't just about Iraq," Muller said. " We got a storm coming our way. There is a rising tide of anger among Islam."
He presented numerous scenarios around the globe, where he believes the U.S. is at risk for being drawn into a new military conflict. He cited Presidential assassination attempts in Pakistan, Iran's support of Iraq with tangible war materials and Egypt's Muslim brotherhood that could take over if a general election occurred.
"If any one of these situations occurred, the U.S. military could not sustain enough troop support, Muller said. America is facing a potential crisis."
Muller said he believes that the whole notion of service to country is very different today then in the past because we favor the idea of a professional army, as opposed to a draft. The Alliance for Security conducted a phone survey in August that found that, if the draft were reinstated today, and they were selected, 32 percent of draft-age Americans would not serve.
Muller pointed at the audience and said, "You're right to be anxious. You are at risk."
Sarah Warren, Harvard graduate and former humanitarian aid worker in Kosovo, accompanied Muller and spoke to students about educating themselves about the draft. The entire process, from when the President approaches Congress, to when the Selective Service implements the draft lottery, can occur in as little as three days.
"I think the message tonight is: don't wait. Start educating yourselves now. Start asking questions," Warren said.
Muller and Warren suggested and the documentary "Fog of War" as good starting points to obtain knowledge about American foreign policy and the war on terror.
"It's not enough just to talk about freedom and democracy. We have to live it," Muller said. "A democracy is only as strong as it's citizens are engaged

Bobby Muller leader of Vietnam Veterans against the War, and John Kerry. Today

The above link will take you to the official John Kerry Blogspot. I do this to make clear that Bobby Muller is actively campaigning for John Kerry today, and I do this to further point out that the group Muller heads, Allliance for Security, in conjunction with Rock the Vote-sent out 640,000 bogus draft emails designed to do nothing more than to frighten young voters and presumably to push them to Kerry.

Muller is the leading voice of something called Tour of Duty
Is the draft inevitable?
What are the consequences of a foreign policy based on preemption?
What lessons have we learned from Vietnam?

Join AFS founder and Vietnam veteran Bobby Muller in addressing the questions that are critical to the future of our international security. Bobby's Tour of Duty this fall will engage college students and communities across America in a national dialogue. Sign up today!

Mr. Muller is also featured in the film "Going Upriver" Described as "KERRY'S APOCALYPSE NOW!

As recently as Oct. 5th Muller confronted John O'Neill author of "Unfit for Duty" at a book signing event.
CHICAGO - (KRT) - The battle over John Kerry's Vietnam War record flared up in Chicago Tuesday, when members of a fledgling group that supports the Democratic presidential nominee confronted the author of an anti-Kerry book at a downtown luncheon.
At one point, the bickering became so intense that organizers called in police. No arrests were made, but the book signing and speech, sponsored by the City Club of Chicago, was punctuated with sharp exchanges between author John O'Neill and members of a group called
Several members of the group accused O'Neill of lying in his best-selling book, "Unfit for Command," in which O'Neill says Kerry exaggerated his service record.
"My book was the truth," O'Neill said after the luncheon. "I'm thrilled that they could bring people in and find not one single thing that was wrong with the book."
Debate over Kerry's service has raged since May, when O'Neill and other members of a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth came forward to challenge key portions of Kerry's record.
This summer the Swift Boat group began running commercials in battleground states - ads that have been credited with damaging Kerry's presidential campaign. When O'Neill's book was released in August, it became a best seller.
Members of said they organized to challenge O'Neill's claims that Kerry did not deserve his three Purple Hearts or military awards. Several members of the group, including Rich McCann, served with Kerry in Vietnam.
"It's time for us to bury Vietnam," McCann, of Cleveland, said before the City Club event. "It's time for us to move on to other issues."
But Kerry's Vietnam record was the only issue debated during O'Neill's visit, and tempers flared before the book signing portion at the Chicago Athletic Association on Michigan Avenue was completed.
As O'Neill autographed books for admirers, veteran Bobby Muller approached in his wheelchair, shook the author's hand, then asked repeatedly if O'Neill would debate him on Kerry's record.
After the two bickered for a few moments, O'Neill's wife, Anne, intervened, telling Muller to stop while nudging him away in his wheelchair.
"Tell her about the wreath you laid on Ho Chi Minh's grave," O'Neill said derisively, apparently in reference to a 1981 trip Muller made to Vietnam as a representative of the Vietnam Veterans of America, a group he formed in 1978 with Kerry.
A representative for Muller said the 1981 trip was part of an effort to get information on POWs and MIAs, and that Vietnamese soldiers, not Muller, laid the wreath at the gravesite.
"Come on, open it up, John," Muller told O'Neill. "Stop ducking me. Let's go head to head. Let's debate."
Organizers called in security and threatened to throw Muller out, but he was allowed to stay for the luncheon. Several times during O'Neill's speech, Kerry supporters in the audience jeered or shouted "that's not true" as O'Neill laid out the basis of his book.
Later when former Swift Boat captain and Kerry supporter Skip Barker asked a question, O'Neill dismissed him and others as Democratic Party plants.
Jim Wasser of Kankakee, who served with Kerry, said he joined the new group in part because he felt O'Neill and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were unfairly damaging the reputations of the men who served with Kerry.
"When you're lying, you're lying," Wasser said before the luncheon. "That's why we're drawing a line in the sand today."
© 2004, Chicago Tribune.

After going to the site I find that these are people who are going after the Swift Boat Vets for Truth. Imagine that, Bobby Muller, longtime friend of John Kerry disrupting and jeering O'Neill at a book signing. And of course attaching O'Neill to Nixon, which obviously makes him a Republican operative. Remember from my previous post regarding Kerry and Muller that Muller was one of a handful of protestors who showed up at the "Kerry Lied" Rally in September held in Washington DC. On July 31 of this year Muller was a speaker at Iraq Veterans against the War, where he stated the media does not tell the truth and urged participants to use the internet. Perhaps by sending phony draft emails?

On July 21, 2004 Mr. Muller was a speaker at the National 2004 Veterans for Peace Convention at which he expressed fear that the Bush administration is poised to send US Troops into Saudi Arabia to protect the monarchy.

In March he was speaking at a teach in (if that is not a throw back to the 70's) for veteransforcommonsense.
Scroll to the end and see who the sponsers are. And Yes Vietnam Veterans against the War are still quite active in today's anti-war activity. And Bobby Muller seems to be everywhere when it comes to anti-war activity, and it is very important to understand he is overtly campaigning for John Kerry, one could say so are a number of old Vietnam Vets. But what one of them began their anti-war activity with John Kerry and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, what one of them co-founded a Vietnam Veterans group with John Kerry, the only group that has a congressional charter, what one of them has people connected to John Kerry for President donating money to his Foundation, what one of them is consistantly using fear of a draft to help push young voters into Kerry's camp, even after the vote to not reimpose the draft?

From a news release from Rock the Vote-Alliance for Security
This is not a hoax. Congress voted tonight on the military draft. The vote was nearly unanimous against the draft. But does that mean that the issue is settled? Not in the least. This is not a partisan issue, clearly. All of Congress voted to oppose the draft. Not because we need a draft today, but because we need a real debate about whether one might be needed soon. A generation that may indeed be called to service deserves more than this. Any Member of Congress who votes against this bill should be able to explain how they would avoid a draft if a full-scale civil war erupts in Iraq or if we must take military action against Iran, North Korea, or another identified threat. See below for a statement released today by Rock the Vote and the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation/Alliance for Security.

Bobby Muller, mouthpiece for John Kerry.


Saturday, October 16, 2004

John Kerry, the Draft and the threads of 1971

"With George Bush, the plan for Iraq is more of the same and the great potential of a draft. Because if we go it alone, I don't know how you do it with the current overextension" of the military, Kerry said.

In 1971 John Kerry was a member of the Vietnam Veterans against the War, I think the vast majority of those who have taken the time to really look at the presidental candidates know this. Of course much of what caused anger against the war in Vietnam was the draft. One could do a post regarding the various people who were leaders in the VVAW but I would prefer to focus on just one.

Bobby Muller.

In early 1971 Bobby Muller helped found Vietnam Veterans against the War. Mr. Muller enlisted into the Marines while a senior at Hofstra University in 1967, by September of 1968 he was a combat LT. leading a Marine Platoon. Eight months into his tour he was wounded, and he came home paralyzed, forever to live his life from a wheelchair. By late 1971 he was making appearances at rallies. It was through the Vietnam Veterans against the War that he meant John Kerry. Both became leading activists for the VVAW.

In 1972 Bobby Muller along with Ron Kovic (of Born on the 4th of July fame) heckled Richard Nixon from the floor of the Republican National Convention by chanting "Stop the bombing, stop the war" until they were ejected from the hall.

Later Bobby Muller and John Kerry would leave the VVAW, though for what specific reasons I have been unable to find. One imagines that being leaders of a group that had a meeting where it was discussed as appropriate to assassinate pro war politicians may have led them to conclude it was no longer appropriate to continue with that group. Makes you want to shake your head and say "You Think?"

Later Bobby Muller was to go on to co-found Vietnam Veterans of America, the other founder is John Kerry. From John Kerry's own internet campaign site.
When he returned home, he became a spokesman for Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) and later co-founded Vietnam Veterans of America.
John Kerry remains a life time member of this group.

Later Bobby Muller again formed another offshot group, again I am unable to locate the reasons for this. He is now the President of the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation.There is a slight difference in dates regarding the founding of VVA(1978 or 1979)but both Bobby Muller and John Kerry are cited as founding members of Vietnam Veterans of America. It is the only congressionally chartered Vietnam Veterans organization. And it is the offshot of VVA that Bobby Muller is now President of.

When Vietnam Veterans held a rally in Washington DC in September against John Kerry one of a handful to show up as supporters for Kerry was Bobby Muller. Bobby Muller remains a supporter of John Kerry, why should he not be, they come from the same politics, then and now.
An offspring of Bobby Muller Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation is another group called the Alliance for Security. Recently fake draft emails were sent out to 640,000 thousand people from Rock the Vote and Alliance for Security. This is the text of that email.
This is not a real draft, but a real one may happen soon if the current situation doesn't improve.
As it is, our military is stretched almost to the breaking point trying to maintain troop levels in Iraq and around the world. If Pakistan, North Korea or other nations begin to pose new military threats, how would we expect to meet the demand for troops?
Did you know that:
* It would only take two to three days for Congress and the President to authorize a draft and set the Selective Service System's plans in motion?
* Twenty-year-olds would be the first to be inducted?
* Women are very likely to be included in the next draft?
It's up to us to educate ourselves. In the event of a draft, we won't have much time to form an opinion. And with just 34 days left until the election and only a few days left before many state registration deadlines, we need to take a stand now by registering to vote:
Copy this URL into your web browser to get the facts about a potential draft, and to find out what you can do:
Sincerely,Rock The VoteandAlliance For Security

Bobby Muller, cofounder with John Kerry of Vietnam Veterans of America , still good friend of John Kerry was caught sending fake draft emails through his Vietnam Veterans of America front group Alliance for Security. Both groups are intimately linked.

If you go to the Alliance for Security website-
then you to can send a fake draft notice to your friends, courtesy of Bobby Muller.

Here is a list of some who contributed to Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation
Bagley, Nicole L3/16/2004 $2,000.00Washington, DC 20016Vietnam Veterans of America Founda/ -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Muller, Robert O3/26/2003 $2,000.00Washington, DC 20009Vietnam Veterans of America Founda/ -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Terzano, John F3/26/2003 $1,000.00Alexandria, VA 22308Vietnam Veterans of America Founda/ -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Weidman, Richard F12/22/2003 $1,000.00Silver Spring, MD 20910Vietnam Veterans of America/Advocat -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Weidman, Richard F12/22/2003 $1,000.00Silver Spring, MD 20910Vietnam Veterans of America/Advocat -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Weidman, Richard F12/30/2003 $250.00Silver Spring, MD 20910Vietnam Veterans of America/Advocat -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Weidman, Richard F2/25/2004 $250.00Silver Spring, MD 20910Vietnam Veterans of America/Advocat -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Weidman, Richard Frank9/30/2003 $300.00Silver Spring, MD 20910Vietnam Veterans of America/Advocat -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC
Weidman, Rick1/16/2004 $250.00Silver Spring, MD 20910Vietnam Veterans Of America/Advocat -[Contribution]JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC

There's more but it becomes very redundent. Complete list here

Now the only people who have purposed a draft have been democrats, the bill was voted down in the last week with even the man who wrote it voting against it. One would think this is now a dead issue, but apparently John Kerry, self righteous demagoue screeching about Republican Fear Mongoring, feels it necessary to continue squealing about a draft. And his friend Bobby Muller as well as nonpartisan Rock the Vote were happy to help spread fear to young people who often look no further to ascertain the reality of the situation. It is also notable that some of the rock stars who are participating in Rock the Vote have helped with Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, highlight Bruce Springsteen. There are threads that pull Bobby Muller, the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, Alliance for Security, Rock the Vote and John Kerry all together. And they all are using the fear of a draft to attempt to elect a man that spit on his fellow vets as well as the military in general.

It's so good to have friends, especially the one who helped you build your political career on a web of slander and lies against the people you were purporting to help. Apparently that worked out for Kerry so well the same tactics will continue. Let's raise a glass to long term friendship!

For over thirty years these two men have been involved together in activities that are clearly anti-war. Through the Vietnam Veterans against the War they successfully likened their fellow vets as akin to Genghis Khan's army and today they team together to fan the flames of a non existant draft.

John Kerry's Vietnam experience and his later anti-war activities are very relevent today, as are his continuing connection to a man who helped found the group used to defame all Vietnam Vets. It matters because John Kerry makes it continue to matter. He cannot get out of 1971, and knowing that the draft was perhaps the biggest galvanizer against the Vietnam War seeks to recreate those same days using today's children to further his political aims.

Willing to use your children and mine, for reasons no different than his use of Vice Presidents Cheney's daughter. The lust for political power.


Friday, October 15, 2004

Is Mary Cheney "Fair Game" ?

The obvious answer to that question should be no. However if you are the candidate for the Democratic party that answer is obviously yes, and if you are the campaign manager for that candidate the answer is again obviously yes.

Let me put politics aside for a moment, as I believe this is not simply a political issue. It is an issue of honor, principle and common decent manners. Character if you will.

An honorable man does not utilize the children of one's opponent for political gain, anymore than a honorable man would intentionally slander and smear the millions of members of the armed services that participated in Vietnam. An honorable man would understand the unwritten and unspoken boundaries that disallow the use of someone's child in order to score political points. For over 30 years however, John Kerry's lust for power has led him repeatedly to violate honor, and principle. As a matter of principle one does not stand up on the Senate floor and give a personal story that is "seared, seared" into his memory of a completely bogus event. Most people call that lying.

An honorable party that has honorable differences with the other political party does not have campaign managers equate the going after another human being with the hunting of animals. I suppose however that a candidate who is so clueless as to take his trusty 12 gauge and belly crawl to hunt deer would be completely unable to grasp the difference in hunting deer and hunting humans, and is likely at a complete loss as to why his campaign managers verbal diarrhea is completely inappropriate. As clueless as he was to bring Mary Cheney into the debate to begin with.

Next we come to what should be common decent manners, something that seems in short supply not just now, but since those turbulent times of the 60's. Good manners by itself would dictate that one would not, in a very public manner, speak of someone else's personal life who has not given you permission to do so. It should come as no shock to anyone that Vice President Cheney has a daughter who is a lesbian, her parents have spoken of it at various times. However one imagines that she has spoken to her parents regarding this and was comfortable enough in the fact that they love her and would not deliberately hurt her, particularly in a public manner and would have given her parents permission to speak of her and her life. She did not give John Kerry any such permission. A man who has raged that the Patriot Act allows the government to go into your private life had no compunction in discussing the personal life of a private American citizen in front of millions of American's. Apparently John Kerry has upsurped the right to delve into the private life of anyone he deems politically advantageous to himself, thus the man who wishes to appear as the great defender of private life and personal liberties is unable to control himself enough to actually live the principles he so easily mouths. Shocking I know.

This should not be seen as an impulsive moment. There is nothing impulsive about John Kerry, he coldly calculates stratagems that he can utilize in his quest for political power. Who can think of any other serviceman who took the time to have a camera at hand so they could recreate scenes of combat to later to be used, however many years later, to bolster his self image of a heroic combat vet.

Then of course there is Mrs. Edwards characterizing the upset this has caused as the Cheney's being ashamed of their daughter, apparently it never occurred to her that it is nearly universally instinctual for parents to protect their children instead of using throwing them to the political wolves who smile as they call the child of their political opponent "Fair Game" I suppose to wolves anything is fair game when one is hungry enough.

I leave you with a quote from Samuel Adams, fiery patriot.
A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.
Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren, February 12, 1779


Patient Rights-Gay and Lesbian Couples

Let me quote something Edwards said in the Vice Presidental debate concerning homosexuality, this is only a small part of what was said in the exchange that included Edwards bringing up Ms. Cheney. This quote does not focus on that, but on something that I am much more intimately familiar with.

Quoting Edwards-
For example, a gay couple now has a very difficult time, one, visiting the other when they're in the hospital, or, for example, if, heaven forbid, one of them were to pass away, they have trouble even arranging the funeral.

Let me explain something, when someone visits a person in the hospital you do not have a nurse patrol out there making sure a gay or lesbian partner is kept out of the room. In fact the nurse may not keep any visitors out of the room unless it is deemed medically necessary and even then there are times it is very difficult to deal with. We often see gay or lesbian couples in the hospital, the partner is simply termed the significant other just like we do for couples who heterosexual who are not married.

A hospitalized patient has rights, as long as they are awake and alert they make the decision as to who may visit and who may not. The only time this is not in force is when the patient is unable to speak for themselves, in that case the person who has been deemed the Durable Power of Attorney makes that choice. This is how it works regardless of the sexual orientation of the patient. In the case that the patient does not have a DPOA, then the decision making falls to the next of kin. For married couples that is the partner not hospitalized, for children that is their parent and if that child is an adult but not married it is still the parent or parents who make decisions. If it is an adult child who is gay and who did not put a DPOA in place to ensure that their partner is legally able to speak for them and the parent that is now making decisions decides they don't want that partner involved then it is the choice of that parent not to allow that to happen. In some cases this means that a guardian will be sought by the hospital through the social worker, or the partner can go through legal means to have access or anything else they feel their partner wanted. However medical personnal or the medical facility does not get involved unless and only if what is happening is deemed harmful to the patients condition.

This situation is not any different than the patient who did not do a DPOA and has a wife or husband who is now making decisions when the patient is unable to, but there are children who are involved and who feel the person making decisions are felt by other's in the family to be making inappropriate decisions. In that case the children can ask for a guardian to be put in place, they can do this by working with the social worker in order to have someone who can explain the process to them or by hiring an attorney themselves. Generally in this type of situation a hospital social worker becomes involved when a referrel is given by medical staff because the staff feel that what is happening is detrimental to the patient or if the family members specifically request for assistance in dealing with their particular situation. When a situation develops when parties do not someone to visit, REGARDLESS OF THE SEXUAL ORIENTATION OF THE PATIENT, it is actually necessary for the family to get a court order to disallow visitation. I have seen this only three times in my 13 and a half year career as a nurse. In all three cases it involved heterosexual couples who had not married. Not once in my career have I ever seen homosexual couples be disallowed to see their partner.

It is very simple to ensure this situation does not occur for anyone, again regardless of sexual orientation,all it takes is for any person to fill out a DPOA form. All hospitals are legally bond to ask every single patient when they are admitted if they have a DPOA form and if they do not to offer it to them and to also offer a social worker to go over the paperwork with the patient so they can fill it out appropriately. The filled out form must be witnessed by two people, nurses are not allowed to be witnesses, but social workers and/or Pastors are or any other competant persons the patient deems. The DPOA form does not cost a dime, it does not require an attorney. Nursing homes are bond by the same law. I know I do this probably 20 times a week. If you wish to have DPOA papers and are not an admitted patient, you can still go to any hospital and get the appropriate paperwork, a brochure that explains it and any other assistance from the appropriate hospital personnel that you require. This simple form can save a great deal of heartbreak and upset/anger though it is important to point out that if you wish to have someone deal with your finances when you are incapable of doing so something more has to be done, again however it is a simple process that should be done prior to a problem.

I encourage all of my patients to do this and also encourage their family members that are not hospitalized to do this prior to being ill. If this is taken care of than it isvirtually impossible for anyone to take away the right of someone to be the speaker for the person who requested them to do this service without the dissenting party going to court and if they go to court they need to be very prepared to be able to prove why the patients wishes should not be followed. Every single patient who does not already have a DPOA recieves the appropriate paperwork to do so, again this is fully required by law. I am required to fully explain it, offer a social worker or pastor to speak to the patient and then I am required to chart the whole thing. This is not simply something that a medical facility does as a nice service, it is something that has grown out of patient rights issues and the fear of many people of having medical procedures such as being placed on a ventilator at end of life when they do not want this.

Any couple or any person for that matter, who wants to ensure that they have their wishes adhered to should ensure their future as well as the future of those they care for doing a DPOA and they should do it as soon as they have someone who is willing to be a DPOA no matter how young they are or how healthy they are because one never knows when an accident will happen.

I am not allowed nor is any other nurse in this country allowed to not give this information to someone simply because they are gay or lesbian. However, all medical personnal are fully bond by the privacy act of HIPPA which limits what information we are allowed to give without the express permission of the patient, that covers all patients regardless of sexual orientation, regardless of whatever situation the patient or their family members are in.

If there are homosexual couples who have not been able to visit their partner then it is because the patient is not able to speak for themselves and they have not taken the extremely easy step of making a DPOA and therefore someone else is calling the shots that, for whatever reason, have decided that the significant other cannot visit. It is not the hospital who does that, it is not the nurses who make that choice. We simply follow the legal guidelines that are in place. With DPOA the person holding that piece of paper has the right to make any and all decisions, it is that person who has the legal right to speak for the patient. The only time the hospital gets involved is if in the judgement of the physicians or nurses the DPOA is making poor choices and that discomfort is taken to the social worker or the ethics committee, then the hospital gets involved, but only because the medical personnal feel it is in the best interest of the patient, not because someone is gay and gasp! Visiting the sick patient.

DPOA is designed to protect patient rights by allowing any person who is of legal age to have someone they trust to make decisions the patient is no longer able to make for themselves. Again it is important to realize that all one has to do is to take personal responsiblity for their live and what they want. It is not necessary to involve the government in the decision making process, all it takes is a simple form and two witnesses.

Yet if you are not familiar with these simple guidelines than it is easy to believe the bunk that Edwards mouthed.


Laugh of the day

Driving to work yesterday and the truck in front of me at a stoplight had what I thought was a Kerry/Edwards bumper sticker on it. Looked just like one until I looked at it just a bit more and realized that it mimiced one. Looked almost exactly the same-except for the fine print.

Kerry/Edwards(with US Flag in between)
The only ticket so full of shit that it needs two johns.

Laughed the rest of the way into work.


Society and Sheepdogs

Read the article, it is very thought provoking.

Russ Vaughn sends us a poem inspired by this article.

The Sheepdogs

Most humans truly are like sheep
Wanting nothing more than peace to keep
To graze, grow fat and raise their young,
Sweet taste of clover on the tongue.
Their lives serene upon Life’s farm,
They sense no threat nor fear no harm.
On verdant meadows, they forage free
With naught to fear, with naught to flee.
They pay their sheepdogs little heed
For there is no threat; there is no need.

To the flock, sheepdog’s are mysteries,
Roaming watchful round the peripheries.
These fang-toothed creatures bark, they roar
With the fetid reek of the carnivore,
Too like the wolf of legends told,
To be amongst our docile fold.
Who needs sheepdogs? What good are they?
They have no use, not in this day.
Lock them away, out of our sight
We have no need of their fierce might.

But sudden in their midst a beast
Has come to kill, has come to feast
The wolves attack; they give no warning
Upon that calm September morning
They slash and kill with frenzied glee
Their passive helpless enemy
Who had no clue the wolves were there
Far roaming from their Eastern lair.
Then from the carnage, from the rout,
Comes the cry, “Turn the sheepdogs out!”

Thus is our nature but too our plight
To keep our dogs on leashes tight
And live a life of illusive bliss
Hearing not the beast, his growl, his hiss.
Until he has us by the throat,
We pay no heed; we take no note.
Not until he strikes us at our core
Will we unleash the Dogs of War
Only having felt the wolf pack’s wrath
Do we loose the sheepdogs on its path.

And the wolves will learn what we’ve shown before;
We love our sheep, we Dogs of War.

Russ Vaughn
2d Bn, 327th Parachute Infantry Regiment
101st Airborne Division
Vietnam 65-66

To get the full flavor you really must read the linked article above.


FCC will not block airing of Stolen Honor

You mean 18 Democrats don't realize that this is covered by the First Amendment? Imagine that.


Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Makes Your Head Whip Around

Yesterday CBS reported that major offensives in Iraq would be put on hold until after the election.

But then again maybe not.

Democrats plan to file complaint with FCC against Sinclair Broadcasting

They didn't mind when CBS used false documents in the attempt to highlight what Bush did or did not do 30 years ago, but now that there will be a smaller broadcast of John Kerry's undisputed anti-war activity and how it affected those who fought in Vietnam and those who were held as POW's NOW a broadcaster is biased.

To many of us Kerry's anti-war activity is highly relevent to today's world and today's campaign. It happened at a pivotal time in our history and given the pivotal times of today it is legitimate to broadcast the content of Stolen Honor.

Nobody but conservatives was pointing out the ties Rather had to the Democrats or his daugther's ties, but now the Post is making sure that everyone knows that Sinclair Broadcasting has donated money to the Republican's. Fair play is fair play. Report all of it, not just what you want.

I agreed with Sinclair refusing to air the reading of the names of dead soldiers in Iraq, primarily because it was a pure political ploy. The didn't bother to include the names of those who had been killed in Afganistan, it was not simply intended to honor war dead.

Personally I hope the showing of Stolen Honor causes John Kerry great emotional pain, as great as his activities caused others.


Monday, October 11, 2004

A Note on Blogging and Time

Any one who has read this blog previously will note that I am a nurse, for the last year and a half I have consistantly worked overtime and or homecare and in some cases both.

Last July I started doing sub contracting for wound care through agencies. The first case I picked up was with a patient that had a non healing wound that had been present for nearly three years with multiple hospital admissions and several surgeries. At that time I worked M-F as a wound care specialist at a long term acute care hospital or LTAC for short. It is a speciality hospital in which long term vent weaning, long term wound care and very difficult infections are dealt with. I always explained to people the type of hospital it is was doing what hospitals used to do before the advent of DRG's, only we did it better and more effectively by being able to focus the exact needed resources for those difficult to heal patients. I was scheduled to work 8 hour shifts but like so many nurses the end of the shift is rarely when it was supposed to be.

When I picked up the first home care case it meant that I would drive from the hospital 35 miles one way to the patients home after I had worked a full day, do the necessary wound care and documentation and then drive another 35 miles home. I did this every single day. I was there for every holiday, bringing my patient a plate of goodies and a good meal, something he did not always have. I tell this not because I am some wonderful nurse angel, I really am not. I have a keen interest in being able to heal wounds that have been unresponsive, because too often those wounds are unresponsive because the doc has absolutely no clue what to do with various types of wounds. That is a sad commentary but ever so true. I drove through driving rain during thunder storms and I drove through driving snow storms, just put the ole Jeep Wrangler in 4 wheel drive and off I went. I had made a commitment and would see it through. In December I picked up another patient, I tell about him in a post from Sunday.

At first I did not see the second patient Claude, every day. By this time I was picking up Saturday's to work on the floor at the hospital, in other words I was not doing my regular job I was working as a floor nurse. Of course no matter what I still ended up doing much of my regular job as well. The Saturday time was 12 hour shifts, most floor nurse today work that. From December to Febuary I juggled this all, and did it fairly successfully. Part of it was because I was earning extra money to ensure I could pay college tutuiton for my oldest child and part of it was an attempt to build a consulting business for wound care.

At the end of Feb. I had a terrific argument with the new nursing director for my facility. I had been pulled to do floor work on a day that I was to do wound care and then it happened the next day, but not only was I expected to take a patient load I was also being expected to do the wound care patients that needed to be seen as well. That effectively gave me 14 patients and I flat refused to do it. My license is far to precious to me to do dangerous work for one, and I refuse to do poor patient care. What the director did not know was that I had already gotten another job and intended on giving notice the following Monday, though I had intended to give a 45 day notice as there was no one in my facility trained to do wound care and it was my intent to train someone in at least the basics, though effective wound care takes at least a year to learn appropriately. I loved what I did, watching a wound heal that has been non healing is extremely gratifying for both me and the patient. But I knew it was time to leave as I was clashing often with the new director over what I felt constituted appropriate care.

So I left after this argument. I would not under any circumstances do care that I felt was either unsafe or poor. So I had a week off and started my new job. I now work 12 hour shifts at night, I took the night job because it worked out better with my agency wound care obligations. When I first started I was not working nights, I did many classes in cardiology because it was an area I was not familiar with and would stop by the one patients home in the morning and the other patient's home in the evening. By the end of April the first patient was essentially healed, at least to the point that a wound nurse was no longer warranted, and a regular nurse could handle it. I fully expected the wound to close within a couple weeks, checking in by phone with the patient confirmed that in three weeks he was completely healed.

I had started doing more visits with my other patient as his wound was not doing well and more aggressive treatment was required. I was also working 4 twelve hour shifts a week at the hospital so I had one day of overtime each week. Claude ended up in the hospital, two admissions together for about a 10 week period, it was the least amount that I worked for a year. I was still working 48 hours a week but it was ok. I would put my days close together so I could then have several days off together. The hospital I work at now allows self scheduling and as long as all needs are covered the days you choose to work are not changed. It was a nice way of being able to do things over the summer and then I could spend several days in a row off while my kids were out of school.

When Claude came home from the hospital it was the end of July and I started seeing him twice a day every day, as well as my 4 twelve hour night shifts at the hospital. It worked out well because I would see him on my way home and then on my way to work. I won't lie it was tiring but I was doing what I wanted and it worked well for my family life. I had gotten quite close to Claude and healing him became a huge priority for me. 7 or 8 weeks ago I started picking up weekend 11-7 shifts with him at his home and dropped my hospital overtime. Initially I did it to help cover for someones vacation and we had just gone to 8 hour shifts there instead of the 12 that the agency was doing. Claude liked having me there so much he wanted that to continue and it meant that the regular 11-7 gal could have every weekend off. This was available to me because my unit at the hospital is an outpatient unit and we had started to close on the weekend instead of staying open for only 2-3 patients who could be taken care of on another floor saving the hospital some $30,000 per weekend.

Life was busy for me but it was a good busy. With the 11-7 shifts I could sleep but still get up and have time to spend with my kids and the other days I was sleeping while they were in school. My hubby tolerated it because he supports me in my endeavors and knowing that we had one child in college and he is also taking classes and the next child off to college next year, as well as finishing the remodeling of an old farmhouse it was good to have the money coming in. I loved what I was doing in both jobs and the agency had plans to expand as far as wound care so there was much to look forward to.

Every day I saw Claude and we would joke and laugh and enjoy the relationship that we had. Each morning I would come in and his wife would have a cup of coffee ready for me, and after I did my wound care we would chat along with the other nurse that was there. I became good friends with the other nurses, we shared books and movies and things that we thought the other may be interested in.

On Sunday morning Claude died, and I lost a good friend, not just a patient. For a year and a half I have spent every nearly every single day except when my first patient healed and Claude ended up in the hospital driving out to someone's home. And even then I was working overtime anyway. Yesterday I had no where to go. Today I had no where to go. No patient that needed to be taken care of, no overtime to go to. It is an incredibly odd sensation. So many times yesterday and today I had that anxious feeling of having forgotten something to simply realize that I just didn't have anywhere that I needed to go. My heart hurts and every time I have that feeling of I was supposed to be somewhere I remember why I don't need to be, which only makes me feel worse.

So I have blogged to fill my time. The kids were at school today, hubby doing his thing and I simply had nothing to do. Such an odd sensation. I'm reading a book on Ghengis Khan that is really very good but could not get into it, after I read the same paragraph for half a dozen times I just gave up.

There have been few days in the last year and a half that I did not feel very blessed in my life. And part of that blessing was the unexpected chance to know Claude. It was a job I did not go looking for, it was a job that found me.

I think maybe I have posted too much today, but it helps me keep other things off my mind, so excuse my excess today. My life was touched by a wonderful guy and I shall miss him very much.