Thursday, May 3, 2007

Will Any Of Our Leaders Respond To Clueless Jack Murtha?

Congressman Jack Murtha is a walking outrage. Murtha, the unindicted co-conspirator in Abscam who suggested that our soldiers can support Iraq if they redeploy to Okinawa, 5.000 miles away, goes over the top on Hardball with Chris Matthews. His main points, al Qaeda is not involved in Iraq, General Petraeus is lying to the American public, and General Petraues came back to Washington not to brief Congress, but rather purely for political propoganda. Here is the video:



I generally try my best to refrain from profanity, but Murtha is a worthless son of a bitch. How is Murtha possibly claiming that the war in Iraq is unrelated to the al Qaeda threat?

General Petraeus held a press conference last week - in between his closed door briefings to Congress. During that press conference, General Petraeus said flatly "Iraq is, in fact, the central front of al Qaeda's global campaign and we devote considerable resources to the fight against al Qaeda Iraq." You can find both a video and a transcript of the conference here. At the press conference, the very first question General Petraeus was asked was about this statement:

Q: You say that Iraq is now the central focus of al Qaeda's worldwide effort. Are you saying that al Qaeda in Iraq is now the sort of principal enemy of the U.S. forces stationed there? Before it was Shi'a groups. And do you see that al Qaeda in Iraq -- do you see any evidence that it is linked internationally to bin Laden? How many foreign fighters are actually there?

GEN. PETRAEUS: First of all, we do definitely see links to the greater al Qaeda network. I think you know that we have at various times intercepted messages to and from. There is no question but that there is a network that supports the movement of foreign fighters through Syria into Iraq.

. . . It is clearly the element in Iraq that conducts the sensational attacks, these attacks that, as I mentioned, cause not just horrific physical damage -- and which, by the way, have been increasingly indiscriminate. Secretary Gates noted the other day that al Qaeda has declared war on all Iraqis, and I think that that is an accurate statement. They have killed and wounded and maimed countless Iraqi civilians in addition to, certainly, coalition and Iraqi security forces, and they have done that, again, without regard to ethnosectarian identity.

That significance of al Qaeda in the conduct of the sensational attacks, the huge car bomb attacks against which we have been hardening markets, hardening neighborhoods, trying to limit movement and so forth -- those attacks, again, are of extraordinary significance because they can literally drown out anything else that might be happening.

. . . So this is a -- you know, it is a very significant enemy. I think it is probably public enemy number one. It is the enemy whose actions sparked the enormous increase in sectarian violence that did so much damage to Iraq in 2006, the bombing of the Al Askari mosque in Samarra, the gold-domed mosque there, the third holiest Shi'a shrine. And it is the organization that continues to try to reignite not just sectarian violence but ethnic violence, as well, . . .
Clearly either Murtha or Petraeus is lying to America. Let's go to a third source. What about this letter from Ayman al Zawahiri, the second in command of al Qaeda, to Zarqawi, then the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, intercepted in July, 2005, in which al Zawahiri laid out al Qaeda's plans for Iraq:
The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq.

The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or amirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate- over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq, i.e., in Sunni areas, is in order to fill the void stemming from the departure of the Americans, immediately upon their exit and before un-Islamic forces attempt to fill this void, whether those whom the Americans will leave behind them, or those among the un-Islamic forces who will try to jump at taking power. . . .

The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq.

The fourth stage: It may coincide with what came before: the clash with Israel, because Israel was established only to challenge any new Islamic entity. . . .

D-If we look at the two short-term goals, which are removing the Americans and establishing an Islamic amirate in Iraq, or a caliphate if possible, then, we will see that the strongest weapon which the mujahedeen enjoy - after the help and granting of success by God - is popular support from the Muslim masses in Iraq, and the surrounding Muslim countries.
Does that sound like there might be a relationship between the terrorism of bin Laden and Zawahiri that we seek to fight and the war in Iraq today? You can find the entire text of that letter here. Or see here, discussing at length Al Qaeda's operations in Iraq, including messages from bin Laden, within the context of al Qaeda's fight against their former hosts, the Sunnis in Anbar Province.

For yet more evidence of linkage, consider this, a military press release just days ago on April 27, indicating that a confidant of bin Laden was sent to take over al Qaeda operations in Iraq (emphasis added):
The Defense Department announced today that it has taken a senior al Qaeda operative into custody at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

. . . At the time of his detention, Abd al-Hadi was one of al Qaeda’s highest-ranking and most experienced senior operatives, Whitman said. Abd al-Hadi was one of al Qaeda’s key paramilitary commanders in Afghanistan from the late 1990s, and from 2002 to 2004, was in charge of cross-border attacks in Afghanistan . . .

. . . Before Sept. 11, 2001, Abd al-Hadi was a member of al Qaeda’s ruling Shura council, a now-defunct advisory board to Osama bin Laden, as well as the group’s military committee.

Abd al-Hadi associated with leaders of other extremist groups allied with al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including the Taliban, according to Defense Department information. Abd al-Hadi interacted was known and trusted by bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, and met with al Qaeda members in Iran.

At the time of his capture, Abd al-Hadi was trying to return to Iraq to manage al Qaeda’s affairs and possibly focus on operations outside Iraq against Western targets, Whitman said
.
Bottom line, unless every available open source, including Zawahiri and General Petraeus, are false, then Murtha is lying through his teeth to America. I kind of think the latter.

Two, the claims that General Petraeus being brought back to brief Congress before the vote on Iraq funding was purely political and that he did not brief Congress are both outrageous lies. Congress refused to be briefed by Petraeus in March, before the initial vote on the Iraq War bill. When General Petraeus was brought back to brief Congress before the final vote on the bill, Pelosi at first refused to set up a closed door briefing, and then, ultimately, neither she nor Jack Murtha attended the briefing. Murtha and his Democratic cohorts are spewing insanity. Their plan is surrender first, deal with the incalculable costs associated with surrendering after the 2008 election.

As to attacking the veracity of General Petraeus, they are laying the groundwork to claim come September that any reports of success in the ongoing counter-insurgency operations in Iraq are untrue because Petraeus cannot be believed. Murtha is not the first Democrat to take this tack. Both Harry Reid and Carl Levin before him have also repeated that meme. They are completely invested in insuring that America does not succeed in Iraq, and will let no inconvenient facts get in the way of their partisan arguments. Thus the utterly outrageous attacks on the veracity of the very person they voted for to lead our troops in combat in Iraq. If General Petraues cannot be trusted to tell us the truth, how can he be trusted to command an entire Army in combat?

Someone on the side of reason and reality needs to respond and to respond forcefully to Murtha and each and every one of his outrageous claims. Al Qaeda grew strong in the 1990's on the strength of their claim to having defeated the Soviets in Afghanistan. And they grew confident enough to attack America inside America. What will retreat from Iraq do for al Qaeda? I have yet to hear any of the Democrats answer that question, save for the former Democrat, Joe Lieberman. Retreat from Iraq is an invitation to carnage on a grand scale - in Iraq, in the greater Middle East and in America.

You might want to send the above video to your Congressman and Senators as well as the RNC, asking them if they will respond to Murtha - and ask them to take the gloves off when they do. We cannot allow things of this nature to go effectively unanswered or the price we will pay in blood and gold will be incalculable.

And here are some parting thoughts from al Zawahiri:




2 comments:

Dinah Lord said...

Is Jack off his meds or what?

Sending this off to a few folks right now. Thanks for the idea.

Cheers.

D

Vote for Scott
The party of R&R.

HillbillyPolitics said...

Has anybody checked the medical records of yahoos like this one lately? Given his age, he might be suffering from some sort of age related dementia.

 

View My Stats