Posse Incitatus

Sheehan's twisted view of the military

Noted moonbat Cindy Sheehan has been of passing interest to the Posse primarily because of what her ravings illustrated about the anti-American left.

That is why Gateway Pundit's detective work is of particular interest.  We already knew Sheehan was a liar, in part because her view of the world was so warped.

Her version of the treatment of her son's remains was always ludicrous, particularly for those that know anything about the military.

The way we treat our dead tells us much about how we treat the living.  Since death is an integral part of military service (either dealing it out or suffering from it), the military has its own elaborate and long-honored traditions about how to dispose of its fallen warriors.  To disrespect a fallen comrade is the ultimate taboo.

So Sheehan's story about her son coming home in a cardboard box and being unloaded like freight was clearly a crock from the get-go.

But it was illustrative of how Sheehan and her ilk thought the military would treat the dead.  To the "anti-war" movement, the military is made up of inhuman monsters.  One of the characteristics of monsters is that they dishonor the dead.  The desecration of enemy corpses has long been viewed as an atrocity, but to dishonor one's own fallen is truly despicable.  Hence the slur.

James Taranto has frequently exposed the hypocrisy of the "but we support the troops!" line often used by anti-war activists right after they throw another smear at the military.  This is a classic example.

One cannot claim to support the military in one breath and then claim it has an institutional disregard for its own fallen brethren with the next.  Credibility isn't strained, it is ripped into microscopic shreds.

Sheehan apparantly stands by her slur, and given the reality dysfunction that cripples the modern left, she might have gotten away with her lies. 

Fortunately, the funeral home saved the reciepts.

Get mad. Get real mad.

The Posse just viewed the trailer for United 93.

To say we experienced Kim du Toit's Red Curtain of Blood doesn't even come close.

If this film is anything close to what respected critics and the trailer indicates, it will be a welcome wakeup call.

It is time Americans remembered we are at war with a merciless and ruthless enemy.  We do not doubt that the chattering classes will try to sweep it under the rug, denigrate and otherwise cast aspersions upon those that were moved by the film.

Let them try.  They will only destroy what remains of their credibility and audience.

Of course, the Bush administration should have been telling this story itself for the past four years.  The time is now for the president to remind the American public that the NSA's wiretapping program could have stopped the 9/11 attacks and that Russ Feingold and the rest of the "civil liberties" lobby have their heads screwed on backwards.

The GOP majority in Congress has screwed up a lot of things and its fortunes are at low ebb.  Perhaps this film will remind us that the Republicans may be spendthrifts, but at least they love their country.

Alas, the same cannot be said about Democrats.

The last hope of the West

The Posse was greatly moved to read of the ANZAC Day observances in Australia and New Zealand.

Tim Blair has a roundup of stories about the record crowds who showed up to honor their military veterans. 

Amidst all the pessimism, defeatism and talk of the decline of the West, the news is welcome tonic.  Australia is a young nation and its time is coming.

And we are glad of it.

Want to know a secret?

Over the past few weeks, the Posse has indulged in Cold War nostalgia.  We've been reading Inside the KGB by Christopher Andrew and high-ranking Soviet defector Oleg Gordievsky and comparing it with the television versions (now available on DVD) of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and Smiley's People, featuring the incomparable Sir Alec Guinness.

Our trip down memory lane is a reminder that the outcome of the Cold War was far from certain and we have been studying the manner in which the left was brought under control and how the West managed to maintain its focus during the last Long War.

The continuing revelations about high-level leaks of classified information, however, strike us as somewhat unique.

With all due respect to Captain Ed, the identities of the leakers isn't as important as the leaks themselves, or what they mean.

There has been a lot of talk about an impending civil war in Iraq.  As many astute bloggers have noted, Iraq has been in a state of civil war for decades.  A Sunni Arab dictatorship continually kept the majority Shi'ites and the Kurds under repression.  Periodically each group staged an open revolt that was militarily crushed.

There is nothing new in this.

What is new is the fact that the American intelligence community seems intent on creating its own civil war here in the United States.  A pattern of damaging leaks, unsupported accusations and hit pieces placed selectively in major publications are indicative of nothing less than an attempt at removing the Bush administration from office.

We suggest that this is a civil war because it is highly unlikely that the perpetrators have any great love for American's adversaries.  There seems little possibility of a Taliban or Iranian "mole" feeding secrets to Osama bin Laden.

Instead, the current breakdown is entirely the result of anger at the Bush administration - anger perhaps becuase it's policies are flawed, but increasingly it seems anger based on the fact that the administration exists at all.

In such circumstances, it is understandable that the anti-Bush faction would seek whatever allies it can find.  Placing American civilians at risk, undermining the war effort, causing defeat on the shadowy espionage battlefield - all of these will destroy the Bush administration and lead to a period of renewed Democrat hegemony.

And if the price for this is another 9/11 style attack, so be it.  Spies are nothing if not ruthless.

This is truly a plot worthy of Roger L. Simon.  It doubtless features a cast of dozens of operatives, both political, military and media.  Who knows what dark thoughts lurked in the heart of Valerie Plame, for example, when she pulled strings to have her husband sent to Niger - or how their dinner conversation turned after he blatantly mischaracterized his findings to the press?

Joseph swirled his glass of wine and gazed out across sleeping Washington. 

"It isn't much of a secret," he said.  "Most people know you're with the Agency.  You've worked at Langley for five damn years.  It's going to come out."

She laid a hand on his shoulder.  "Yes, but how will it come out?" she said quietly.  "Who is going to spill?  If the administration tries to refute you, we claim I was punished and the Bushies get a nice fat scandal.  If they don't, our story becomes the new recieved truth.  Either way, Kerry will sweep these Texas turds into the Potomac come November."

We are genuinely curious of how it was decided to reveal the NSA wiretaps as well.  Was there no thought to the damage this could cause?  If civil liberties were truly in danger, why not proceed to respective legislative oversight committees?  Our thought here is that they wouldn't play ball - the program was legal but if spun correctly, it could also prove damaging.

And so now the Inspector General herself has been cashiered - though the reasons aren't clear.  Either she passed secret information to reporters or she didn't.  But if the IG can't keep classified material under wraps, who can?

And are national secrets no longer important?  What level of security can be compromised in the name of "whistleblowing?"

To put it another way, how many people would have to die for the press to admit that maybe they shouldn't have published damaging information?

One of our main criticisms of the Bush administration is that it has allowed the CIA to run wild.  Despite the deaths of three thousands Americans, no major effort has been undertaken to reform the agency and punish those who have placed more Americans in danger.

The irony is, if the Bush administration remains complacent in the face of such insubordination and treason, it will indeed be to blame if another terrorist attack succeeds.

Islamist protest in N.Y.

I picked this up off Drudge:

A New York rally by the Islamic Thinkers Society outside the Israeli consulate yesterday featured chants of "The mushroom cloud is on its way! The real holocaust is on its way!"

The chants were in Arabic and translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism, headed by Steve Emerson, a former reporter for CNN.

Here are some excerpts from the chants:  Leader (in Arabic): "With our blood and our lives we will liberate al Aqsa!" [The rest also respond in Arabic:] "With our blood and our lives we will liberate al Aqsa! Israeli Zionists What do you say? The real Holocaust is on its way"

Bring it!  Push us over the edge of reason, come on.  Prove that you are nothing but a group of intolerant, warmongers that can not be dealt with on an intellectual level.  Radical Islam is Islam.  Islam should not be tolerated.  Islam should not be embraced.  We should not try to understand Islam.  It is a religion of oppression and hate.  Remember if you are not Muslim, you are an Infidel.  They no longer tolerate people of their book.  These followers of a supposed peaceful religion train and encourage CHILDREN to blow themselves up and kill the infidels.  Why is that okay?  How do you rationalize that in the West?  What in your brain doesn't function right that allows you to dismiss or support such stupid and self-destructive behavior?  Is it your thalamus or amygdala or just your entire frickin cortex?  If a group of Southern Bible-thumpers decided to train their eight year olds to walk into an abortion clinic straped with explosives to kill the heretics, would this be tolerated?  Would it be okay?  Should we try to understand their interpretation of religion and embrace them?  HELL NO!  So, why is it okay in Islam?  Because so many people are AFRAID of actually doing ANYTHING.  People are afraid to aline with a belief in anything against Islam.  Well the days are coming when you will have to choose which side you want to be counted with.  For me and mine, we will not be on the side that encourages their children, their babies, to blow themselves up for the glory of Islam.

SITHKITTEN

Why we like gun buybacks

All of this God-blogging has distracted the Posse from commenting on an exciting development for gun enthusiasts: the return of the gun buyback program.

Kevin Baker has a wonderful fisking of the article, but we think he's taking a rather narrow view.  The issue isn't whether they work by reducing crime or making the world less violent.

No, the question is: How can we benefit from a bunch of stupid people intent on giving away their money?

The Posse has often lamented the failure of this movement to take hold on a wider scale, and we've publicly suggested that for gun buybacks to really work, more substantial sums must be offered.  At least $100 per firearm.  Preferably $200.

This would cover the cost of our travel to all the second-hand stores in the area to sweep them of cheap, often non-functional firearms.

Advance warning is also essential.  It takes time to set up those bulk purchases of war-surplus Moisin-Nagants with cracked stocks, bent barrels and other defects. 

Now, this whole exercise does tend to waste the public's money.  However, given that the jurisdictions we are dealing with wouldn't put it to good use anyway, lining our pockets and subsidizing the used firearms market seems is probably better than anything else they were going to do with it.

Bring on that expose of Mohammed

Once again, Kevin Baker has struck a nerve with the Posse.   We probably link to the Smallest Minority more than any other site because it's so damn provocative.

At any rate, we were amused to see that the Easter campaign against Christianity continues with a film suggesting Jesus of Nazereth didn't really exist. 

Kevin correctly observes that one won't find a similar film about Mohammed.

One of the commenter asks what evidence there is.  Of course the evidence isn't the issue, its the standard by which is it judged.

The thing about ancient history is that we don't have a lot of sources.  In many cases we have one part of one book as our primary source of knowledge about something.

So when people say "Why that's not enough evidence," they are either ignorant or being dishonest.

Compare Jesus to someone like Julius Caesar, Cleopatra or almost any other historical figure.  How do we know any of them existed?  Often it's an inscription well after the fact or a coin, or a mention in a subsequent text.

In our college days, we too faced doubts about whether Jesus ever existed.  We came to believe that he did after sorting objectively.  Indeed, we came to the conclusion that there is arguably more evidence Jesus Christ existed than that Julius Caesar did.

Now people say "Whoa, wait a minute, Caesar conquered Gaul! There are coins!  Statues!  What does Jesus have?"

Try a cathedral in every major city in Europe.

But even beyond that, if one limits one's time frame to actual ancient sources, and applies the same cynical bent to Caesar that one applies to Jesus, Caesar comes off much worse.

Jesus wasn't the source of the Gospels, merely the subject.  Caesar, on the other hand, wrote most of the what we know about him.

Moreover, like Christ, Caesar was subsequently deified and his successors - unlike the Apostles - recieved considerable benefits from this.  Indeed, the Imperial Cult was a powerful incentive to ensure that Caesar and his successors were pumped up in every way.

The early Christians, on the other hand, were persecuted almost immediately.  On a pure cost-benefit basis, the best thing they could do would be to deny Christ's divinity as soon as possible.

Indeed, it wasn't until the Fifth Century that the Church had the power to impose its will - long after the New Testament had been established.

So let us review:

Julius Caesar's successors were the rulers of the Roman world.  They had every incentive to fabricate evidence of their predecessor's divinity and greatness.  Our primary sources for Caesar's greatest victories admittedly were written by himself and/or his allies for his personal political gain.

The Christians, on the other hand, remained an underground movement, shunned and persecuted with little opportunity or reason to stand by their beliefs other than the conviction that they were revealed truth.  The early bishops tended to die messy and painful deaths - deaths that could be avoided simply by renouncing their "imaginary friend."

We eagerly await publication of the "Caesar Code."

We'll go with Option 2b

The Gates of Vienna, a site we wish we had time to read more often, has an excellent discussion of what might happen to Europe as the Islamic tide continues to rise.

The Posse's inclination is to hope for the best and prepare for the worst.  While we do not underestimate the danger facing Western civilization, we believe that it will endure and that the Light will defy and defeat the darkness of our time.

That is why we believe that the eventual outcome will be the "Second Reconquista" described in the post linked above.

Europe indeed is awash in cowardice, but there is also great anger on the part of the working classes and a willingess to engage in violence if it furthers their ends.

Pushed into a corner, wounded and afraid, Europe's weakened peoples will fight back, and fiercely - as they always have.

Europe's militaries are small and emaciated, but they contain a core of professional soldiers whose ancestors marched with Julius Caesar, Charlemagne and Richard the Lionheart.  Many of those volunteers - particular in the elite units - are part of a military caste than can document its participation to the days of Frederick the Great - if not earlier.

These are the fulcrum that has always held the balance of power where military might is concerned.  They are brave, patriotic and ruthlessly competent.  And if given an excuse, they will strike back as their ancestors did.

We do not say this in praise of them.  These same warriors have little love for democracy, tend to despise Jews and incline toward fascism.

That is why we believe Europe will survive, but that it's democracies probably won't.

Let's see them do that to a madrassa

The Posse could only chuckle when we saw that recently outed gay actor George Takai has joined a travelling media circus harassing Christian colleges over their stances on homosexuality.

Of course the participants no doubt imagine themselves showing great courage and that they are forcing otherwise narrow-minded bigots to confront the truth about homosexuality.

It has probably never occured to them that the belief that homosexuality is a mental disorder is reinforced rather than diminished when one is exposed to its most radical advocates.

Then again, the college in question simply locked its doors and ignored them.  It didn't burn them, drop stone walls on them or otherwise threaten the brave, brave marchers.

If we may quote from the article:

Tour organizer Jacob Reitan, 24, said the colleges they are visiting "equate homosexuality with sickness and sin. It's time to have a conversation instead of defaming our humanity."

The Posse suggests that the Tour is misdirected.  Christian colleges aren't sending suicide bombers into crowded restaurants.  When Notre Dame is willing to host the Vagina Monologues, we've pretty much reached the apogee of what anyone can realistically call "tolerance."

The local mosque and madrassa, on the other hand, would doubtless benefit from such an exposure to the alternative lifestyle.  Perhaps Mr. Sulu would like to "beam" into Karachi or Riyadh?

We won't hold our breath waiting for that confrontation to happen, though. 

The Gospel According to Thulsa Doom

Via the hated Instapundit, the Posse found this post to be an outstanding analysis of the thinking behind the release of the Judas "gospel" and its attendant publicity.

It dovetails and clarifies many of the themes we've been propounding for years: that the left has embraced treason and cowardice as virtues, yet they cannot shake their sense of shame.

So they concoct new myths and try to debunk, disparage and otherwise denigrate traditional virtues and morals.

In many ways, they have embraced the central message of Thulsa Doom's religion: emptyness.

In many ways, radical Islam is quite similar to Thulsa Doom's creed - which started out, we must never forget, as "just another snake cult."

But the willingness of its followers to kill and die for their leader made it something altogether more sinister.

The left hasn't reached that point.  Indeed, they live in terror of death, so much so that they will sacrifice anything and everything for the here and now: family, friends, or nation.

Whatever causes them discomfort must be abhorred and destroyed.  But eventually, the pleasures lose their sensation, and all that is left is emptiness and death. 

What then for those who have no faith left, or who have built their cult around betrayal?  For them, there can be nothing but to be betrayed in turn: euthanized by their few unfeeling children.

For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh of the flesh also shall reap corruption. But he that soweth in the spirit of the spirit shall reap life everlasting. [Galatians, 6:8]