 |  |
 
October 2012
August 2012 July 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
     |
 Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by! March 15, 2004 For Whom the Bell TollsBy GreyhawkIn the 2000 U.S. presidential election, 51% of the voting age population voted. The turnout was higher than expected. More than 77 percent of the country's 35 million eligible voters cast ballots, compared with 55 percent four years ago. In Madrid, the figure was 80 percent. Ironic, perhaps, that the terrorist attacks were so highly effective in bringing out the vote. And of those 27 million who voted, According to official election figures, the Socialists won 43 percent of the vote and 164 seats in the 350-member Chamber of Deputies; the Popular Party won 38 percent of the vote and 148 seats. Recap: 8 million eligible did not vote, the Popular Party received 10.2 million votes, and the Socialists won 11.6 million votes. The Socialists were short of the 176 seats to have a majority necessary to form a government, which means it must create a coalition with another party or parties. Some quotes from among the 33% of eligible Spanish voters who voted Socialist: ``Our prime minister has gotten us into a terrible, completely wrong war,'' Vanessa BellÀon, a 23-year-old preschool teacher with a piercing near her lower lip, said as she voted there for the United Left Party. ``And because of it, I spent yesterday and today going to funerals. I am thinking of a 3-year-old child at my school who no longer has a mother.'' Since the Spanish Civil War was over long before I was born I'll have to take his word for that. (Though it does go against everything I've read or heard.) Here's an excerpt from a translation of the letter claiming responsibility for the bombings, allegedly by Al Qaeda: "The Death Brigades penetrated into the European Crusader heartland, and struck a painful blow at one of the foundations of the Crusader coalition. This is part of a settling of old accounts with Crusader Spain, the ally of the U.S., in its war against Islam… Memri's analysis is that this statement does not seem to be an authentic Al-Qa'ida document. This from another Spanish Socialist: A 26-year-old window frame maker, who identified himself only as David, said he had changed his vote from Popular Party to Socialist because of the bombings and the war in Iraq. ``Maybe the Socialists will get our troops out of Iraq, and Al Qaeda will forget about Spain, so we will be less frightened,'' he said. ``A bit of us died in the train.'' Whether it was their letter or not, Al Qaeda celebrates victory. No, wait, the socialists. In Spain. They were the big winners. They are doing the celebrating. And what percentage of Americans will vote this year? Posted by Greyhawk / March 15, 2004 1:07 PM | Permalink 14 Comments |
November 26, 2010America@war [Greyhawk]
I think anyone who's ever pondered the "comment" option - once only available on blogs and bulletin boards, now ubiquitous on almost any web site - will appreciate this:
The so-called faculty of writing is not so much a faculty of writing as it is a faculty of thinking. When a man says, "I have an idea but I can't express it"; that man hasn't an idea but merely a vague feeling. If a man has a feeling of that kind, and will sit down for a half an hour and persistently try to put into writing what he feels, the probabilities are at least 90 percent that he will either be able to record it, or else realize that he has no idea at all. In either case, he will do himself a benefit. That's wisdom from the past, captured for posterity at the US Naval Institute, shared via the web on the institute's 137th anniversary. From their about page:
"The Naval Institute has three core activities," among them, History and Preservation: The Naval Institute also has recently introduced Americans at War, a living history of Americans at war in their own words and from their own experiences. These 90-second vignettes convey powerful stories of inspiration, pride, and patriotism. Take a look at the collection, and you'll see it's not limited to accounts from those who served on ships at sea, members of the other branches are well-represented. I'm fortunate to have met USNI's Mary Ripley, she's responsible for the institute's oral history program (and she's the daughter of the late John Ripley, whose story is told here). She also deserves much credit for their blog. ("We're not the Navy nor any government agency. Blog and comment freely.") We met at a milblog conference - Mary knew (and I would come to realize) that milbloggers are the 21st-century version of exactly what the US Naval Institute is all about. Once that light bulb came on in my head, I mentioned a vague idea for a project to her - milblogs as the 21st century oral history that they are. "Put that in writing," she said (of course - see first paragraph above!) - and here's part of the result. Shortly after the first tent was pitched by the American military in Iraq a wire was connected to a computer therein, and the internet was available to a generation of Americans at war - many of whom had grown up online. From that point on, at any given moment, somewhere in Iraq a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine was at a keyboard sharing the events of his or her day with the folks back home. While most would simply fire off an email, others took advantage of the (then) relatively new online blogging platforms to post their thoughts and experiences for the entire world to see. The milblog was born - and from that moment to this stories detailing everything from the most mundane aspects of camp life to intense combat action (often described within hours of the event) have been available on the web... And et cetera - but since you're reading this on a milblog, you probably knew that. And you know that milblogs aren't just blogs written by troops at war, that many friends, family members, and supporters likewise documented their story of America at war online in near-real time, as those stories developed. The diversity in membership of that group is broad, the one thing we all have in common is the impulse to make sense of the seemingly senseless, and communicate the tale - for each of us that impulse was strong enough to overcome whatever barriers prevent the vast majority of people from doing the same. Everyone at some point has some vague idea they believe should be shared - we were the people who, from some combination of internal and external urging, found and spent those many half hours persistently trying to write it down. But where will all that be in another 137 years? Or five or ten, for that matter. That's something I've asked myself since at least 2004 - when I wrote this:
Membership in the ghost battalion has grown in the years since, and an ever growing majority of those abandoned-but-still-standing sites are vanishing. Have you checked out Lt Smash's site lately? How about Sgt Hook's? If you're a long-time milblog reader you know the first widely-read milblog from Operation Iraq Freedom and the first widely-read milblog from Afghanistan are both gone from the web. If you're a relative newcomer to this world you may never even have heard of them - or the dozens upon dozens of others who carried forth the standard they set down. If you have a vague notion that something should be done about that, (a notion I've heard expressed more than once...) then you and I and the good folks at the US Naval Institute are in agreement. Preserving the history documented by the milbloggers is just one of the goals of the milblog project, the once-vague idea that we're now making real. And it's a big idea, if I say so myself - too big to explain in one simple blog post, so stand by for more. Likewise, it's too big a task to be accomplished by just one person. So if you're a milblogger (and exactly what is a milblogger? is a topic for much further discussion on its own) I'm asking for your help. All I'll really need is just a little bit (maybe just one or two of those half hours...) of your time, and your willingness to tell the tale. We've already made history, it's time to save it. (More to follow...) Posted 4:02 PM | Permalink |
Comments (0) |
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
 
 
 Furthermore, I will occasionally use satire or parody herein. The bottom line: it's my house. I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2011 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com  Tending Distant Far from hearth and home, watching What tales we'll tell When things grim Some distant sunset, vision fading Saluting fallen friends whose names - Greyhawk, Baghdad, December 2004 |
I grieve for the losses they endured.
But sadly they surrender. Terrorism is based on terror since the name. They thrive on fear. And it seems many of Spain have given them what they wanted.
I'll be voting. And I say smash them before they Smash. The reign of terror must end. If nothing else so that the people shown here can sleep at night.
I find it useful to remember that right wingers all over the world were waiting for us to come out of our Clinton madness. Today we're waiting for Germany to repudiate Schroeder. Friends wait, and as they've waited for us, now we must wait for them and try to limit the damage.
A question that needs to be explored is what, if any, is the relationship between Al Queda and the Spanish Socialist Party?
We now know that an oil contract relationship existed between Saddam Hussein and UN officials, a member of the UK Parliment, various officials in countries opposed to the anti-Iraq coalition, former weapons inspector Scott Ritter and even a US congressman.
Was there collusion between the Socialists and Al Queda in the Madrid bombings?
A question that needs to be explored is what, if any, is the relationship between Al Queda and the Spanish Socialist Party?
We now know that an oil contract relationship existed between Saddam Hussein and UN officials, a member of the UK Parliment, various officials in countries opposed to the anti-Iraq coalition, former weapons inspector Scott Ritter and even a US congressman.
Was there collusion between the Socialists and Al Queda in the Madrid bombings?
A question that needs to be explored is what, if any, is the relationship between Al Queda and the Spanish Socialist Party?
We now know that an oil contract relationship existed between Saddam Hussein and UN officials, a member of the UK Parliment, various officials in countries opposed to the anti-Iraq coalition, former weapons inspector Scott Ritter and even a US congressman.
Was there collusion between the Socialists and Al Queda in the Madrid bombings?
A question that needs to be explored is what, if any, is the relationship between Al Queda and the Spanish Socialist Party?
We now know that an oil contract relationship existed between Saddam Hussein and UN officials, a member of the UK Parliment, various officials in countries opposed to the anti-Iraq coalition, former weapons inspector Scott Ritter and even a US congressman.
Was there collusion between the Socialists and Al Queda in the Madrid bombings?
Interesting, brad, but I doubt if there was active collusion. However, I do believe that the socialist party members probably started planning their victory party before the election was over- because they knew they would be the ones to profit from the terror.
In my mind this makes them worse than the terrorists. If they wanted to earn the respect of the world, they would stand together and say "before the bombings we were in favor of removing our troops- but now you've kicked the sleeping dog".
Instead they get on their knees. Or at least they will when they get done celebrating the deaths of their countymen that put them into power.
Pathetic.
If they pull out of Iraq, they should redeploy double the troops to Afghanistan.
Poland has already stepped up to the plate and offered to replace the Spanish troops. (Poland paid the price for the cowards who embraced Hitler.) No surprise there.
And, yes, Spain fell to Franco in 1937. Or 1930. George Orwell fought on the side of democracy, then. He wrote eloquently about the loss of a country to Franco. But there are no surprises, here, either.
The Spanish are saying it's okay for America to take hits. And, I do suspect, if AL-quada sees how the socialists just got into power, they've been handed a two-fer. They can always blow up parts of Spain, should the populace decide rewarding socialists/terrorists is just a stupid game of postponements. But we should expect terror back, here. (In America.) I have no doubt that Kerry isn't popular enough to win. That only about 18 states are in question. And, that's what's going to explode? Heck, maybe Miami will get it? They have Jews (a well-loved target for Islamic fundamentalists.) And, they have votes that were once diverted to butterflies. (Thank goodness. Giving this Bush the presidency.)
My guess is that Americans, come November, when we vote, will make the jaws drop in Spain. I think this president will be re-elected. And, that he must pass through trials of fire? Well, how else did Lincoln get recorded in the history books as one of our greatest presidents? We're always tested in the crucible. Our Founding Fathers didn't shirk their responsibilities when it came to defining our Republic.
As to Spain, even with the votes, the socialists still have to deal with a parliament where they don't make up the majority. And, if they're on a thin margin, and buyer's remorse sets in, whose to say they stay in power? Parliaments can be sucker punched every day of the week.
Which is another reason I am forever grateful to our Founding Fathers. Our system is much more stable than anything found elsewhere.
That the Spaniards rushed to surrender before the French? Well, if history repeats itself, it's just like the last time. Only this time in farce. Spain fell to Franco before the French fell to Hitler. Let them wave their white flags. See if I care.
Spain has just said to terrorists: "An attack before an election will work."
Expect to see more. Here too, if they can manage it. And I don't trust our 'Homeland Security' so much that I believe they can't.
I recently read some Euro-torial about how Americans were those Europe didn't want and how we are barbarians because of it. He was wrong. Our ancestors (and ourselves in some cases) are now from almost every country in the world. And if those countries didn't want us, we didn't want them either.
We aren't barbarians. We are rats who deserted the sinking ships worldwide. We came to the last safe place and found out it wasn't safe either.
'They' attacked our safe place. Have you ever dealt with a cornered rat? I made that mistake once (luckily I learn fast and I MOVED). I hung around a lot of "lefty sites" immediately post-Sept 11. They were no less out for blood than the right... then. Hit them immediately before an election, before their 'progressive' instincts take over, and they're as Jacksonian as the right.
Don't mess with America. You think we are scary now? We can be much worse. I'm not a neocon, they are nice, comparatively. I'm one of Den Beste's Jacksonians. Don't mess with us.
What occurred in Spain (terrorism deaths) can be expected in most free countries these days. What happened to the heart of the Spainiard in reaction is the real tragedy. They are not worthy of the blood that was spilled to make them free nor the blood spilled to perpetuate that most sacred liberty - freedom. I do suspect inquiries will be made by the new ruling party, as to how they may change their official language to "french" and their military uniforms to yellow. A tragedy indeed!
What is so frightening to me about the socialist election victory in Spain is that a country that has been allowed to prosper under the protection of American military power via NATO, is so quick to turn its back on us. This seems to be a sentiment that is EU-wide. I hope it isn't. The EU wouldn't be today if it hadn't been shielded from outside threats by the US. It seems as though the Spaniards have cried "Uncle!" having taken just one shot from a bully. Neville Chamberlain would have been proud of them.
It was a horrible loss that they suffered. But do they really think they're going to be any safer in the long run by cutting and running like this?
The appeasement of Spain in the face of the murder of their citizens has demonstrated to al-Qaeda the effectiveness of slaughter in impacting the electoral process. al-Qaeda won with terror: the spanards are withdrawing from Iraq. Clearly, this response to terror, appeasement, has created greater danger for every country in the immediate period before elections, especially Iraq. While much of the focus and analysis in the media has been on the increased danger to Europe and the US, the Iraqis I fear are also in a greater jeopardy. Emboldened and victorious, this tactic is sure to be repeated. There is no other democracy more threatening to al-qaeda than an Iraqi democracy.
I'd like to point out that the election in Spain was close, especially considering the turnout of the coward vote. So let's not make things tougher for our Spanish brothers in arms by insulting the whole country-after all, look how many here oppose GWB for doing the right thing!
What we need to point out to the fearful is that the ONLY peace the Bad Guys will grant them is the peace of the grave.