The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for September 12th, 2008

Obama Has a New Ad Making Fun of McCain Because He Doesn’t Personally Do Email… BUT…and oh my is there a but…

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2008

UPDATE IV: Clintons top White House political adviser Dick Morris said on Hannity & Colmes 9/15/2008 that the Clinton’s never used computers in the White House because they didn’t know how.

UPDATE III: Fox Interviews Obama Campaign Spokesman – Watch this Joker Jive and Dodge and Try to Wiggle His Way Out of This One. Hat Tip

National Review / Boston Globe

McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain’s severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes. Friends marvel at McCain’s encyclopedic knowledge of sports. He’s an avid fan – Ted Williams is his hero – but he can’t raise his arm above his shoulder to throw a baseball.

Obama, this is the end, you just don’t know it yet.


UPDATE: Malkin,

UPDATE II: Still nothing form the “elite media” on this. If the roles were reversed it would be wall to wall.

Update V: Jonah Goldberg has a column on the issue in today’s LA Times.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Latest Palin Smear: Palin Charged Rape Victims for Rape Kits as Mayor… but when the truth gets out the elite media and the Democrats will have egg on their face again

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2008

Welcome Neoneocon readers!

Editor’s Note – Attention leftists who are propagating this smear against Governor Palin – When you came to the conclusion that the administration in Wasilla were some kind of monsters, didn’t you stop to ask yourself “why would a police chief want to make sure women paid for their own rape kits”  and think twice before you started posting these silly accusations?

Before 2000 all rape victims in Illinois and several other states were billed for the kits; from 2000 -2003 with the changes to Illinois law under the Obama bill many women still got billed for the kit. QUESTION – is every mayor and police chief in Illinois some craven jerk that delights in the fact that women had to pay?? Of course not. Just as if you get in a car accident and are knocked out cold, if they have to ambulance you or life flight you, even if it is a drunk driver who committed a crime against you, you still get a bill. The state or insurance or the perp will usually pay later, but to pretend like any of this was unique to Wasilla is silly. Read the story below where it says “Original Story” and then read the updates.

Special Note from the Editor – Some leftists on web sites are posting the following or something similar, saying that we got this story wrong and quote the following links.

Univ. of Chicago – Dean of Students – Sexual Violence

Pamphlet from the Illinois Coalition Against Sexual Assault: (see page 3)

Here is where those leftists go wrong – The law they are quoting is the law as it is in Illinois NOW (which was created in 2003), but in 2000 the law was changed to exactly what the IUSB Vision said it was (which was the Obama sponsored bill).
Below is the the law they are quoting and again, it was not passed until 2003. In 2004 women were still being charged due to weak implementation of the law according to US News & World Report. Below is a list of all of the hoops a rape victim had to meet before they could get reimbursed for the rape kit as of 2003.
Section 545.100  Hospital Charges and Reimbursement

When any hospital or ambulance provider furnishes emergency services to any alleged sexual assault survivor, as defined by the Department of Public Aid pursuant to Section 6.3 of the Act, who is neither eligible to receive such services under the Illinois Public Aid Code [305 ILCS 5] nor covered as to such services by a policy of insurance, as defined in the Illinois Insurance Code [215 ILCS 5], the hospital and ambulance provider shall furnish such services to that person without charge and shall be entitled to be reimbursed for its billed charges in providing such services by the Department of Public Aid. (Section 7 of the Act) (Source:  Amended at 27 Ill. Reg. 1567, effective January 15, 2003)

Bottom line, IUSB Vision was right.

* * * * Original Story Below* * * *

It all started with a year 2000 article in The Frontiersman.

The new [state] law makes it illegal for any law enforcement agency to bill victims or victims insurance companies for the costs of examinations that take place to collect evidence of a sexual assault or determine if a sexual assault did occur.

We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence, Knowles said. Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.

While the Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies have covered the cost of exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece, the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests.

Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.

In the past we’ve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just don’t want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said.

According to Fannon, the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year to collect evidence for sexual assault cases.

Ultimately it is the criminal who should bear the burden of the added costs, Fannon said.

The forensic exam is just one part of the equation. Id like to see the courts make these people pay restitution for these things, Fannon said.

Fannon said he intends to include the cost of exams required to collect evidence in a restitution request as a part of a criminals sentencing.

EDITORS NOTE – The bill that the state passed made no provision for the state or the city to recover the costs for the kits or other materials from the perp who committed the crime; it is that oversight which Police Chief Fannon clearly opposed – THE BILL ITSELF:

So here we go with the spin from the left to smear Governor Palin, with USA Today, DailyKOS, Huffington Post… and even former Alaska Governor Tony Knowles, who has been caught in fabrications before about Palin says this according to left wing blog “the McClatchy Report:

While some of their complaints have already been aired, Knowles broke new ground while answering a reporter’s question on whether Wasilla forced rape victims to pay for their own forensic tests when Palin was mayor.

True, Knowles said.

Eight years ago, complaints about charging rape victims for medical exams in Wasilla prompted the Alaska Legislature to pass a bill — signed into law by Knowles — that banned the practice statewide.

“There was one town in Alaska that was charging victims for this, and that was Wasilla,” Knowles said.

Now the Truth – The link below is to the minutes of the committee hearing where the Alaska Legislature took testimony and discussed the 2000 rape kit bill in Alaska.

Democrats Rep. Croft and Former Democrat Governor Tony Knowles said to the press that the reason the law came up was because the evil Palin was charging women for Rape kits in Wasilla….one problem. Read the minutes of the committee hearing on the bill. The testimony from the State Public Safety Commissioner’s Office says that NO police agencies in Alaska had ever charged an individual for one of these kits. In fact, if the whole thing was done because of Wasilla and Palin – why did the words Palin and Wasilla NEVER come up in committee hearings or testimony on the bill???

Here is the link to the hearing where Deputy Public Safety Commissioner Smith says so.

HERE is the link to the second committee hearing on the bill where the Director of the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault testified that while no police agencies billed victims, some hospitals have billed insurance companies in several parts of the state.

This means that women had nothing to worry about. Only some hospitals were attempting to bill insurance companies (think about it, many hospitals double bill and send anything that moves a bill). If there was no insurance the state picked it up and tried to recover the cost from the perp, which was the standard practice in several states and the practice went on in several areas in Alaska according to the testimony, not just Wasilla as Knowles claimed to the press recently (the Southeast area the testimony refers to is the Capital of Alaska Juneau, Sitka, and Ketchikan).

In short, Democrats lied again.

The rape kit smear  from Knowles and the Democrats gets even richer; from the time Palin took office till the time the new state law was passed exectly zero rapes were reported to the city of Wasilla.

Both FBI Crime Reports and the City of Wasilla show ZERO rapes from 1995 up to the year 2000. During 2000 one rape was reported and two rapes each for 2001 and 2002.

Police Chief Fannon was saying that it was the policy of the police department to charge insurance companies or the perpetrator for the cost of the kit. As I will show you below, this is not an unusual policy at all so Alaska was ahead of the curve in changing these laws.

Wasilla had no police department before 1996 so if a rape were reported  sheriff or the state police would have handled it anyway.

The hits just keep on coming…..

Guess which political party amended the Violence Against Women Act to mandate that the states pay for rape kits in 2009??… – THE BILL WAS SPONSERED BY REPUBLICAN JAMES SENSENBRENNER and passed in 2005, it gets better, guess which state is STILL billion women for the rape kits….why its Obama’s home state:

US News & World Report

But according to a 2004 bulletin published by the NCVC, “[F]eedback from the field indicates that sexual assault victims are still being billed.” Knecht says she’s recently heard from caseworkers in Illinois, Georgia, and Arkansas reporting that rape victims continue to be charged for their forensic exams.

And all it took was about 20 minutes of fact checking public documents to prove that they are lying about Palin again and that many jurisdictions had this rape kit policy.

UPDATE I – Somepeople are claiming that the link doesn’t start reporting until 2000. This is untrue as you can plainly see the aggravated assault and roberies are listed from 1995 to 2000.

Another person says that Wasilla had sexual assaults, sure they did but none were reported as rapes according to the data above. is the link for the crime states off Wasilla’s own city data server and it does show sexual assaults, however there are four degrees sexual assault in Alaska. Sexual assault can be defined as any unwanted contact that can be interpreted in a sexual nature, like grabbing someone’s butt:

Sexual assault can be verbal, visual, or anything that forces a person to join in unwanted sexual contact or attention. Examples of this are voyeurism (when someone watches private sexual acts), exhibitionism (when someone exposes him/herself in public), incest (sexual contact between family members), and sexual harassment. It can happen in different situations, by a stranger in an isolated place, on a date, or in the home by someone you know.

It makes no sense that Wasilla in 1995 would report population, robberies and aggravated assaults to reporting agencies such as the FBI but leave rapes out.

UPDATE II: Illinois Bill Obama SPONSORED would still result in many women being billed for the rape kits!!!!

A leftist commenter tried to pull a fast one on us HERE. By claiming that Obama’s bill forbade the practice of charging women for the rape kit, but the joker didn’t read the bill. It forbids using collection agency like tactics against any crime victim for any expense incurred for the investigation of the crime. And if the victim meets certain hardship criteria they can ask the court for emergency funds if they cannot pay for the kit themselves, BUT if the cost of the kit cannot be recovered from the perpetrator the cost goes back to the alleged victim. If the victim was a minor or disabled, and reported the crime within 72 hours and obeyed other criteria the state would pay the expense. Still many women under the bill Obama sponsored would be stuck with the charges. Those who qualified under the program had to pay first or were billed and then had to file for reimbursement.

The Bill.

(740 ILCS 45/10.2 new)
4        Sec. 10.2.  Emergency awards.
5        (a)  If  it  appears,  prior  to  taking  action  on   an
6    application,  that the claim is one for which compensation is
7    probable, and undue hardship will result to the applicant  if
8    immediate  payment  is  not  made,  the  Attorney General may
9    recommend and the  Court  may  make  an  emergency  award  of
10    compensation  to  the  applicant, pending a final decision in
11    the case, provided the amount of emergency compensation  does
12    not  exceed $2,000.  The amount of emergency compensation for
13    funeral and burial expenses may not exceed $1,000. The amount
14    of emergency compensation shall be deducted  from  any  final
15    award  made as a result of the claim.  The full amount of the
16    emergency award if no final award is made shall be repaid  by
17    the applicant to the State of Illinois.
18        (b)  Emergency   award   applicants   must   satisfy  all
19    requirements under Section 6.1 of this Act.


Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 7 Comments »

Palin, Obama, McCain, Biden, the Elite Media, and the Experience Issue

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2008

Where was the press waiting to grill Barack Obama on foreign policy experience two weeks after he into a campaign? ….. but wait he can add someone like Joe Biden ot Hillary Clinton or Bill Richardson to balance that out….

The press grilled George W. Bush shortly after he came on the scene about foreign policy because he was “just a governor” …. but then Bush brought on Dick Cheney and all that nonsense ended.

Of course, Ronald Reagan was “just a governor” too.

Where was the press to grill Bill Clinton two weeks after he was into a general election campaign on foriegn policy? Oh wait Bill added Al Gore to the ticket to make up for that so its all ok.

So if Democrats and others can heve a team that compliments each other like Clinton/Gore, Bush/Cheney and Obama/Biden…why is that standard not good enough for McCain/Palin? The facts are that tickets are designed to do two things, compliment the top of the ticket and/or handle issues with the political geography of the nation.

The press and the left are setting a standard for foreign policy as if it should be equal to Senator McCain’s so she can "step in as president on day one if need be". This is preposterous. No one has the experience that Senator McCain has. He comes from a dynasty of truly great military leaders, McCain spent 22 years as a Naval Officer and was commander of the largest squadron in the United States Navy (executive experience), McCain was the liaison between the US Navy and the US Senate.  McCain, as a senator, has been involved in every national security and foreign policy situation and crisis since the Beruit bombing, which McCain opposed President Reagan on and predicted would happen.

Unlike Joe Biden (who I like and is a nice guy) and even unlike some in his own party, when it comes to foreign policy and national security McCain has almost always been shown to be on the right side of history in these situations time and time again.

No one who has ran for president or vice president for 2008 can match McCain’s record. No one and not even Sarah Palin nor anyone else should be expected to; for the media to pretend to is pretty transparent.

Today the Huffington Post put out this piece of propaganda and carefully cut a youtubeclip to create their spin. The headline over the story reads:

McCain Pre-Palin: Mayors And Governors Can’t Handle National Security

When does being a governor or mayor for a short period of time ABSOLUTELY disqualify your credentials on national security? When you are John McCain and your task is to defeat primary opponents Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.

…and here is the youtibe clip they carefully cut:

Looks pretty damning doesn’t it? It’s designed to, unfortunately the entire spin of the story is a lie.

McCain never said that being a mayor or a governor disqualifies you – the Huffington Post made that up which explains why they cut the clip as they did.

Here is the ENTIRE clip:

As you can see Senator Thompson talks about his experiences, Mayor Guiliani talks about his experiences, Mitt Romney talks about his experiences. John McCain did not say that their experiences were no good and certainly did not put down Rudy Guiliani’s accomplishments as the greatest and most accomplished Mayor New York has had in my lifetime. McCain said this (the parts in red are what HuffPost clipped out:

I have fought wasteful spending. I have had a strong and a long relationship on national security, I’ve been involved in every national crisis that this nation has faced since Beirut, I understand the issues, I understand and appreciate the enormity of the challenge we face from radical Islamic extremism,” the Senator declared. “I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn’t a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn’t a governor for a short period of time, for 22 years, including leading the largest squadron in the United States Navy I lead. I didn’t manage for profit I lead for patriotism.”

As you can see by the text and the video, McCain wasn’t disqualifying anyones service; McCain is just making it clear that everyone’s service on that stage pales in comparison with his (and if I may add, no sane person would attempt to argue otherwise).

So HuffPost lies again… no surprise there.

Joe Biden has long experience, but unfortunately for Joe he has been on the wrong side of history repeatedly. With the prospect of a new cold war with Russia on the horizon, it is important to look at the last cold war at Biden’s record. Biden opposed missile defense, many new weapons systems, deployment of nuclear weapons with our allies, opposed Reagan’s tough stance on arms control agreements, opposed Reagan’s policy to contain and roll back the progress of the Soviet Empire and the list goes on. Reagan was proved correct.

So why did McCain pick Palin. The answer is obvious and it is why I would have picked her as well. McCain needed a real, proved in political combat, maverick to run with him. If McCain wins and starts to shake things up the political orthodoxy and bureaucracy from many in both parties will fight back. Our federal system has a lot of corruption and cronyism. The attorney’s will fly, there will be accusations and charges filed to bring down his credibility. The elite media will make it their mission in life to destroy his approval rating and sway Congress into not cooperating with McCain.  The fight will be ugly and McCain needs a partner who will stand with him no matter what, so his political enemies can’t isolate him.

It’s about leadership and McCain has thrown down the gauntlet.

My Take: All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to vote “present”. Washington needs that shake up. It’s just that simple.

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

A Picture is Worth 1000 Words. Here are your “Troopergate” Investigators…

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2008

Update III: Our analysis of the Branchflower Report is HERE.

UPDATE II: See Below – Palin’s lawyer whips out the evidence – looks like “Troopergate” is partisan nonsense and Hollis French lied.

Look It's Our Two "Investigators" Kim Eden (D-Juneau) circled on the far left and Hollis French (D-Anchorage)

Kim Elton (D-Juneau)(circled left) and Hollis French (D-Anchorage)

The man circled in red on the left is Kim Elton. He is a Democrat from Juneau who is the head of the legislative committee that authorized this investigation. Elton appointed Hollis French (D-Anchorage) to be the investigator. Now what is so amusing is that French has been telling the press since almost the beginning about how likely it will be that this investigation will damage the Governor. Hollis French said that this will result in an “October Surprise”.

“If they [ McCain Campaign] had done their job they never would have picked her,” said French. “Now they may have to deal with an October surprise,” he said, referring to the scheduled release Oct. 31 of the committee’s final report.

Sounds like a really objective investigator doesn’t he? Think maybe they had a conclusion in mind before they started? I report, you decide.

If you want every last detail of the simple facts of the case just click the link below. When the American people learn the details of this story, Governor Palin’s approval ratings will likely go up another five points… but the press has a habit of leaving out certain details and after you read the link below you will understand why.

Click & learn.


Amanda Carpenter did the digging on this story and deserves tremendous credit for this truly outstanding piece of journalism (Amanda is a Ball State grad).

HERE is the link to Amanda’s story and HERE is the link to the audio clip that goes with it.

Here is a key excerpt from Amanda’s story:

Lawmakers approved 13 of Branchflower’s subpoena requests that day, which included one for Palin’s husband, Todd. Four other subpoenas were approved for aides Branchflower believes participated in a meeting called by Palin’s former chief of staff Mike Tibbles where Wooten’s firing was allegedly discussed.

Rep. David Guttenberg (D.) asked Branchflower why he was requesting subpoenas for only those people attending the meeting and not Tibbles himself.

Branchflower said he would “have to defer that question to Mr. French.”

“I put the list together with, talking to Mr. French,” Branchflower added.

Sen. Gene Therriault (R.) told Branchflower, “I don’t understand why you would have to defer that question to Sen. French. If it’s your list you’re in complete control of the list, then why can’t you answer the question?”

Branchflower had no explanation. He only offered, “I’m not sure why his name was removed. My initial request was to have him on the list.” At that point, French interjected. “It appeared to me there wasn’t the political will to subpoena Tibbles.”

“Something’s fishy here,” Therriault replied. “I mean either Mr. Branchflower conducts his investigation without direction, and now we know he’s been directed on the date and changing what he’s doing and how he’s doing it because of the time pressure he is feeling. And now we’re hearing that people that he’s trying to get information from, there’s direction going on on that, too.”

French and the Democrats are trying to keep Palin’s Chief of Staff off the witness list. has a very good analysis HERE. Excerpt:

Branchflower then explained that he had submitted Tibbles’ name for a subpoena, only to have it removed by French. He could provide no explanation why French, who has endorsed Barack Obama, would have denied him a subpoena to interview the man who conducted the meeting in question. As both Democrats and Republicans pressed Branchflower to explain this omission, French himself interjected that he didn’t see a “political will” for the subpoena.

Clearly, this interference demonstrates the partisan nature of this inquiry. Why would the state of Alaska subpoena all of the attendees of a meeting but neglect to subpoena the man who called and ran the meeting? If the “political will” did not exist to question Tibbles, then why would it exist to subpoena the other participants in this meeting?

For some reason, French doesn’t want the committee to hear what Tibbles has to say about this meeting. Even beyond that question, though, French’s interference shows that this investigation is neither independent nor apolitical. French has been caught manipulating subpoenas for a predetermined outcome of this case. That strongly indicates that French doesn’t have much of a case, and feels the need to distort it for his own political reasons.

UPDATE II: EVIDENCE – Monegan bypassed normal channels – tried to bypass administration as a lone gun – Insubordinate (in other words it was exactly what Palin said from the start).

Anchorage Daily News has the story HERE

In one message, the governor’s budget director, Karen Rehfeld, wrote that she was “stunned and amazed” that Monegan appeared to be working with a powerful state legislator, Anchorage Republican Rep. Kevin Meyer, to seek funding for a project Palin previously had vetoed.

“The last straw” leading up to Monegan’s firing, Van Flein wrote, was Monegan’s planned trip to Washington, D.C., to seek funding for a new, multimillion-dollar sexual assault initiative the governor hadn’t yet approved.

Special thanks to for hosting the new legal documents HERE and their commentary is HERE.


…insubordination from Monegan:

  • 12/9/07: Monegan holds a press conference with Hollis French to push his own budget plan.
  • 1/29/08: Palin’s staffers have to rework their procedures to keep Monegan from bypassing normal channels for budget requests.
  • February 2008: Monegan publicly releases a letter he wrote to Palin supporting a project she vetoed.
  • June 26, 2008: Monegan bypassed the governor’s office entirely and contacted Alaska’s Congressional delegation to gain funding for a project.

From this presentation, it looks like Monegan had decided from the start to be a loose cannon in the Palin administration.  The wonder of this isn’t that he got fired — it’s how he managed to hang onto his job as long as he did.  …

As the filing states, Monegan served as a political appointee, at the pleasure of the Governor.  Obviously, Monegan didn’t act to support Palin’s budget initiatives, often acting in opposition to them.  In anyone’s administration, that will result in dismissal.  Monegan kicked himself out of the job through his own acts.


This means that Hollis French KNEW that Monegan was trying to push his own budget initiatives that the Governor opposed or did not approve. This means French KNEW Palin’s stated reason for firing Monegan was the truth. So what does this say about Hollis French circled in the picture above?

UPDATE III: Alaska Attorney General Refuses To Honor French’s Subpoena’s

And I don’t blame him, people in the legislature after witnessing Hollis French’s games on the issue are getting fed up with him.

Anchorage Daily News, which is no friend of Palin, reports:

In a letter to state Sen. Hollis French, the Democrat overseeing the investigation, Republican Attorney General Talis Colberg asked that the subpoenas be withdrawn. He also said the employees would refuse to appear unless either the full state Senate or the entire Legislature votes to compel their testimony.

Colberg, who was appointed by Palin, said the employees are caught between their respect for the Legislature and their loyalty to the governor, who initially agreed to cooperate with the inquiry but has increasingly opposed it since McCain chose her as his running mate.

“This is an untenable position for our clients because the governor has so strongly stated that the subpoenas issued by your committee are of questionable validity,” Colberg wrote.

The Attorney General is spot on. There is a reason why these kinds of subpoenas’ are on shaky ground. A legislature can’t yank a governor’s or a president’s advisers in front of a committee and make them spill their guts because if they could, no one would be totally open to give candid advice. It is very shaky legal ground. Palin’s administration said that if the entire legislature voted to subpoena they would voluntarily comply, which is not likely to happen as the rest of the legislature has about had it with this investigation; not to mention that the e-mails that Palin’s administration released and the documents they released show that Monegan’s firing was not only legal, but a slam dunk. comments on this story here.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Washington Post Smears Palin Again, Gets Facts Wrong Again, Doesn’t Check CNN or Youtube – Even Better, Idiots at Huffington Post Don’t Fact Check Either and Run With It

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2008

Washington Post Smears Palin Again, Gets Facts Wrong Again, Doesn’t Check CNN or Youtube – Even Better, Idiots at Huffington Post Don’t Fact Check Either and Run With It

A good blogger tries to not take a newspaper or wire services report on face value, because lets face it, journalists are human and can get it wrong, many journalists get it wrong on purpose because they have an agenda. The Washington Post has been the worst offender when it comes to publishing out and oput lies about Governor Palin that anyone who fact checked for 10 minutes could discover the simple truth about.

Today on page one the Washington Post:

Palin Links Iraq to Sept. 11 In Talk to Troops in Alaska

By Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 12, 2008; A01

FORT WAINWRIGHT, Alaska, Sept. 11 — Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would “defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.”

The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaeda plan the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. But it is widely agreed that militants allied with al-Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion.



Here is the full quote starting about four minutes into the video:

When you start going back out on missions you remember that for the rest of the time your there for THEM to fight for THEIR honor, This will be true on your mission as well wherever it leads you. All of you will also be there for THEM, you will be there in service to the same cause of freedom from tyranny and from violence, you will be there defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans. You will be there because America can never go back to that false sense of security that came before Sept 11th 2001.

Why did the Washington Post not include the full quote? Because when you see the full quote it is obvious that Palin is talking about the mission to defend the Iraqi people from Al-Qaeda. It is Al-Qaeda who attacked the World Trade Center twice. In fact the change of strategy that General Petreaus implemented with the surge was to stop only doing pinpoint strikes against Al-Qaeda in Iraq, but also to protect the Iraqi people form Al-Qaeda and that change in strategy worked, which is the exact mission Gov. Palin is explaining to her troops.


U.S.: Letters detail infighting over al Qaeda’s Iraq mission

  • Story Highlights
  • Letters say leaders chide al Qaeda in Iraq over recruiting, moving “assets” into Iraq
  • Umbrella group Islamic State of Iraq accused of exaggerating in propaganda
  • One letter obtained in U.S. operation that killed Al Qaeda information minister
  • U.S.: Al Qaeda in Iraq operating with only a third of the fighters it had two years ago

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN)— Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant has conveyed leaders’ dissatisfaction with al Qaeda’s operations in Iraq, according to the U.S. military, which says it has uncovered letters authored by the terror outfit’s No. 2 man.

Ayman al-Zawahiri allegedly wrote the March letters — which the military released Wednesday and which were translated by CNN — to Iraqi militant groups with ties to al Qaeda.

“It is in their own words. It is reflective of what they are saying about themselves,” said Brig. Gen. David Perkins, a spokesman for the Multi-National Forces in Iraq.

Al-Zawahiri conveys advice from al Qaeda’s chief, bin Laden, on how to improve the group’s performance and passed along dissatisfaction among al Qaeda members and leaders over a range of issues.

Complaints revolve around the group’s recruiting efforts, poor communication between al Qaeda central and al Qaeda in Iraq, ineffective and dishonest propaganda techniques, and the growing difficulty in moving “assets” from other countries into Iraq. VideoWatch how the letters suggest an internal dispute »


Not to be outdone by the Washington Post in hyped lies and stupidity here is the front page of the Huffington Post:


And finally the ultimate fact checker – the UNCUT video of Palin’s speech on Youtube! All HuffPost and WashPost Editors  had to do was look at YOUTUBE to see it was all a lie….

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin and other blogs like are all over this story – apparently the smart bloggers know how to do five minutes of fact checking.

UPDATE II: Bill Kristol is all over it as well:

Stupid or Malicious?span>
The Washington Post distorts Palin on page one.
by William Kristol

Kornblut’s interpretation of what Palin said is either stupid or malicious. Palin is evidently saying that American soldiers are going to Iraq to defend innocent Iraqis from al Qaeda in Iraq, a group that is related to al Qaeda, which did plan and carry out the Sept. 11 attacks. It makes no sense for Kornblut to claim that Palin is arguing here that Saddam Hussein’s regime carried out 9/11–obviously Palin isn’t saying that our soldiers are now going over to Iraq to fight Saddam’s regime. Palin isn’t linking Saddam to 9/11.

NOTE: To Washpost, HuffPost, Lynn Hoff etc etc.. those troops arent going over there to fight the Iraqi regime or Sadaam. Saddam has been out of the picture for five years. Welcome to 2008.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Profiles in Leftist Nonsense: Huffington Post Doesn’t Get NATO

Posted by iusbvision on September 12, 2008

This is the front page of the Huffington Post After Charlie Gibson’s Interview…. wait till you see what they wrote…

Let’s first examine the transcript:

Gibson: Do you favor the entry of Ukraine and Georgia into Nato?

SP: Ukraine definately, yes, yes and Georgia.

Gibson: Then under the NATO Treaty do we go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

SP: “Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.

SP also said in the interview: And we’ve got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable.”

Here is what HuffPost has to say about this:

There are numerous problems with this statement. The most important element is that it sends a very dangerous and extreme signal to the world — especially other nuclear powers. This type of dangerous talk reinforces the militaristic saber-rattling of the McCain campaign. From joking about bombing Iran, to talking about invading Iraq, Iran and Syria weeks after 9/11 to the misguided “we are all Georgians now,” the McCain campaign is sending all kinds of horrifying signals to the world about the types of wars it would fight. Leaders in other capitals are paying attention and words matter.

Technically, if Georgia and Ukraine were to become part of NATO under Article Five, we would be obligated to protect them and even Obama-Biden support bringing them into NATO. But here’s the thing…

No sane American or European leader would ever ever ever give an answer like that. You do not get into hypotheticals about nuclear war. You just don’t.

First of all, Palin never mentioned nuclear war in the interview, she also never said that we should invade Russia. She did imply that if Georgia were a part of NATO than we would have to go help them as the NATO treaty says. For some reason the left can’t stop just making stuff up. In the weeks after 9/11 we talked about invading lots of places because we weren’t sure who all the culprits were.

Huffpost says that “no sane American or European leader would ever give an answer like that” …. ummm excuse me our government has been saying it, Sarkozy in France has demanded that Russia withdrawal their forces from Georgia. Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser Zebignew Brzezinski said this …. and this is what is so sweet…. he said it TO THE HUFFINGTON POST……

Here is what Brzezinski said about bringing Georgia into NATO:

Brzezinski: The West desisted from extending the NATO “membership action plan” to Georgia — a preparatory stage for becoming a member — out of deference to Russian objections. It is now clear that the deference shown to Putin, in the face of his obvious ambitions, has been counterproductive. In view of what has happened, NATO ought to extend the membership action plan to Georgia, therefore reinforcing the commitment NATO made in Bucharest last March to the effect that NATO intends, at some future point, to include Georgia.

In spite of Brzezinski’s disastrous middle east policy under Carter, Brzezinski is spot on here and knows that moving to bring Georgia into NATO means that the west will be treaty bound and obligated to help Georgia expel Russian forces from it’s territory, by sanction’s if possible, by force if sanctions fail.

Brzezinski said in the interview:

We can logically anticipate that Putin, if not resisted, will use the same tactics toward the Ukraine. Putin has already made public threats against Ukraine.

The Huffpost treats the NATO group defense pact as a “technicality” as if it is not meant to be deadly serious:

Technically, if Georgia and Ukraine were to become part of NATO under Article Five, we would be obligated to protect them and even Obama-Biden support bringing them into NATO.

The Huffpost, calls Palin’s support for the letter of the NATO treaty, “sabre rattling” and a “very dangerous signal” and goes on to say that “Leaders in other capitals are paying attention and words matter.”

Umm Huffpost I have news for you Article Five of the NATO treaty isn’t an empty threat and isn’t optional and isn’t a mere trivial technicality. It is legally binding, but more importantly, stating that the NATO treaty will be enforced has stopped wars, saved countless lives and that NATO mutual defense threat carries with it the diplomatic credibility of NATO. Brzezinski has made it clear and he is correct that we need to bring them into NATO and let Putin know that NATO is SERIOUS, because as he said, anything less will just encourage Putin (which would make war even more likely). So to stop a war NATO must show Putin that NATO is ready to wage one.

So when Huffpost says that “No sane national leader would give an answer like that” – they are wrong, every NATO leader should give an answer like that so the diplomatic credibility of NATO can keep Putin from invading Ukraine or someone else. This is exactly why Sarkozy, Bush, McCain, and Brzezinski have said what they did.

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Obama and McCain are both on the record for supporting Georgia’s entry into NATO to help defend them. In fact, Obama and McCain co-sponsored a Senate Resolution (co-sponsors also included Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton – LINK) calling for Georgia’s admission into NATO. That resolution passed the Senate unanimously. Governor Palin has the same position on this issue as both presidential candidates and the entire US Senate, yet according to the Huffington Post it is she who is the warmonger….


Now let’s cover the other two issues they bring up, its 3:00 AM and I am beat so I will keep this short and sweet.

First – the accusation is that Palin did not know what the Bush doctrine is. Huffpost has this wrong and here is why. To Palin, the word “doctrine” has a special meaning, like a purpose or philosophy. As a very committed Christian it is a word that Palin has thought about many times and hears regularly in matters of faith. When you see her answer she starts explaining what Bush’s doctrine after 9/11 was, not the actual “Bush Doctrine” as a policy. When Gibson clarified that he was asking specifically about about the “Bush Doctrine” policy she gave the correct answer and the same one that McCain has given which is the position Obama spoke in agreement with later in the primary.

If Palin didn’t know what this policy was and what it meant, she would not have given such a specific and correct answer after Gibson clarified what he was asking. So what this adds up to is that Palin thought Gibson was asking her one thing when he was asking for another. There are six Bush Doctrine’s. Gibson named one and Governor Palin named another.

Second – Huffpost mocks Palin for saying that energy policy is a foundation for national security. The Democrats still don’t get this as they have opposed drilling, nuclear power and support high fuel taxes on diesel fuel which keeps many 60+ mpg diesel cars too expensive to drive and thus not sold in America. Ford makes such a vehicle but only sells it overseas. Palin is a guru on energy policy and that is one of the reasons she is so popular and the Republican brand owns the energy issue.

Chuck Norton

UPDATE – Allahpundit at means well but got it wrong. Dont get me wrong. The people at Hotair are VERY good at what they do to put it mildly. [Palin answered the Bush Doctrine question correctly. There are six Bush Doctrines, Gibson named one and Palin named another. See Hey Gibson! About that Bush Doctrine: There are SIX of them. Palin was right again. – Editor]

That said, it’s pretty clear she doesn’t know what he means by the Bush Doctrine and can’t answer the Pakistan question in anything but platitudes about stopping Islamic extremism.


Democrat Stratagist Kirsten Powers, who is a Democrat who makes an effort to be clear minded, got it right and oddly enough took almost the same take I did:

Her responses to Gibson’s cross-examining seemed canned and rehearsed, a little like the answers you might give in a tough college interview. But that may be a result of the ham-fisted editing – which seemed to cut her off mid-thought on many answers. ABC should release the entire, unedited interview, so that Americans can judge her more fairly.

The biggest concern is that she appeared to not know what the Bush Doctrine is. There are, in fact, different definitions of it – but all have had an impact on this nation.


The Australian Herald Sun also got this right on – I will have a full post on this piece later today:

Sarah Palin has given her first interview since being picked as the Republican’s vice-presidential candidate. The media has scrabbled for evidence of fumbles, and evidence that a shootin’, cussin’ redneck is about to plunge the world into war.

And away they go. From the Toronto Globe and Mail:

Shooting from the hip on foreign policy, Palin raises spectre of war with Russia

Indeed, 3AW’s Neil Mitchell this morning scoffed that a President Palin would have already started “four wars”, to judge by the interview.

Really? Let’s check.

The first war a President Palin would allegedly start was with Pakistan, by invading it in the hunt for terrorists, and perhaps from the transcript you might agree the words are indeed naive and alarming:

We should start with the premise that the United States, like all sovereign nations, has the unilateral right to defend itself against attack. As such, our campaign to take out Al Qaeda base camps and the Taliban regime that harbored them was entirely justified… (I)f we’ve got (Osama bin Laden) in our sites, we should ask for Pakistan’s cooperation, we should ask Pakistan to take him out. But if they don’t, we shouldn’t need permission to go after folks that killed 3,000 Americans.

Oops, sorry. That was actually Barack Obama. This is Palin:

ABC News Anchor Gibson also asked Palin several times whether or not U.S. forces have the right to make cross-border attacks into Pakistan with or without the approval of the Pakistani government…

“In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists, who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink…”

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »