Project Hero: PFC Daniel McClenney

PFC Daniel McClenney, Silver Star Posted by: McQ on Saturday, November 26, 2005 For valor in combat while in Konar Province, Afghanistan, the Silver Star was awarded posthumously to PFC Daniel McClenney, USMC."On 24 June 2004, McClenney's fireteam sought to locate and disarm enemy militia in the Konar Province of Afganistan. Enemy fire from two ambush positions intended to support a larger attack on other Marines and Coalition forces at Firebase Naray. "The enemy would have dealt a detrimental blow ... had Pfc. McClenney's fire team not reacted in a quick and decisive manner," the Navy secretary wrote. "McClenney continued to engage the enemy despite being wounded on the initial burst of enemy fire," England said. "After his team leader was killed, he took over radio communications and gave constant situation reports to the firebase and quick reaction force for 30 minutes."McClenney aggressively exchanged fire with the enemy while simultaneously requesting medical evacuation for his entire team," England said. "With a severe wound to his abdomen and a broken arm ... McClenney displayed an indominable fighting spirit as he fought hand-to-hand, until he was mortally wounded." Although PFC McClenney was posthumously awarded the Silver Star for his valor in the engagement in which he lost his life, probably the tribute that would have meant the most to him was deliverd by LCpl Brian Mobly who had been in the same fire fight and was severely wounded as a result. Said LCpl Mobly, "He was a helluva Marine". There is no higher accolade to a Marine.RIP Daniel McClenney. He was 19. Previously featured in "Project Hero" 1LT Brian Chontosh: Navy Cross PROJECT HERO is an ongoing attempt to highlight the valor of our military as they fight in both Iraq and Afghanistan. We constantly hear the negative and far to little of the positive and inspiring stories coming out of those countries. This is one small attempt to rectify that. If you know of a story of valor you'd like to see highlighted here (published on Saturday), please contact us. And we'd appreciate your link so we can spread the word.

How to Lose a War- Have Dems Quit on us...

How to Lose a War November 21, 2005 -- QUIT. It's that simple. There are plenty of more complex ways to lose a war, but none as reliable as just giving up. Increasingly, quitting looks like the new American Way of War. No matter how great your team, you can't win the game if you walk off the field at half-time. That's precisely what the Democratic Party wants America to do in Iraq. Forget the fact that we've made remarkable progress under daunting conditions: The Dems are looking to throw the game just to embarrass the Bush administration. Forget about the consequences. Disregard the immediate encouragement to the terrorists and insurgents to keep killing every American soldier they can. Ignore what would happen in Iraq — and the region — if we bail out. And don't mention how a U.S. surrender would turn al Qaeda into an Islamic superpower, the champ who knocked out Uncle Sam in the third round. Forget about our dead soldiers, whose sacrifice is nothing but a political club for Democrats to wave in front of the media. After all, one way to create the kind of disaffection in the ranks that the Dems' leaders yearn to see is to tell our troops on the battlefield that they're risking their lives for nothing, we're throwing the game. Forget that our combat veterans are re-enlisting at remarkable rates — knowing they'll have to leave their families and go back to war again. Ignore the progress on the ground, the squeezing of the insurgency's last strongholds into the badlands on the Syrian border. Blow off the successive Iraqi elections and the astonishing cooperation we've seen between age-old enemies as they struggle to form a decent government. Just set a time-table for our troops to come home and show the world that America is an unreliable ally with no stomach for a fight, no matter the stakes involved. Tell the world that deserting the South Vietnamese and fleeing from Somalia weren't anomalies — that's what Americans do. While we're at it, let's just print up recruiting posters for the terrorists, informing the youth of the Middle East that Americans are cowards who can be attacked with impunity. Whatever you do, don't talk about any possible consequences. Focus on the moment — and the next round of U.S. elections. Just make political points. After all, those dead American soldiers and Marines don't matter — they didn't go to Ivy League schools. (Besides, most would've voted Republican had they lived.) America's security? Hah! As long as the upcoming elections show Democratic gains, let the terrorist threat explode. So what if hundreds of thousands of Middle Easterners might die in a regional war? So what if violent fundamentalism gets a shot of steroids? So what if we make Abu Musab al-Zarqawi the most successful Arab of the past 500 years? For God's sake, don't talk about democracy in the Middle East. After all, democracy wasn't much fun for the Dems in 2000 or 2004. Why support it overseas, when it's been so disappointing at home? Human rights? Oh, dear. Human rights are for rich white people who live in Malibu. Unless you can use the issue to whack Republicans. Otherwise, brown, black or yellow people can die by the millions. Dean, Reid & Pelosi, LLC, won't say, "Boo!" You've got to understand, my fellow citizens: None of this matters. And you don't matter, either. All that matters is scoring political points. Let the world burn. Let the massacres run on. Let the terrorists acquire WMD. Just give the Bush administration a big black eye and we'll call that a win.The irresponsibility of the Democrats on Capitol Hill is breathtaking. (How can an honorable man such as Joe Lieberman stay in that party?) Not one of the critics of our efforts in Iraq — not one — has described his or her vision for Iraq and the Middle East in the wake of a troop withdrawal. Not one has offered any analysis of what the terrorists would gain and what they might do. Not one has shown respect for our war dead by arguing that we must put aside our partisan differences and win. There's plenty I don't like about the Bush administration. Its domestic policies disgust me, and the Bushies got plenty wrong in Iraq. But at least they'll fight. The Dems are ready to betray our troops, our allies and our country's future security for a few House seats. Surrender is never a winning strategy. Yes, we've been told lies about Iraq — by Dems and their media groupies. About conditions on the ground. About our troops. About what's at stake. About the consequences of running away from the great struggle of our time. About the continuing threat from terrorism. And about the consequences for you and your family. What do the Democrats fear? An American success in Iraq. They need us to fail, and they're going to make us fail, no matter the cost. They need to declare defeat before the 2006 mid-term elections and ensure a real debacle before 2008 — a bloody mess they'll blame on Bush, even though they made it themselves. We won't even talk about the effect quitting while we're winning in Iraq might have on the go-to-war calculations of other powers that might want to challenge us in the future. Let's just be good Democrats and prove that Osama bin Laden was right all along: Americans have no stomach for a fight. As for the 2,000-plus dead American troops about whom the lefties are so awfully concerned? As soon as we abandon Iraq, they'll forget about our casualties quicker than an amnesiac forgets how much small-change he had in his pocket. If we run away from our enemies overseas, our enemies will make their way to us. Quit Iraq, and far more than 2,000 Americans are going to die. And they won't all be conservatives. Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer.

How to Lose a War- Have Dems Quit on us...

How to Lose a War November 21, 2005 -- QUIT. It's that simple. There are plenty of more complex ways to lose a war, but none as reliable as just giving up. Increasingly, quitting looks like the new American Way of War. No matter how great your team, you can't win the game if you walk off the field at half-time. That's precisely what the Democratic Party wants America to do in Iraq. Forget the fact that we've made remarkable progress under daunting conditions: The Dems are looking to throw the game just to embarrass the Bush administration. Forget about the consequences. Disregard the immediate encouragement to the terrorists and insurgents to keep killing every American soldier they can. Ignore what would happen in Iraq — and the region — if we bail out. And don't mention how a U.S. surrender would turn al Qaeda into an Islamic superpower, the champ who knocked out Uncle Sam in the third round. Forget about our dead soldiers, whose sacrifice is nothing but a political club for Democrats to wave in front of the media. After all, one way to create the kind of disaffection in the ranks that the Dems' leaders yearn to see is to tell our troops on the battlefield that they're risking their lives for nothing, we're throwing the game. Forget that our combat veterans are re-enlisting at remarkable rates — knowing they'll have to leave their families and go back to war again. Ignore the progress on the ground, the squeezing of the insurgency's last strongholds into the badlands on the Syrian border. Blow off the successive Iraqi elections and the astonishing cooperation we've seen between age-old enemies as they struggle to form a decent government. Just set a time-table for our troops to come home and show the world that America is an unreliable ally with no stomach for a fight, no matter the stakes involved. Tell the world that deserting the South Vietnamese and fleeing from Somalia weren't anomalies — that's what Americans do. While we're at it, let's just print up recruiting posters for the terrorists, informing the youth of the Middle East that Americans are cowards who can be attacked with impunity. Whatever you do, don't talk about any possible consequences. Focus on the moment — and the next round of U.S. elections. Just make political points. After all, those dead American soldiers and Marines don't matter — they didn't go to Ivy League schools. (Besides, most would've voted Republican had they lived.) America's security? Hah! As long as the upcoming elections show Democratic gains, let the terrorist threat explode. So what if hundreds of thousands of Middle Easterners might die in a regional war? So what if violent fundamentalism gets a shot of steroids? So what if we make Abu Musab al-Zarqawi the most successful Arab of the past 500 years? For God's sake, don't talk about democracy in the Middle East. After all, democracy wasn't much fun for the Dems in 2000 or 2004. Why support it overseas, when it's been so disappointing at home? Human rights? Oh, dear. Human rights are for rich white people who live in Malibu. Unless you can use the issue to whack Republicans. Otherwise, brown, black or yellow people can die by the millions. Dean, Reid & Pelosi, LLC, won't say, "Boo!" You've got to understand, my fellow citizens: None of this matters. And you don't matter, either. All that matters is scoring political points. Let the world burn. Let the massacres run on. Let the terrorists acquire WMD. Just give the Bush administration a big black eye and we'll call that a win.The irresponsibility of the Democrats on Capitol Hill is breathtaking. (How can an honorable man such as Joe Lieberman stay in that party?) Not one of the critics of our efforts in Iraq — not one — has described his or her vision for Iraq and the Middle East in the wake of a troop withdrawal. Not one has offered any analysis of what the terrorists would gain and what they might do. Not one has shown respect for our war dead by arguing that we must put aside our partisan differences and win. There's plenty I don't like about the Bush administration. Its domestic policies disgust me, and the Bushies got plenty wrong in Iraq. But at least they'll fight. The Dems are ready to betray our troops, our allies and our country's future security for a few House seats. Surrender is never a winning strategy. Yes, we've been told lies about Iraq — by Dems and their media groupies. About conditions on the ground. About our troops. About what's at stake. About the consequences of running away from the great struggle of our time. About the continuing threat from terrorism. And about the consequences for you and your family. What do the Democrats fear? An American success in Iraq. They need us to fail, and they're going to make us fail, no matter the cost. They need to declare defeat before the 2006 mid-term elections and ensure a real debacle before 2008 — a bloody mess they'll blame on Bush, even though they made it themselves. We won't even talk about the effect quitting while we're winning in Iraq might have on the go-to-war calculations of other powers that might want to challenge us in the future. Let's just be good Democrats and prove that Osama bin Laden was right all along: Americans have no stomach for a fight. As for the 2,000-plus dead American troops about whom the lefties are so awfully concerned? As soon as we abandon Iraq, they'll forget about our casualties quicker than an amnesiac forgets how much small-change he had in his pocket. If we run away from our enemies overseas, our enemies will make their way to us. Quit Iraq, and far more than 2,000 Americans are going to die. And they won't all be conservatives. Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer.

Rise UP American Sheepdogs

Awesome post from Blackfive! Sheepdogs, Rise Up! If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed. - Colonel Dave Grossman on Sheepdogs Duty. Honor. Country. I know those words don't mean much to many in the Halls of the Senate and Congress, but they do to a large group of Americans. Sheepdogs, Rise Up! The time is now. Too many would play politics before securing a peace endanger the Iraqis, our troops and us at home. Motivations to withdraw early from Iraq run the gambit of defeatist rhetoric to political protectionism. The motivations of certain Senators that voted for a withdrawl in Iraq are suspect: (1) Conservatives and Moderates are covering their asses for the next election because, right now, the President isn't popular...they are cowards. and/or (2) Liberals don't want the military to meet the expectations of the American people resulting in a political sea change in the states...sycophants. or (3) A few might truly believe that we can meet those expectations and win the war in 2006 and pull our troops out of a safe and democratic Iraq...idealists. Aside for those in category three (if there are any really in that category), those who voted for the amendment are putting their own interests ahead of the mission (duty) ahead of everything other than keeping their cushy jobs (honor) ahead of their constituents (country) Who among you believes that this is NOT politics over country? NOT political self-preservation over our soldiers? NOT the fate of their careers over the fate of Iraq? This is about cutting and running for political cover or gain. Nothing more. It is entirely possible that, in the end, certain Senators and Congressmen will not be viewed as cowards by their constituents. However... They will be viewed as cowards by the Iraqis. Deservedly so. These demands for withdrawl will be a clarion call to Syria and Iran to keep sending terrorists. It sends a signal to Zarqawi to keep going for just twelve more months. It sends a signal to our allies - particularly Tony Blair who's been nothing short of miraculous in this fight - that we will always run from adversity because the last forty years has shown that Americans don't have the stomach for it. This is our one chance to do it right. To get back on track. To show the world that we mean business. Sheepdogs, contact your Senators. Contact your congressmen. Call the Congressional switchboard to be connected to any Senate or House office: 202-225-3121. Write letters to the editor of your hometown papers. Call people. Call your VFW. Call your American Legion. Call your Marine Corps League. Get involved. I've joined the team at No End But Victory. Bookmark it. Visit often. The esteemed authors have more eloquent posts than mine about the amendment in the Senate and the mistakes around the left's arguments for running away. First, peace. Then, withdrawal. No. End. But. Victory.

More lies from our leftists in Congress..

The White House issued another statement Monday taking on critics of the pre-was intelligence on Iraq. This time the target is Senator Carl Levin of Michigan. Like most Democrats now playing politics with the Iraq war, the truth shows him to be a first-class hypocrite: Sen. Levin (D-MI) Tries To Separate Iraq From The War On Terror. SEN. LEVIN: "But before the war, the President was saying that you cannot distinguish between Saddam Hussein and Iraq. As a matter of fact, he said that so often that he tried to connect Saddam Hussein with the attackers on us, on 9/11, so often, so frequently and so successfully, even though it was wrong, that the American people overwhelmingly thought, because of the President's misstatements that as a matter of fact, Saddam Hussein had participated in the attack on us on 9/11. That was a deception. That was clearly misinformation. It had a huge effect on the American people." (CNN's "American Morning," 11/14/05) But Sen. Levin And Other Democrats Previously Said That Iraq Was A Part Of The War On Terror. Sen. Levin: "The War Against Terrorism Will Not Be Finished As Long As [Saddam Hussein] Is In Power." (CNN's "Late Edition," 12/16/01) Sen. Levin: "We Begin With The Common Belief That Saddam Hussein Is A Tyrant And A Threat To The Peace And Stability Of The Region." (Committee On Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 9/19/02) Sen. Clinton (D-NY): "[Saddam] Has Also Given Aid, Comfort, And Sanctuary To Terrorists, Including Al-Qaida Members, Though There Is Apparently No Evidence Of His Involvement In The Terrible Events Of September 11, 2001. ... This Much Is Undisputed." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10288) Sen. Kerry (D-MA) Says Saddam Hussein Is Part Of The "Global Menace" Of Terrorism. CNN'S LARRY KING: "What about enhancing this war, Senator Kerry. What are your thoughts on going further than Afghanistan, all terrorist places ..." KERRY: "Oh, I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn't end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It's a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue, for instance, Saddam Hussein." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 12/14/01) Sen. Levin Admits That Democrats Also Believed That Saddam Hussein Had Weapons Of Mass Destruction (WMD). SEN. LEVIN: "You know, the administration continues to talk about everybody believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. That is true, but that isn't the issue." (CNN's "American Morning," 11/14/05) Sen. Clinton: "In The Four Years Since The Inspectors, Intelligence Reports Show That Saddam Hussein Has Worked To Rebuild His Chemical And Biological Weapons Stock, His Missile Delivery Capability, And His Nuclear Program. ... It Is Clear, However, That If Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Continue To Increase His Capability To Wage Biological And Chemical Warfare And Will Keep Trying To Develop Nuclear Weapons." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10288) Sen. Rockefeller (D-WV): "There Is Unmistakable Evidence That Saddam Hussein Is Working Aggressively To Develop Nuclear Weapons. And Will Likely Have Nuclear Weapons Within The Next Five Years. And Then Could Have It Earlier If He's Able To Obtain Materials On The Outside Market Which Is Possible. Difficult But Possible." (Sen. John Rockefeller, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, Pg.S10306) Sen. Kerry: "According To The CIA's Report, All U.S. Intelligence Experts Agree That Iraq Is Seeking Nuclear Weapons. There Is Little Question That Saddam Hussein Wants To Develop Nuclear Weapons." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, pp. S10172-10173) Rep. Pelosi (D-CA): "Saddam Hussein Certainly Has Chemical And Biological Weapons. There's No Question About That." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 11/17/02) This is a great idea, and too late in coming, but I think it is safe to say that the MSM will ignore it for the most part. That said, keep it up guys! Also, do the Dems really think this is a winning strategy for them? Forget about the fact that they are lying and consider what the American people will think of a party so dumb that they were supposedly duped by the president into a war. That doesn't say much for their leadership skills and that is what gets votes.

The latest leftist smear on our troops..

What is White Phosphorus? By Mark Noonan at 06:33 AM It was back in 1950, during the Korean War, when Americans were first accused of using chemical warfare against enemies in violation of treaties. For good measure, the communist enemy back then also accused us of using biological warfare. Of course, neither were used - but the slander was made, and has been endlessly repeated over the past 55 years every time American has gone into battle. The latest wrinkle in this slander is the accusation that in the use of white phosphorus exposives, we are engaging in chemical warfare - with the late battle of Fallujah held up as the horror story, with leftists claiming that our weapons "melted the skin" off noncombatants, including children. Evil, horrible America. When I first heard this story, I was amused - white phosphorus not being in any way, shape or form a chemical weapon, I figured that even the MSM would leave it alone. Wrong. I guess I still underestimate both the ignorance and the anti-Americanism of the MSM...nothing is too stupid for them to swallow it as long as it can be pitched in an anti-American and/or anti-GOP manner. I guess, however, that a lot of people just don't know what white phosphorus is - fortunately, Uncle Jimbo over at Blackfive provides us a handy guide to what it is, and how it is used. Most importantly, for our purposes, the weapon is used in order to limit non-combatant casualties. Uncle Jimbo does note the injustice of an armed force making the strongest efforts in human history to limit non-combatant casualties being accused of wantonly killing non-combatants. In light of the enemy's specific targeting of non-combatants, such charges are even harder to bear. What this shows is, once again, that we will never catch a break from our critics, foreign or domestic. No slander, no matter how patently false, will be disbelieved, and no act of mercy and justice on our part will be noted. Given this, it has become entirely pointless to actually argue with the critics...we have to keep hitting back with facts because we've learned this past six months that when you leave the field to the other side, eventually they start having success even with the wildest lies...but to debate? No point..we're just going to have to keep on our track, and win this war partially for a bunch of ingrates. As I've said, life isn't fair.

Assad in Syria tells everyone to go to hell..

Aweseome analysis from ACROSS THE BAY Blog: Bashar Opts for Brinksmanship Public "emotions" in Syria are, to a large extent, the product of the authorities and what these authorities do. It is a well-known case in military and dictatorial regimes, where the societal sentiment is subject to daily cooptation and regulation. The "patriotic" awareness that is being produced by the Syrian regime -- chauvinistic, hateful of Lebanon and the Lebanese -- may succeed in absorbing the contradictions of said regime, yet it will certainly not succeed in building a healthy Syrian patriotism. Hazem Saghieh, Al-Hayat, 07/30/05. How is Syria coping with the pressure? The way it always has, with violence. It is worthwhile to note that a state fearful of sectarian conflict runs a regional policy in Lebanon, Iraq, and Israel that aims to provoke elsewhere its own worst nightmares at home. This real fear of being surrounded and vulnerable not only drives the regime's authoritarian apparatus, it is also the source of Syrian identity. Eventually, Syrians will have to learn how to construct a positive national identity out of a multisectarian, multiethnic society without dispatching their demons abroad or sweeping them under an Arab nationalist rug. Lee Smith, The Weekly Standard, 10/10/05 Rallying around this regime, under whatever pretext and regardless of the motives, is like rallying around a corpse. The only thing that this regime can deliver is decay. Ammar Abdulhamid, 11/09/05. To noone's surprise, Bashar has opted for brinksmanship. In a speech, aptly described by an AFP report as "typically long and rambling," the Syrian dictator essentially declared war, as Josh Landis put it. Similarly, Lebanese politician Roger Edde described the speech as "a decision to go to war against the International Community, and against the political stability and security of Lebanon, represented by its Prime Minister." The direct targets of the war, consistent with long-established Syrian foreign policy, are Syria's neighbors, especially Lebanon. This is a predictable move, and certainly more expected than the fanciful notion that Bashar would bring the battle home and turn against his brother and/or brother-in-law, as some analysts like Seale and Leverett suggested. Back on Oct. 23, Michael Young explored Bashar's two equally bad options: With his back to the wall, what can Mr. Assad do? He can, of course, fully comply with the U.N. But that would be political suicide amid the fingers pointed at members of his inner core. Or Mr. Assad can pursue brinksmanship--in Lebanon, Iraq and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict--assuming this will strengthen his hand at a time when there is no ready alternative to his rule. He may be right, and his regime's collapse may take some time as nobody wishes to see Syria descend into chaos. However, such an impasse only heightens the chances that Syria will face increasingly harsher sanctions and perhaps even military retaliation from the U.S. over Iraq. Mr. Assad is being offered several ways to impale himself; his only leeway is choosing which is the most painless. If the Baath Party Congress didn't convince you that Bashar was a believer, or, at the very least, that he was going to stick with "revolutionary" Arab nationalism, then his speech today should end all discussion on the issue (see Beirut Spring for links to an English summary and audio excerpts).Actually, we caught a glimpse of what the theme of the speech was going to be from the "regime's liberal" Sami Moubayed, who wrote a long English version of the "Syria as the Pan-Arab citadel of steadfastness" (which, by the way, said the exact opposite of his piece from a couple of weeks earlier). Lending credence especially to the quote by Saghieh, but also the ones by Smith and Abdulhamid above, Moubayed informed us that "there is a consensus between the street and government" on the issues of "Lebanon, Palestine and the Iraqi resistance." That was one of the main messages of the speech: that there is no chasm between the Assad regime and the Syrian people. While Bashar's chauvinistic and paranoid (see Feris Khishen's piece) speech splattered the Iraqis, its main target was Lebanon. (And for all the "deal on Iraq" folks, let me point out what Bashar said in his speech -- the Americans must pull out of Iraq -- and what I recently wrote on the issue: "The only 'deal' the Syrians have in mind, to quote a friend of mine, is one where the U.S. agrees to withdraw, and a 'partnership' in which the Syrians see it out the door -- in Lebanon as well as Iraq.")

Hoorah!!!

Result of Quiz :: Which soldier type are you? created by rebelranger You scored as Combat Infantry. Your a combat infantry soldier,a grunt, a dogface, a footslogger. While some say your common, your a really a disciplined person who realizes the importantce of working in a team, and in reality you and your comrades get most of the work done. This country needs more people like you. Your a brave selfless person. And I salute you. TEN-HUT!!! Combat Infantry 88% Medic 69% Officer69% Engineer56% Support Gunner50% Special Ops 50% Artillery 38% Civilian 0%

Shocker- the French can not control France...

Just hours after French President Jacques Chirac publicly condemned violence and rioting in Paris ... police were fired on by rioters. Ten officers were wounded, two of them seriously, when police clashed with about 200 youths who were hurling stones and other projectiles. The incident came only a few hours after Chirac made his first public address since the riots began. This report from CTV could mean that certain "youths" -- to use the charming nomenclature of the press -- have decided to lead the events of the past eleven days into deeper waters. It may compel the police, firemen and rescue workers to increase their force protection measures, to travel in better protected packages, reducing the area they could cover in a more permissive environment. Although the timing of the police shooting in the immediate aftermath of Chirac's speech may be coincidental, the attacks may also be a conscious defiance, the proverbial cream pie thrown in the French President's face. On Sunday ... business owners called on Chirac to summon the military ... before arsonists begin to attack buildings as well. ... Police said ... nearly 1,300 vehicles were burned across the country. Some 2,300 police officers were ordered into the Paris region ... on Saturday night. What isn't known, what the public can only guess at, are the preparations the French government have made to carry out Chirac's pledge to restore order. "The law must have the last word," Chirac said, and vowed those sowing "violence or fear" will be "arrested, judged and punished." The French government must demonstrate that it can deliver, for nothing incites contempt so much as to be all hat and no cattle; to bluster and to bluster impotently.

Paris burns for 8th straight night...

So, now the Frenchies have been able to defend Paris for more than a week. Thus beating their previous defense of Paris by about... well.. more than a week. Of course, this time they are fighting other French rather than the Wermacht. Oh well, who are we Americans to quibble with disaffected youth? Karma is a b-tch isn't it Chirac? Paris Burns By JAMEY KEATEN Associated Press Writer The Associated Press AULNAY-SOUS-BOIS, France Nov 3, 2005 — Rampaging youths shot at police and firefighters Thursday after burning car dealerships and public buses and hurling rocks at commuter trains, as eight days of riots over poor conditions in Paris-area housing projects spread to 20 towns. Youths ignored an appeal for calm from President Jacques Chirac, whose government worked feverishly to fend off a political crisis amid criticism that it has ignored problems in neighborhoods heavily populated by first- and second-generation North African and Muslim immigrants. Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin called a string of emergency meetings with Cabinet ministers throughout the day. He told the Senate the government "will not give in" to violence in the troubled suburbs.French Rioters Shoot at Police, Fire Crews "Order and justice will be the final word in our country," Villepin said. "The return to calm and the restoration of public order are the priority our absolute priority." The riots started last Thursday after the electrocution deaths of two teenagers who ran from a soccer game and hid in a power station in the northeastern suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois after they saw police enter the area. Youths in the neighborhood said police chased the boys to their death. French authorities have said that officers were investigating a suspected burglary and not pursuing the boys, a view backed up by an interim report by the national police inspectors office released Thursday. Investigators said the boys Mauritania-born Traore Bouna, 15, and Zyed Benna, 17, of Tunisia knew of the dangers of hiding in an electric substation as they sought to evade police. The report also cites two witnesses saying they did not see the boys being chased. A third boy, Muttin Altun, 17, was badly burned. Separate administrative and judicial investigations into the accidental deaths also were under way. By Wednesday night, violence triggered by the deaths had spread to at least 20 Paris-region towns, said Jean-Francois Cordet, the top government official for the Seine-Saint-Denis region north of Paris where the violence has been concentrated. He said youths in the region fired four shots at riot police and firefighters but caused no injuries.

Go Air Force! Valour IT challenge has begun...

Valour-IT Blogging Fundraiser Competition Begins Today! Mrs Greyhawk What is a "Valour-IT Blogging Fundraiser Competition" you ask? Project Valour-IT is a Soldiers Angels project dedicated to provide voice-controlled software and laptop computers to wounded Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines recovering from hand and arm injuries or amputations at major military medical centers. Operating laptops by speaking into a microphone, our wounded heroes are able to send and receive messages from friends and loved ones, surf the 'Net, do on-line banking and communicate with buddies still in the field without having to press a key or move a mouse. This can be instrumental in their recovery and help eliviate frustrations an injured soldier may endure. The goal of this competition is to have a fun rivarly amongst the branches of service, so there will be 4 teams, Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Each team will have a blogging leader (not necessarily affiliated with that branch). For instance I've been assigned to the Air Force team and I'm not in the Air Force and Holly Aho the team leader for Marines is most certainly not a Marine, she's just too damn sweet. However BlackFive is team leader for the Army and he represents. And for the Navy, they are still searching for a Team leader so if interested contact Please contact FbL. Each team will compete through blogging about project Valour-IT in order to raise donations. Whichever team raises the most money for project Valour-IT between 11/2 and 11/11 is the winner of the competition. While teams are divided along military lines, you need not have been in the military in order to help or join a team. So pick the best Air Force team. If you are interested in joining Mudville, which has been assigned to the Airforce team, leave a trackback or comment to this post, or send me an email to let me know you'd like to be on our team. We'll welcome you as a member. Uno Ab Alto !(One over all) Regardless which team you choose to donate thru, all monies goes to one pot to help all soldier's wounded no matter what branch they are in. Those that are not bloggers can also help project Valour-IT by telling friends and family as well as by email. Flyers are available for whoever would like to distribute them, bloggers and non-bloggers alike. There are a few incentives such as receiving a Soldiers' Angels Coin which will be given to each donor during the competition. They are beautiful (I know I have one) Bloggers in the competition are also free to offer their own incentives for donations. Here at Mudville, every donation of $100.00 or more will get you free advertising for the time alloted for this competition. The fundraising competition will run from November 2 until Veteran's Day, November 11. Need some motivation? Read this or this. And a few tax issues to add: 1. It's a tax-deductible donation and eligible for matching funds from companies who do that sort of thing (see: http://soldiersangels.org/valour/irsinfo.html for proof for the cautious) 2. The snail mail address for those who'd rather donate that way (scroll down at: http://soldiersangels.org/valour/donate.html). We will credit donations to the team competition if they arrive during the competition days. Our goal is to raise enough money to purchase 30 laptops. That's about $21,000, or roughly $5250 per team over a 10-day span. Valour IT Air Force Team We've collected $555.00 of our goal of $21000.00! SO JOIN OUR TEAM TODAY! AIM HIGH! UNO AB ALTO ! - (One over all!) USAF No One Comes Close!

"Unhinged"- Michelle Malkins new book on crazy libs

http://www.michellemalkin.com/mt/oct05-tb.cgi/3138 It is amazing how the "anti-war, pro-peace" party is so heavily involved in aggression and intimidation. (Of course only against fellow Americans and not Islamo-fascist terrorists). This looks like an awesome book and hopefully will do very well on the NY Times bestseller lists. Good Luck Michelle!