Friday, August 31, 2007

Casualties of Peace

Yesterday, Brian De Palma's "Redacted" screened at the Venice Film Festival.



..............Where are the Hollywood conservatives at a time when no less than 8 anti-war movies are coming out at this critical juncture?

David Gritten writes,
there's no doubt Redacted packs an extraordinary emotional punch. It ends with shocking still photos of Iraqis, dead, disfigured or in extreme distress because of the war. This montage left the audience at a Venice press screening stunned, silent and in a few cases tearful. The combination of De Palma's visceral style and the horrifying subject matter left me reeling.
What about cutting off faces with piano wire? Blowtorching, eye-removal, drilling holes? Baking children and serving them up to the parents? What about the atrocity of insurgents strapping a suicide vest onto a child with Down's Syndrome, and then sending him off to explode? Using children as decoys to drive a car bomb through a checkpoint? Or perhaps using children as human shields? Just plain using children. What does Brian De Palma's film have to say about these atrocities? That we're responsible for these as well, because we're "over there"? That al-Qaeda and insurgent atrocities are "isolated" cases, whereas the story about the rape of a 14 year old Iraqi girl by U.S. soldiers in his fictionalized account of it, is typical and representative of our military?

As one commenter, Zhangliqun, on Dennis Prager's blog points out,
If this is an indictment of American involvement in Iraq, what does it say about the UN, who sent rapist "peace keepers" into Africa?

Or about Socialism, whose soldiers were actually ORDERED by Stalin to rape German women when they invaded Germany?

[redacted] Or what about all the rapists in jail, the overwhelming majority of which vote Democrat if they vote at all? [/redacted]

Oh, by the way, there were incidents of American soldiers raping German women in WW2 also. I suppose the fear of such a possibility should have left Hitler in power. And Tojo.
Should we hold our soldiers to a higher standard? Of course! We don't need Brian De Palma's film to achieve that. All that De Palma's film does, is it serves al-Qaeda and all the anti-American forces that are working against America and her self-interests; and America's self-interest just so happens to coincide with what is in the best interest of Iraq. Arrogance? You tell me.

America has done more good for the world than evil. What is evil, is magnifying an evil act and distorting the perception that this is the normal behavior of what is the best military in the world; a military that has gone above and beyond what any military in the history of conflict has ever done to avoid civilian casualties.

De Palma, 66, whose "Casualties of War" in 1989 told a similar tale of abuse by American soldiers in Vietnam, makes no secret of the goal he is hoping to achieve with the film's images, all based on real material he found on the Internet.

"The movie is an attempt to bring the reality of what is happening in Iraq to the American people," he told reporters after a press screening.

"The pictures are what will stop the war. One only hopes that these images will get the public incensed enough to motivate their Congressmen to vote against this war," he said.

F**k you, De Palma!

Just which reality is he referring to? Showing the horrible images of war and violent death is not an indictment on the necessity to fight this war; it's an indictment to stick your head in the sand and avoid all wars. The absence of war does not equate with bringing about peace.

"Peace is not merely the absence of war, but the presence of justice, of law, of order- in short, of government."-Albert Einstein

"They have not wanted peace at all; they have wanted to be spared war- as though the absence of war was the same as peace."- Dorothy Thompson

For those with the stomach for it, (especially for those Venice Film Festival attendees who had their emotion-strings tugged by Brian De Palma's film, lapping up the propaganda) I recommend you click here for some mild but effective counter images.

It boggles my mind that the peace fascists who hold up signs and photos of dead Iraqi babies is somehow supposed to convince me that ending the war on their terms will somehow cause such images as dead Iraqi babies to go away.

Which side has slaughtered more Muslims? Al-Qaeda, or the U.S.? Which side makes every effort- to minimize collateral damage (and consequently putting our soldiers' lives at greater risk) and which side deliberately targets civilian casualties to splash across headline news?

Which side builds hospitals, mosques, schools, and infrastructure? Which side shows greater kindness and compassion toward the Iraqi children?

Which side is attempting to bring peace and security to the Iraqi people, and which side wishes to sabotage efforts for peace, subjugate a populace, and create a caliphate as a launching pad for more conflicts and greater wars with the world at large?

A host of anti-war Hollywood movies are on the horizon, and they are rooting for defeat and retreat. The "compassion" of the anti-war left ignores reality and consequence. They crave for peace without consideration that peace is not achieved by "bring the troops home"/"peace is patriotic"/"books not bombs"/ mantras. Removing us from the field of battle does not achieve peace at all. Fighting and defeating our enemies, does.

The casualties of peace- the kind of peace that the anti-war left advocates for- will bring more suffering; not less.

Previous Flopping Aces posts, related:
Sean Penn visit to Chavez
More Leftist Propaganda from Hollywood
Hollywood Set to Launch Anti-War Movies In Time For The Election

Hat tip for this post:
Confederate Yankee
Dennis Prager
Rantings of a Sandmonkey

Also blogging:
Bloviating Zeppelin
Now for Something Different
The Oxford Medievalist

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Superbad Potty Humor

So let me get this STRAIGHT: Senator Craig holds a press conference saying that the only thing he did wrong was plead guilty to a criminal charge?!?!


Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

The Quagmire in Afghanistan

Number of unconfirmed deaths in a battle in Shah Wali Kot district in Kandahar province:

Taliban-led insurgents: 100 +

Afghan soldiers: 1

Coalition forces: 0

So who's winning in Afghanistan? And yet we're supposed to pull troops out of Iraq, and fight the "real" enemy in Afghanistan, and not in Iraq?

Another great speech by the President to the American legion.

President Bush hugs a member of the audience after addressing the 89th American Legion national convention in Reno. He accused Iran of fomenting instability in the Middle East. By Evcan Vucci, AP, via USA Today.

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Washington Post Firing Blanks

Best comment on a story debunked a week ago by Confederate Yankee:
dotellen wrote:
We're shooting them in Iraq, so we don't have enough amunition to shoot them
here at home...
8/28/2007 12:24:16 AM
Hmmm.....ammunition shortage?

Not in Iraq, apparently, if we're just throwing bullets, cartridge and all, at the enemy.

Labels: , , ,

Monday, August 27, 2007

Caption This

John Kerry not so swift a vet....

...American Thinker has the details on why.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, August 26, 2007


The Unbroken Glass Half-Filled

There at the first corner, I see it. New glass. Someone has put new glass in a shop. Someone only installs new glass when they think it won't get broken. New glass is confidence.
Read the context...

Hat tip: Charlie Foxtrot, via Rocket's Brain Trust

Labels: ,

Saturday, August 25, 2007

Saturday Morning ABC Schoolhouse Rock: Interjections!

One of my childhood favorites!

I love the part where the lone fan says, "Hurray! I'm fer da udda team!"

Nowadays, that could be taken in more than one sense of the phrase....maybe back then too; but I don't know! I was just a kid in the 70's!!!!

Labels: , ,

Thursday, August 23, 2007

The Democratic Party is Lost

Articles of Note:
from of all places: Fallujah catches its breath
George Will Waiting for September in Iraq
Cliff May Fighting for Hearts, Minds and Souls

Visit Freedom's Watch.

Flopping Aces The Good News You Won't Hear
Hugh Hewitt: Will 10,000 Terrorists Killed or Captured in Iraq in 2007 Lead the MSM News Tonight (Check the link to Ace of Spades). Curt also links to the story.
Dragon Lady's Den on Congressional approval rating
The Liberal Lie, the Conservative Truth on how Iraq is splitting Democrats and 2008 vote
Midnight Blue blogging the Surge
Mike's America and Bottomline Up Front cover President Bush's speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention. (Also read Hewitt's post on The Approach of the Arab Pol Pot)
The Oxford Medievalist on Levin and Hillary and the Surge. Also, Marie's Two Cents on Hillary and Democrats.
Freedom Eden on Democrats insist on losing Iraq
The Bill T Blog blogging the surge

More links to be added....

Mike's America: Do We Listen to Soldiers Who Have Earned the Right to be Heard?
story of Iraqi hero you should know about: Bottom Line Up Front, Mike's America.

Seven Iraqi war vets for freedom respond to the 7 Iraqi war vets in the NYT op-ed.

Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

The Con-Vick

Monday, August 20, 2007

Caption This

Sunday, August 19, 2007

Surge-ical Procedure: Rooting out the Defeat-Mongers

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Saturday Morning Cartoon: Animaniacs U.S. Presidents

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Are Conservative Bloggers as "Hateful" as Liberal Bloggers?

Gayle alerted me to her e-mail being read on Bill O'Reilly (Gayle: Do you recall what else you wrote in your mail?). It was in regards to an apparent segment involving the Daily Kos.

So, being out here on the westcoast, I taped the segment. I did buy a tvcard for my computer, but have not had time to figure out how to install it; so, if it's not obvious, I simply used my digital camera and videoed off of my archaic non-plasmic tv set, to share with fellow blogbuddies of the Dragon Lady:

In general, (IN GENERAL!!!), who is more "gentlemanly", respectful, and "well-behaved" in the blogosphere: The right-wing attack dogs or the left-wing moonbats?

You decide.

Remember: Keep your comments pithy; no bloviating.

As far as foul-language and vitriol goes, I'd give it up to the KosKiddies and their kith and kin. But then, that might just be because I'm unapologetically a partisan center-right pro-war-on-Islamic-terror 9/11 conservative blogger and noncard-carrying member of the vast right-wing conspiracy.

Also, on related posts:
Burkean Reflections
Daily Kos
Dean Barnett
Hugh Hewitt
Freedom Eden
Skye Puppy
The Oxford Medievalist

Labels: , ,

Monday, August 13, 2007

Caption This

Thanks to everyone who participated with captions. They were all amusing. As of the end of Monday, my favorite is:

"Have you hugged your Hobbit today?"- angevin13

With honorable mention to:

"When I'm choking on my own ideas...I do the self-heimlich maneuver like this."- Tom K.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Sunday Funnies

Saturday, August 11, 2007

ABC Schoolhouse Rock: Rufus Xavier Sasparilla

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Dhimmi Я NOT Us

In light of some of the (expected) comments my posts and Gayle's posts have generated, regarding the use of words other than "jihadist" to describe the Islamic terrorists (and also in being able to distinguish the difference between their cultural and religious sympathizers, enablers, apologists, and supporters from that of moderate Muslims who embrace modernity, separation of mosque and state, and the divorce of politics and religious teachings), I thought I'd continue speaking out on behalf of the moderate Muslims who do not wish to dhimmify you and me. PBS may not recognize them as true Muslims since they aren't the CAIR-brand of moderates; but this lil' ol' blogger does.

I recalled seeing this video posted up by CJ back in February:

This is the second in a series of videos from troops from all services about why they serve. Marine SGT Abdelhalim is a Muslim serving his country at Al Asad Airbase in Iraq. He is an avionics technician responsible for making sure that our troops' air support is on target and ready to go.
Is he part of the "vast Islam-wing Conspiracy" to dhimmi-down western society? Or a true jihadist against the "false" "jihadists"? If nothing else, he is an American soldier, fighting for his country: the U.S.A.

Also of interest: The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (the anti-CAIR).

I got to shake hands with Dr. Zuhdi Jasser a couple of months ago. An extremely articulate and courageous voice in the ideological war for the soul of Islam:

Please visit my previous post and read the comments section. I've also left a number of comments at Gayle's blog, and Amy Proctor's. It might help clarify and flesh out my position better than the posts, themselves.

I think this is an important discussion to have, and another front in the war against Islamic terrorism.

Check out Michael Medved's column, "Why Not Bomb Mecca?" It was also discussed first hour, today.

Also blogging related posts:
Bottomline Up Front
Conservatism with a Heart
Harkonnen's Hodgepodge
Mike's America

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Defeat Retreat

Sunday, August 05, 2007


A couple of months ago, I described why I felt that in the war to win hearts and minds, we should engage in the propagandizing of the term hirabah over jihad, when referring to the ideological movement of the radical fundamentalists who wish to war with the West and the rest.

This isn't about "appeasing" the multiculturalists by not labeling and identifying the enemy; or a refusal to call them who they are, because of misguided political correctness in not wanting to "offend" anyone. This is about waging counter-propaganda.

The jihadis want to refer to themselves as martyrs. Holy warriors. Jihadi. They are nothing of the kind. They are thugs and killers of the innocent; and fanatics and lunatics of an intolerant ideology. We should not give the jihadi movement the legitimacy of language. We should strip them of that dignity and distinction, and call them hirabi, or hirabahists.

Dr. Walid Phares writes,
this giant doctrine, which motivated armies and feelings for centuries, also inspired contemporary movements that shaped their ideology based on their interpretation of the historical Jihad. In other words, today's Jihadists are an ideological movement with several organizations and regimes who claim that they define the sole interpretation of what Jihad was in history and that they are the ones to resume it and apply it in the present and future. It is equivalent to the possibility that some Christians today might claim that they were reviving the Crusades in the present. This would be only a "claim" of course, because the majority of Christians, either convinced believers or those with a sociological Christian bent, have gone beyond the Christianity of the time of the Crusades.

Today's Jihadists make the assertion that there is a direct, generic, and organic relation between the Jihads in which they and their ancestors have engaged from the seventh century to the twenty-first. But historical Jihad is one thing, and the Jihad of today's Salafists and Khumeinists is something else.

Whether or not those moderates portrayed in Islam vs. Islamists are the mainstream majority or the mainstream minority, reformation of Islam from 7th century practice and interpretation is necessary if it is to survive in peaceful coexistence with the rest of the world in the 21st. And we do well to encourage that growth by not legitimizing the "Jihad Movement". We do this whenever we refer to the hirabahists in the language with which they want to identify themselves, and use to propagandize their hatred.

We do a disservice to ourselves and to the War against Islamic Terror by referring to the hirabis as jihadists, every bit as much as we do a disservice and dishonesty in not recognizing "Islam" as part of their identity.

The Islamists (i.e., the radical extremist fundamentalist wahabbi sulafists) are attempting to pull us all into a clash of civilizations (it is not: it is a clash between all of civilization versus barbarism), and a war between East and West, Muslim and infidels. Just as al-Qaeda in Iraq fomented the eruption of sectarian violence with the al-Askari Mosque bombing (the mastermind of this and the more recent twin minaret bombing is said to have been killed on August 2nd), so too do they wish to pull both sides into THEIR war. They force all Muslims to choose sides. And I fear that in some instances, we risk alienating Muslims who might otherwise choose the path of peace and alliance with us, and not with the hirabahists.

I agree in fighting the "jihadists" on every front, and at every level; part of doing so, is in taking away the language of legitimacy from them and not refer to them by what they want to call themselves. For many Muslims, the term "jihad" has positive connotations. Whether linked to historical pride and romanticizing past glories; or with the "greater jihad" of spiritual inner struggle. So, when we allow ourselves to go along with the "jihadists" to define the meaning and connotations of "jihad" in the English language to signify the negative (terrorists, murderers, religious fanatics, homicide bombers, etc.), we give them the legitimacy of language.

Why should we?

*UPDATE* In my original post, an anonymous commenter left this link to other useful terms.

Further reading, from Gayle: Michael Waller's Making Jihad Work for America

Related blogging:
Bottomline Up Front on Congressman Ellison's recent comments
Bottomline Up Front on Muslims say to terrorism: "This is not us."
Dragon Lady's Den and also an update on The Importance of Language in Fighting Wars.
Serving the People of Iraq posts on FOX's Muslims vs. Jihad and Islam vs. Islamists.

Labels: , , , , ,

Color Me Un-Amazed!

Saturday, August 04, 2007

Saturday Morning Cartoons: All Fifty States and Their Capitols

Don't jeopardize your chance for sing-a-long fun!

Another way to have fun learning a little about all 50 States.

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, August 02, 2007

of Sticks and Stones....

Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

© Copyright, Sparks from the Anvil, All Rights Reserved