Operation Arrowhead Thunder? Who knew?

Soldiers conducting Operation Arrowhead Thunder also have uncovered more than 1,000 roadside bombs around the provincial capital, Baqubah, where the offensive is being conducted, Iraqi security officials said.

I'm sure that the Times' crack reporters and editorial staff will soon provide us with an exclusive interview with General Perseus himself.

(h/t Hot Air's new headline thingy)

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

Just eight days ago, in advance of the now-engaged campaign in Baquba, Italian-based "news" site Uruknet re-posted in full an article by The Peoples Voice, a site dedicated, according to the masthead, to "Environmental, political, and social justice issues."

The People's Voice post attempts to re-raise the specter of the "illegal" use of Mark 77 firebombs and white phosphorus ordnance that they and other questionable media outlets claimed were used against civilians in the 2004 assault on Fallujah and in the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003. The article features three graphic pictures of victims that the site intones were killed with firebombs and white phosphorus.

There's a funny thing about at least two of those three pictures, however.

The first image they use in line with comments about the use of Mark 77 firebombs in 2003 was actually taken in Fallujah in 2004, following the American assault on that city, and was featured in the Italian-made documentary Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre that I roundly debunked in November of 2005.

As I stated at the time about this photo:

Body 3. 9:38 Extremely decomposed remains, cause of death undetermined. No apparent burn marks on the body or clothes.

Body 3 referred to the order of appearance of the remains, and 9:38 corresponds to when the photo was shown in the documentary. Interestingly enough, while the People's Voice leave the reader to infer that this body was the victim of a firebomb, the Italian documentary claimed that this body had been killed by white phosphorus. Details, details...

While the photo is of extremely low quality (and therefore easy to spin any way you desire), it is clear the corpse is clothed. Something that burns as hot as napalm or firebomb would likely have burned the clothing completely away, if not most or all of the body as well.

The fact of the matter is that we don't know what killed this suspected insurgent in Fallujah, and the attempt by the RAI documentary to claim he/she was a victim of white phosphorus is equally irresponsible as the People's Voice attempt to link the corpse to a a strike by a Mark 77 at any point in the war, much less a period in time that doesn't coincide with the claims made in the article's text.

The next body shown in the People's Voice article was also lifted from the RAI documentary, and led the reader to believe this body was the dead suspected insurgent was killed by white phosphorus.
Really?

As I noted when I first saw this picture in the RAI documentary:

Body 18. 19:40 Military-aged male, moderately decomposed. No sign of burns on face or clothes.

Once again, (like every single photo in the RAI documentary) there is no physical evidence on this corpse consistent with white phosphorous wounds.

Chris Milroy, professor of forensic pathology at the University of Sheffield (England), after seeing these bodies in the RAI documentary, said:

..."nothing indicates to me that the bodies have been burnt". They had turned black and lost their skin "through decomposition".

It might also be worth noting that the author of the Guardian article cited above made false claims regarding the use of thermobaric weapons in Fallujah (to the best of my knowledge, precisely one thermobaric weapon has been dropped in wartime, and that was used against a cave in Afghanistan).

The third body shown in the People's Voice article, point or origin unknown, also shows a badly decomposed body, cause of death unknown and partially skeletal, as some sort of incendiary weapons victim as well, without any pathological proof presented.

As for the actual charges made in the People's Voice article...

Well, to call them "highly selective" in nature would be fair, as would be calling them "inconsistent" with the military use of white phosphorus even on personnel, "ignorant" as to its actual effects of such weapons on the human body (it would burns holes in a person that did not brush or shake it off; it does not engulf them), and "misleading" overall.

In other words, the entire article is unreliable, but as People's Voice is concerned with environmental issues, we can at least commend them for recycling the dead.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:36 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 707 words, total size 5 kb.

MNF-I released comments this morning regarding the opening day of Operation Arrowhead Ripper, targeting al Qaeda elements in Baquba, capitol of Iraq's Diyala Province.

The 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division launched the offensive with a quick-strike night air assault early Tuesday morning.

"The end state is to destroy the al-Qaeda influences in this province and eliminate their threat against the people," said U.S. Army Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek, deputy commanding general of operations for the 25th Infantry Division. "That is the number one, bottom-line, up-front, in-your-face task and purpose."

About 10,000 Soldiers, with a full complement of attack helicopters, close-air support, Strykers and Bradley fighting vehicles, are taking part in Arrowhead Ripper, which is still in its opening stages. Elements of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division; the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division and the 25th Combat Aviation Brigade are also participating in the operation.

The MNF-I release claims 22 terrorists killed; VOA News now puts the count at 30, while Earthtimes says 13 other suspect members of al Qaeda were captured, along with weapons caches and roadside bombs.

Soldiers from the 2nd Brigade, 5th Iraqi Army also engaged al Qaeda targets in Baquba, killing four suspected terrorists and capturing two more.

One U.S. soldier has been killed and two have been injured thus far in the operation.

I'd remind readers that this operation, just underway, will no doubt result in an attempt by al Qaeda propagandists and journalists with questionable sources to allege war crimes, as similar debunked charges were brought up during and after the battle of Fallujah.

Some ersatz media sites sympathetic to jihadists are still running these already debunked claims, and will no doubt attempt to recycle these claims for Operation Arrowhead Ripper (Gee, do the pictures of bodies linked here look familiar to those in the UrukNet photos? They've mysteriously transformed from the bodies of innocent victims of white phosphorus "poison gas" to being victims of napalm or Mark 77 firebombs, even though none were used in Fallujah).

As a side note, white phosphorus has already been used in Baquba...as a screening agent for American forces to move behind and through to avoid enemy fire, which is one of its primary battlefield uses.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.

So South Carolina, who will you choose in the next Republican Senate primaries, Lindsay Graham, or an indicted coke dealer?

I'm guessing that the coke dealer will at least close the border to other cartels, so that's at least a minor improvement

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 06:04 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

How can they call it a "graduation" when it is obvious that not a single student has taken the final exam?

I demand accountability.

Heh. In the comments at Hot Air, "Those who can, bomb. Those who can't, make videos. "

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:43 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.

Up to 10,000 U.S. Troops have mounted an air and ground assault in Baquba:

Up to 10,000 U.S. soldiers backed by armored vehicles and helicopter gunships fought their way into an al Qaeda haven in Iraq on Tuesday, killing at least 22 extremist fighters, the military said.

Operation Arrowhead Ripper, involving Strykers and Bradley Fighting Vehicles, was aimed at dismantling al Qaeda operations around Baquba, a hotbed of unrest north of Baghdad, a military statement said.

Baquba is the capital of Diyala province, a mixed region located north and east of Baghdad and bordering Iran. Military officials believe some al Qaeda in Iraq elements have recently migrated from Baghdad and Anbar province to Diyala.

The 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division kicked off the operation "with a quick-strike nighttime air assault earlier today," the military said Tuesday.

Ground troops joined the attack helicopters in engaging the militants, 22 of whom were killed by daylight, the military said.

Michael Yon is on the ground with U.S. forces, and writes via email:

We just attacked Baqubah (or let's say it's just begun) and I am here. Very, very busy. US forces appear to be meeting objectives so far. There is fighting and casualties on both sides, but mostly I am seeing order so far.

He posts about the opening stages of the operation in Diyala on his latest dispatch:

The doctor has made a decision: Al Qaeda must be excised. That means a large scale attack, and what appears to be the most widespread combat operations since the end of the ground war are now unfolding. A small part of that larger battle will be the Battle for Baquba. For those involved, it will be a very large battle, but in context, it will be only one of numerous similar battles now unfolding. Just as this sentence was written, we began dropping bombs south of Baghdad and our troops are in contact.

Northeast of Baghdad, innocent civilians are being asked to leave Baquba. More than 1,000 AQI fighters are there, with perhaps another thousand adjuncts. Baquba alone might be as intense as Operation Phantom Fury in Fallujah in late 2004. They are ready for us. Giant bombs are buried in the roads. Snipers—real snipers—have chiseled holes in walls so that they can shoot not from roofs or windows, but from deep inside buildings, where we cannot see the flash or hear the shots. They will shoot for our faces and necks. Car bombs are already assembled. Suicide vests are prepared.

The enemy will try to herd us into their traps, and likely many of us will be killed before it ends. Already, they have been blowing up bridges, apparently to restrict our movements. Entire buildings are rigged with explosives. They have rockets, mortars, and bombs hidden in places they know we are likely to cross, or places we might seek cover. They will use human shields and force people to drive bombs at us. They will use cameras and make it look like we are ravaging the city and that they are defeating us. By the time you read this, we will be inside Baquba, and we will be killing them. No secrets are spilling here.

Read that again, "Baquba alone might be as intense as Operation Phantom Fury in Fallujah in late 2004."

The "Mahogany Ridge" media is tied up in the latest suicide bombing in Baghdad (simply look at the title, lede, and focus of the CNN article cited above as an example), and even those who chose to feature the Baquba assault clearly don't understand the magnitude of the just-joined battle.

Once reality slowly dawns on the media that they are misunderestimating the scope and scale of the assault, steel yourself for a rush of inaccuracies as they seek to get something, anything published, much of it based upon rumor, some of it based upon outright propaganda and lies.

We saw the same during and after Fallujah, when the U.S. military was accused of using napalm on civilians. We don't even have napalm.

The ignorati claimed that white phosphorus was a "chemical weapon," or a "poison gas" and ascribed horrible wounds to it. These claims turned out to be completely untrue.

There may also once again be claims that using .50-caliber machine guns and the cannons of Bradley IFVs and helicopter gunships against terrorist personnel somehow violates the Geneva Conventions. It doesn't.

We'll be hearing and seeing much more from Diyala Province, Baquba proper, and other areas surrounding Baghdad as full-scale surge operations seek to envelop and destroy al Qaeda.

Read smart.

Update: Over at Captains Quarters Ed Morrissey adds some good analysis, and Glenn Reynolds features a longer email from Yon.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:15 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 797 words, total size 5 kb.

Or so he boasts in Men's Vogue.

Men's Vogue?

I'm sure copies are flying off the shelf at Tractor Supply Company as we speak.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:21 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

Last week I published Burning the Smoking Gun, which rebuffed/debunked a claim made by Thomas Harding in a February 12, 2007 U.K. Daily Telegraph article, which made the claim that "more than 100" HS50 .50-caliber long-range precision sniper rifles purchased by the Iranian government from the Austrian company Steyr-Mannlicher were captured in Iraq by U.S. forces.

I confirmed via U.S. Army LTC Christopher C. Garver, Director of the Combined Press Information Center for Multinational Corps-Iraq that no such rifles had ever been documented as being recovered by American forces.

30 minutes ago, Reinhild Wohltan, acting on behalf of Dr. Viktor Bauer PR GmbH, sent along a press release regarding my story. Below is the press release, as copied into a GIF format from the original PDF:

Steyr-Mannlicher once again denies the rumor published as fact in the Daily Telegraph article, and notes that were these rifles to be used for anthing other than "legitimate and important law enforcement purposes," that Steyr's agreement with the Iranian government would be breached, and intones that if the Iranian-purchased HS50 rifles were captured for "non-legitimate use"--i.e., sniping at Coalition forces within Iraq--that they would "offer support to clarify matters," which I would interpret to mean as offer to compare the serial numbers of any rifles recovered to serial numbers of those purchased by Iran.

The Daily Telegraph has not updated their original article to note that their charges are unsupported, and there is no intention that they will.

SO much for those multiple layers of fact checkers and professional media accountability.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:29 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 269 words, total size 2 kb.

Actually his words were "nuke the shit out of the place," but you get the drift:

Britain joined the United States' invasion to oust the Taliban in 2001 because it feared America would "nuke the shit" out of Afghanistan, the former British ambassador to Washington reportedly told a television documentary to be screened Saturday.

In comments printed in advance in the Daily Mirror tabloid on Monday, Christopher Meyer said that fear explained why Prime Minister Tony Blair chose to stand with US President George W. Bush in his decision to invade Afghanistan in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks -- to temper his aggressive battle plans.

"Blair's real concern was that there would be quote unquote 'a knee-jerk reaction' by the Americans ... they would go thundering off and nuke the shit out of the place without thinking straight," Meyer reported told the documentary, according to the Mirror.

This makes perfect sense, of course, considering our history. We nuked Iraq after Abdul Rahman Yasin detonated a sodium cyanide-laced bomb in the first attack on the World Trade Center complex in 1993 and fled to that country, did we not? It was the first attempted WMD attack on the United States, and we responded accordingly. Didn't we?

Previously, we'd nuked Lebanon after the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing and Iran during the Hostage Crisis.

We're just a bunch of nuke-crazy fools!

Except that we aren't...

Frankly, this strikes me as the same kind of hyperventilating we heard over the self-debunking collection of seven British documents known as the "Downing Street Memos." Conspiracy theorists live citing the first, but shun mentioning that the David Manning Memo and the Iraqi Options Paper (PDF), two other documents in the series, indicate that a decision to invade was not the foregone conclusion they claimed.

You'll note that the British Christopher Meyer ambassador makes these claims, but at least in this account, doesn't seem to have any evidence to support his claim. How convenient.

The fact that Afghanistan's Taliban was not concentrated into an area where deploying a nuclear weapon would be a feasible option, that any fallout would potentially affect China, Pakistan and India, and that such a strike would fail to root out al Qaeda and Taliban elements somehow didn't factor into this article, or into Meyer's thinking.

I'd love to see what evidence Meyer can produce to show that we seriously considered using nuclear weapons against a largely mountainous, largely rural country in a dramatic over-response that would not likely produce the results of eliminating the Taliban and al Qaeda without also eliminating a much larger non-involved civilian population. I'd like to see documents supporting that we seriously considered what would be nothing less than visiting upon Afghanistan the kind of nuclear genocide Iranian President Mamoud Ahmadinejad keeps promising to deliver to the state of Israel. I suspect we won't get it.

Like the original Downing Street Memo that is the staple of Iraq War conspiracy theorists, this claim is likely the result of not "even fourth-hand" knowledge.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:45 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 532 words, total size 4 kb.

1 "... I'd like to see documents ..." We don't need no stinkin' documents. If it paints; Bush, America, Americans in a bad light, that's enough for any wacko.

Posted by: DoorHold at June 18, 2007 09:49 AM (MeIzN)

2 This sounds like an over statement. But after Bush has burned his own conservative base I am beginning to think that maybe other people saw something in the nut before we did.

Posted by: David Caskey at June 18, 2007 09:51 AM (G5i3t)

3 Sure everythings on the table to prevent iran from obtaining NUKES said so yourself CY: I would posit that both the Israeli and the U.S. military have munitions capable of destroying or severely damaging Iranian nuclear sites (even hardened underground bunkers), if those sites can be accurately identified. lets not get COLD FEET GIT ER DONE!!!

Posted by: Karl at June 18, 2007 10:12 AM (5zEhw)

4 Yeah, but how did they know Bush was a bloodthirsty cowboy cowboy back in 2001? Did he nuke anyone while governor of Texas that I don't know about? Did he commit any warcrimes while in the Texas Air Guard?

Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at June 18, 2007 10:45 AM (oC8nQ)

5 I'm betting the ambassador was making a joke in hyperbole. I'm sure it was hilarious to all his "America is a bunch of A-holes" buddies. As for Karl... this is unrelated to the post but I'm getting bored with the parody of a conservative that you've been playing at. You're posts are ridiculous. and it's spelled: "Git R' Done"

Posted by: K-Det at June 18, 2007 11:14 AM (aaP7C)

6 There probably is a grain of truth to Christopher Meyer's thinking. No doubt some concern that we might act rashly informed Blair's thinking, but just the normal or generic kind, not the apocalyptic kind. That's part of what friends are for in terrible circumstances and I have no problem with that. That doesn't mean the primary reason for Blair stepping forward was this and not that 9/11 was an act of barbarity which any person in their right mind would assist in countering in some way with great friends wanting to assist in ways that share every burden. It seems to me, though, Meyer tells us more about Meyer than about Blair. It's quite possible that Meyer communicated this fear himself and thinks it was a direct influence on Blair's thinking. It seems more likely these were Meyer's fears based on his view of the world and brought to Washington along with his other baggage. And I wouldn't surprised if they were reinforced by the fears communicated within the clique into which he glommed and circled as ambassador in Washington. The US does not have a monopoly on self-preening egotistical fools at the ambassador level in foreign service.

Posted by: Dusty at June 18, 2007 11:37 AM (GJLeQ)

7 "K-Det"::: EVERYBODY knows bunker busters are NUKES!!! dont play dumb also you mean 'YOUR parody' not 'you're parody' learn the LANGUAGE!!!

Posted by: Karl at June 18, 2007 11:42 AM (5zEhw)

8 Karl - Norice the "laser guided conventional munition" part of the description. I guess you're wrong again. From "StrategyPage": The Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-2 bomb is designed to penetrate hardened targets before exploding, capable of penetrating 100 feet of earth or 20 feet of concrete. The GBU-28 was initially developed in 1991 for penetrating hardened Iraqi command centers located deep underground. This "bunker buster" was required for special targets during the Desert Storm conflict and was designed, fabricated and loaded in record time. The GBU-28 is a laser-guided conventional munition that uses a modified Army artillery tube as the bomb body. They are fitted with GBU-27 LGB kits, 14.5 inches in diameter and almost 19 feet long. The operator illuminates a target with a laser designator and then the munition guides to a spot of laser energy reflected from the target.

Posted by: Actual at June 18, 2007 01:03 PM (KoiLh)

9 Karl, most "bunker busters" are not nuclear. The B61 Mod 11 is the only active U.S. nuclear weapon I'm aware of designed to be a bunker buster. The overwhelming majority are more-or-less conventional weapons with hardened penetrator warheads, such as the BLU-109, BLU-113, and the BLU-116. The BLU-118 themobaric weapon is a bunker-buster of a different stripe, and interestingly enough, I met a man who claims to be the Air Force ordnance tech who built the only one ever used, on a cave full of al Qaeda and Taliban fighters in Gardez Afghanistan, on March 3, 2002. Once again, most bunker busters anre't nukes, there are several non-nuke types of bunker busters, and perhaps as important, both we and our allies are thought to have hundreds stockpiled.

Posted by: Confederaet Yankee at June 18, 2007 01:06 PM (9y6qg)

10 live and LEARN my mistake then

Posted by: Karl at June 18, 2007 04:08 PM (5zEhw)

11 The place was already pre-wrecked when we got there. There would be nothing left to bother nuking.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at June 18, 2007 07:01 PM (9yWTK)

12 I'm sure it was hilarious to all his "America is a bunch of A-holes" buddies. Cripes, the minute one of our allies steps off the res, you guys throw them under the bus. This is Great Britain, remember? They're the ones who went along with Iraq.

Posted by: Doc Washboard at June 18, 2007 09:00 PM (ARfqN)

13 Doc, you are right, Great Britain is our ally, not Meyer or his "America is a bunch of a-holes" buddies. But I don't see K-Det throwing Great Britain under the bus.

Posted by: Dusty at June 18, 2007 09:43 PM (GJLeQ)

14 I deeply respect Great Britain's commitment to the war on terror and to the mutual protection of the US and the UK. I also however, have many British friends from since childhood (I went to an international high school in Europe, being American was like being a mathlete or something) - and I've been hearing anti-american sentiment, whether in jest, serious, or a mixture of both from Britons as much as anyone else. So I have "America is a bunch of a-holes" friends myself... they exist. P.S. I hope my term doesn't survive much longer, it takes way too much time to write.

Posted by: K-Det at June 19, 2007 12:41 AM (aaP7C)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

If ever there has been a bill introduced in Congress to ban something based completely on fear and in the complete absence of any actual problem, S.1331, the so-called "Long-Range Sniper Rifle Safety Act of 2007" may be a perfect example.

The bill, introduced to the Senate on May 8 by Dianne Feinstein and co-sponsored by Senators Kennedy, Levin, Menendez, Mikulski, Clinton, Durbin, Boxer, Lautenberg, Shumer and Dodd (Democrats all), seeks to classify all firearms chambered for .50 BMG and similar calibers as "destructive devices" under the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the National Firearms Act of 1934.

Presently, the "destructive device" ban in both laws refers to poison gas, bombs, grenades, rockets, missiles, and mines.

These Senators are attempting to equate large caliber target rifles with poison gas and bombs under the law. Why?

Fear and Ignorance:

U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), today introduced legislation to regulate the transfer and possession of .50 BMG caliber sniper rifles, which have extraordinary firepower and range (more than a mile with accuracy, with a maximum distance of up to four miles). These combat-style weapons are capable of bringing down airliners and helicopters that are taking off or landing, puncturing pressurized chemical storage facilities, and penetrating light armored personnel vehicles and protective limousines.

[snip]

"These are combat-style weapons designed to kill people efficiently and destroy machinery at a great distance. This legislation would regulate these dangerous combat weapons, making it harder for terrorists and others to buy them for illegitimate use," Senator Feinstein said. "This legislation doesn't ban any firearms; it would only institute common-sense regulations for the sale of these dangerous sniper rifles."

Capable of bringing down airliners and helicopters? A .50 BMG rifle must make huge holes in aircraft to do that, wouldn't you think?

Not so much.

Thi is the rough difference between the diameter of a .50-caliber bullet (left) and the extremely common .30-caliber rifle (right).

Now, take into account that a typical .50-caliber rifle is roughly five-feet long weighs around 30 pounds, requiring them to be shot from a bipod or some other sort of support, and virtually all .50-caliber rifles use telescopic sights. Most are also single-shot, bolt-action firearms.

Feinstein and the other Democrat Senators sponsoring this bill are asking you to believe that a terrorist "super-sniper" can somehow heft a 30-pound gun and wingshoot an airliner like a clay pigeon.

The odds of a sniper hitting an airliner moving in three dimensions faster than a NASCAR stock car is infinitesimal; the odds of Feinstien's hypothetical terrorists actually bringing down a plane verge on the impossible.

What of the threat of a terrorist using such a rifle to penetrate a chemical storage tank or rail car?

According to a builder of such pressurized vessels, also virtually impossible:

When asked about the alleged threat of .50cal rifles to his railcars, Mr. Darymple said that they have long tested their cars against almost every form of firearm, to include .50BMG and larger. When asked what happens when a .50 hits one of his tanks he said with a shrug "It bounces off." He went on to point out that railcars are designed to survive the force of derailing, and collision with other railcars at travel speeds. By comparison the impact of a bullet, any bullet, is like a mosquito bite.

It also goes without saying that if terrorists did desire to take down an airliner, or blow up a railcar or chemical storage tank, they are far more likely to acquire smaller, less obtrusive, more accurate, purpose-built or improvised devices already covered under federal law.

So what is the true purpose of the bill, when the stated purposes simply don't make sense?

Only the Senators themselves know for certain, but IÂ’d be willing to bet it comes wrapped in a cloak of fear and ignorance.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:31 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 662 words, total size 5 kb.

For Sale: Prairie Chapel Ranch. 1583 acres, just seven miles northwest of beautiful Crawford, Texas. Seven scenic canyons dot the landscape, and water-lovers will enjoy three miles of frontage along Rainey Creek and the Middle Bosque River. Nature lovers will thrive in the wide open spaces.

The main house is a unique 4,000 sq/ft energy efficient limestone ranch encircled by a impressive ten-foot wide wrap-around porch. Additional quarters include guest houses and Secret Service barracks. Property includes a stocked 11-acre bass pond and large swimming pool. Asking $4,500,000.

Send offers to the email address in the sidebar.

Please note that while the law regards me as an "undocumented owner" of this property, I will graciously accept payment, and I am assured that the present occupant welcomes all "newcomers," regardless of legal contracts or boundary limitations.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:03 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

Because, of course, he knows better:

Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) charged that Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, who took command in Iraq four months ago, "isn't in touch with what's going on in Baghdad." He also indicated that he thinks Petraeus has not been sufficiently open in his testimony to Congress. Noting that Petraeus, who is now on his third tour of duty in Iraq, oversaw the training of Iraqi troops during his second stint there, Reid said: "He told us it was going great; as we've looked back, it didn't go so well."

Bill at INDCJournal (who has been to Iraq), had this to say:

Harry Reid considers himself more "in touch with what's going on in Baghdad" than Petraeus? Beyond the mindblowing, bizarro hubris of such an assertion, this comment is made sinister or incompetent by the fact that Reid misrepresents the meaning of Petraus's comments:

Go to Ardalino's site for the detailed takedown.

Harry Reid, is once again willing to question General Petraeus' honesty because what Petraeus says he is seeing on the ground—in Baghdad, where he is—doesn't match up with what Reid wants to assert, namely, that the "war is lost" and that the "surge has failed."

Reid has staked out his position, and won't back down from it. Some might call that "integrity."

I'd call it "blatant dishonesty," as the last contingent of soldiers arrive for the surge just today.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:03 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

Considering they supplied arms, training and men against us in wars in Korea and Vietnam in the latter half of the last century, I guess we shouldn't be too surprised at reports that China is arming our enemies today:

New intelligence reveals China is covertly supplying large quantities of small arms and weapons to insurgents in Iraq and the Taliban militia in Afghanistan, through Iran.

U.S. government appeals to China to check some of the arms shipments in advance were met with stonewalling by Beijing, which insisted it knew nothing about the shipments and asked for additional intelligence on the transfers. The ploy has been used in the past by China to hide its arms-proliferation activities from the United States, according to U.S. officials with access to the intelligence reports.

Some arms were sent by aircraft directly from Chinese factories to Afghanistan and included large-caliber sniper rifles, millions of rounds of ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades and components for roadside bombs, as well as other small arms.

The Washington Times reported June 5 that Chinese-made HN-5 anti-aircraft missiles were being used by the Taliban.

According to the officials, the Iranians, in buying the arms, asked Chinese state-run suppliers to expedite the transfers and to remove serial numbers to prevent tracing their origin. China, for its part, offered to transport the weapons in order to prevent the weapons from being interdicted.

The weapons were described as "late-model" arms that have not been seen in the field before and were not left over from Saddam Hussein's rule in Iraq.

U.S. Army specialists suspect the weapons were transferred within the past three months.

As bad as it is, that China is working with Iran to supply weapons to our enemies isn't the worst part of the story.

This is.

The Bush administration has been trying to hide or downplay the intelligence reports to protect its pro-business policies toward China, and to continue to claim that China is helping the United States in the war on terrorism. U.S. officials have openly criticized Iran for the arms transfers but so far there has been no mention that China is a main supplier.

I want to be very careful and not jump to conclusions here, but it seems that Gertz is making the claim that the Bush administration is trying to cover-up the Chinese sale and transfer of weapons used to target American and allied soldiers at the behest of American companies doing business with the Chinese.

If this claim can be substantiated...

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:16 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 419 words, total size 3 kb.

At Daily Kos, "BarbinMD" went to bat this afternoon for an embattled Harry Reid:

Since its inception a few short months ago, Politico, the online soul-mate to the Drudge Report, has gotten into the habit of creating news stories through innuendo, omission, outright error, and now today, out of thin air.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "incompetent" during an interview Tuesday with a group of liberal bloggers, a comment that was never reported.

Reid made similar disparaging remarks about Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said several sources familiar with the interview.

Of course the reason this comment was never reported is quite simple: the bloggers on the call don't remember this quote. I, along with mcjoan and Kagro X, participated in that conference call and none of us heard Reid say it. And of the four other bloggers who were there, Joe and John from AMERICAblog and Jonathon Singer, have no recollection of it.

Please make note: according to this Kos frontpager, she and two other prominent Daily Kos bloggers never heard Harry Reid call General Pace "incompetent," and of the other four bloggers on the call, the two representing Americablog, and one from MyDD, didn't recall anything, either. "Ain't nobody heard nothin,'" as it were, from six of the seven highly respected liberal bloggers on the conference call with the Democrat Senate Majority Leader. But don't question their integrity.

The last man standing, Bob Geiger, recalled things a bit differently, but still attempted a fanboy's "I don't think that word means what you think it means" defense of Reid:

Here's exactly what Reid said:

"I guess the president, uh, he's gotten rid of Pace because he could not get him confirmed here in the SenateÂ… Pace is also a yes-man for the president and I told him to his face, I laid it out to him last time he came to see me, I told him what an incompetent man I thought he was."

So, did Reid utter the word "incompetent" in the same sentence with General Pace's name on the conference call? Yes, he did.

Geiger then went on to make a pathetic attempt to wrangle Reid's mangled syntax into an attack on President Bush instead of Pace.

The seven liberal bloggers on the conference call with Harry Reid either suffered from a convenient form of group amnesia, or from the inability to honestly parse the English language, but perhaps what was important from their perspective is that they rallied together for Harry with strongly-worded claims of "I can't recall," and "I don't remember," and "It depends on what the definition of the word 'is,' is."

But sometimes irony and justice come hand in hand, and Harry Reid soon did to these radical anti-war bloggers what they are collectively trying to do to the American military and the Iraqi people: he cut and ran:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed Thursday that he told liberal bloggers last week that he thinks outgoing Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Peter Pace is "incompetent."

Reid also disparaged Army Gen. David Petraeus, head of Multinational Forces in Iraq.

But Reid, whose comments to bloggers first appeared in The Politico, also told reporters: "I think we should just drop it."

For the Selective Memory-Based Community, Reid's betrayal must have been awful.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:49 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 579 words, total size 4 kb.

I'm assuming that many of you saw that the House of Representatives passed an NRA-supported gun control bill yesterday that aimed to close some dangerous loopholes, requiring states to more quickly and fully provide information to check the criminal and mental health records of potential gun buyers.

Congressional Quarterly reports that the bill faces an uncertain future in the Senate, due in part to resistance by Gun Owners of America and unidentified mental health advocacy groups.

As someone who uses the FBIÂ’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to check the status of potential gun purchasers, I have reservations about the proposed changes, even though I strongly believe that neither felons nor the mentally ill should have access to firearms. Actually, it is my concern over the mentally ill potentially accessing firearms that has me worried.

One provision of the bill that was described thusly:

The senator suggested earlier this week that he was pleased with negotiated language that would explicitly protect the ability of veterans designated as having psychological conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, to buy guns. The measure would also authorize procedures that would allow those successfully treated for mental illness to regain the ability to buy guns.

I'm neither a psychologist nor a psychiatrist, and I do not have anything beyond a layman's understanding of how the human psyche is damaged nor healed. Frankly, based upon what I've seen of people who have been to psychologists and psychiatrists, I'm none to certain that the experts have any idea, either.

For this reason, I'm extremely leery about how they might determine whether someone who was once determined to be mentally ill is now "cured."

My secondary concern deals with reality and the law of unintended consequences.

While a NICS background check is an important tool in sorting out those who should not be allowed to purchase firearms, it is simply one tool based upon documented information.

In my opinion—and I believe that I share this opinion with many who sell firearms on the retail level—one of the best tools to determine whether someone should be allowed to purchase a firearm is an employee trained to look for certain "red flag" characteristics in a buyer. For every high-profile killer like Seung-Hui Cho, there are many potential purchasers without a criminal or mental record who should not be allowed to purchase firearms for other, less technical but still reasonable concerns.

I have, on more than one occasion, turned down a transaction after a NICS background check came back allowing the sale to proceed simply because something "wasn't quite right" about the purchaser. Displayed maturity, firearms safety, certain mannerisms, personality traits, or other suspicious behavior can all be reasons to deny a sale that a database simply cannot account for.

Some gun sellers may become too over-reliant upon the more powerful proposed NICS system, and may forego some of the "human checks" as a result, while we at the same time rely on a less-than-precise mental health system to determine when someone is "cured" and once more able to purchase a firearm.

Somehow, I don't think this bill will change much.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 04:04 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 528 words, total size 3 kb.

Via Fox News

President Mahmoud Abbas will dissolve the Palestinian Authority's government Thursday after fighting between rival parties Hamas and Fatah consumed the Gaza Strip and was expected to call for a state of emergency, sources close to Abbas confirmed to FOX News.

Hamas fighters took control from two of the rival Fatah movement's most important security command centers in the Gaza Strip, and witnesses said the victors dragged vanquished gunmen into the street and shot them to death execution-style.

Now he's expected to call a state of emergency?

This is kind of like jotting a note to requisition more lifejackets after you've hit the iceberg and the ship's already gone down.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.

Formerly a staple of reports in the Associated Press and other news organizations, the credibility of the Iraqi group known as the Association of Muslims Scholars (also known as the Muslim Scholars Association) seems to have fallen on hard times.

The al-Qaeda-aligned group's credibility may have begun to diminish when it claimed that 18 people died in an inferno at the al-Muhaimin mosque in Hurriyah, Baghdad, as part of a highly-disputed series of AP stories claiming that up to 24 people died and four mosques were "burned and blew up" on November 24, 2006. A photo taken the next day from inside the mosque rebutted that claim.

The Associated Press again used the Association of Muslim Scholars as a source for a dubious account on April 10, 2007, as the AMS made the following inflammatory charge:

The Muslim Scholars Association, a Sunni group, issued a statement quoting witnesses as saying Tuesday's battle began after Iraqi troops entered a mosque and executed two young men in front of other worshippers. Ground forces used tear gas on civilians, it said.

These charges were never substantiated.

I asked at the time, "Why does the Associated Press continue to use an organization with an obvious political agenda, ties to al Qaeda, and a documented history of providing false information as a source?"

Apparently, someone at the major media organizations had similar misgivings about the credibility of the Association of Muslim Scholars at roughly that time, or shortly thereafter.

A Google News search for "Association of Muslim Scholars" and a search for "Muslim Scholars Association show that no prominent news organizations have used the AMS as a source for over a month, even as links from lesser news sources (primarily blogs) show that the organization are still issuing press releases.

Apparently, it only took four years of publishing the propaganda of the AMS as news for the professional media to finally realize they were being had.

How encouraging.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:21 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 343 words, total size 3 kb.

This idea seems ever bit as dim as his plan to rely on a re-branded Peace Corps to fight terrorism.

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards wants to reduce the cost of U.S. health care by removing patents for breakthrough drugs and requiring health insurance companies to spend at least 85 percent of their premiums on patient care.

The former North Carolina senator was expected to discuss details of a universal health care proposal he released in February during an appearance Thursday at the Riverside Health Center.

Edwards' plan would remove long-term patents for companies that develop breakthrough drugs and then reap large profits because of the monopolies those patents provide, according to a statement by Edwards obtained Wednesday evening.

Edwards said offering cash incentives instead would allow multiple companies to produce those drugs and drive down prices.

By reducing pharmaceutical companies ability to make a profit from patented drugs, Edwards would be encouraging them to spend less money on researching and developing new cures. After all, these are drug companies, and companies exist to make a profit. Why would companies spend time and billions of dollars developing new and more effective drugs, when Edwards is going to strip away their ability to recoup development costs and turn a profit by forcing these new drugs to become generic by stripping away patents?

But he already has a solution.

Edwards promises to pay companies to keep developing new drugs with "cash incentives." We all know where these incentives would come from. To make good on his promise, Edwards will foist new taxes upon the American taxpayer.

As a result, the cost of new drugs won't actually go down, you'll just be paying from them whether you need them, or not, through your federal taxes.

The other part of Edward's "brilliant" health care plan is to force insurers to spend 85% of their premiums on patient care. this sounds great, until once again economics comes into play. Insurers are in business to make money, and if they can't within the framework you're paying for now, you can expect the premium costs to skyrocket until that 15% is large enough to cover their operating costs and keep their shareholders happy.

I don't know whom the Edwards campaign keeps paying to come up with these hare-brained schemes, but they are obviously paying them far too much.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:37 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 421 words, total size 3 kb.

Comfortable among his own kind, Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has dropped all pretenses of the insincere "...but we support the troops" mantra utterly by the far left, the Politico reports:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "incompetent" during an interview Tuesday with a group of liberal bloggers, a comment that was never reported.

Reid made similar disparaging remarks about Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said several sources familiar with the interview.

This is but the latest example of how Reid, under pressure from liberal activists to do more to stop the war, is going on the attack against President Bush and his military leaders in anticipation of a September showdown to end U.S. involvement in Iraq, according to Democratic senators and aides.

The report of Reid's attacks on key military commanders comes one day after Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent a letter to President Bush claiming that the "surge" in Iraq has failed, just weeks after claiming they would wait until September to evaluate the success of the surge, and despite widespread and growing Sunni uprisings against al Qaeda in al Anbar and Diyala provinces, in Baghdad's Sunni-dominated Amiriyah district, and elsewhere.

According to U.S. Code, Title 18 > Part I > Chapter 115 > § 2387 Activities affecting armed forces generally:

(a) Whoever, with intent to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States:

(1) advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States; or
(2) distributes or attempts to distribute any written or printed matter which advises, counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

(b) For the purposes of this section, the term “military or naval forces of the United States” includes the Army of the United States, the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Naval Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Coast Guard Reserve of the United States; and, when any merchant vessel is commissioned in the Navy or is in the service of the Army or the Navy, includes the master, officers, and crew of such vessel.

Marine General Peter Pace is still the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and an active duty officer and leader in the United States military. U.S. Army General David Petraeus is the Commanding General of Multi-National Force - Iraq (MNF-I), in command of all U.S Army, Marine, Navy and Air Force military units in Iraq. Petraeus was confirmed to that position confirmed to that position by the Senate in an 81-0 vote less than five months ago on January 26, 2007.

Senator Harry Reid, please explain to us how your apparent utterances calling serving generals "incompetent" while they are engaged in command duties as general officers of the United States during wartime does not amount to interfering with, impairing, or attempting to influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States.

You'll note, Senator Reid, that Chapter 15 of U.S. Code covers "Treason, Sedition, and Subversive Activities," and I find it very hard for you to argue—though you and your supporters certainly will—that words uttered against the competence of active duty commanding generals during wartime does not amount to an attempt to "interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States." Your offense, coming from your position of United States Senate Majority Leader, is particularly egregious when it is considered that these comments are directed to a group of opinionmakers that claim to hold such sway over Democrat Party politics.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:37 AM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 700 words, total size 5 kb.

I wrote on June 5th in a post called The Sliding War that "...the factions in Gaza are almost in, sliding into, on the brink of, and verging on being in a civil war, but they aren't there quite yet... and have been for over a year."

Now, it appears that the Gaza Civil War may be all but over, even before the media could recognize it.

From today's Jerusalem Post:

Hamas fighters overran Fatah-allied Preventive Security headquarters in Gaza City on Thursday, a key target in their battle to control the entire Gaza Strip, witnesses and a security agency official said.

One witness, Jihad Abu Ayad, said Hamas gunmen were bringing Preventive Security men out of the building and executing them in the street.

The headquarters was the last Fatah stronghold in Gaza City, and Fatah appears to be demoralized and all but collapsing.

If Hamas—an Iranian-supported terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel—wrests complete control of Gaza, it is indeed an ominous development.

A member of the Syrian Parliment, Mohammad al Habash, has already told al Jazeera that Syria is preparing for a summer war against Israel, and Hezbollah's deputy secretary Sheikh Naim Kassem has already stated that Hezbollah—rearmed by Iran and Syria after last year's battle with Israel in Lebanon—is also preparing for another summer "adventure" with Israel as well.

A map of the region shows why these claims are of such concern.

If the ominous rumblings by Syria and Hezbollah of a summer campaign against Israel are credible, then most if not all of northern Israel could be a potential battleground. If Hamas can consolidate power in Gaza, then they have the possibility of opening a weaker, but still lethal second front in the event of a summer war, diverting or dividing Israeli ground forces.

I strongly doubt that even a combined Syrian, Hamas, and Hezbollah offensive would have any strong chance of success, and hope that whatever their endgame strategy is, they realize that as well.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:45 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 358 words, total size 3 kb.