Letters to home

Here is all the polling data for the Afghan War.  This is the Business Insider regarding regarding the cost of war. This is US News & World Report: Will Cost of Afghanistan War Become a 2010 Campaign Issue? This is Zogby in Forbes regarding the war.

Voice of America: Source Exposure in WikiLeaks Documents Raises Security Questions.

20 Republicans Against The War In Afghanistan (VIDEO)  including Anne Coulter
Can't get any more conservative than these. Yes We Can! I don't care about Obama. And if you think I can ruin a politician's reputation-they don't have one! My objective is to put the war on the public's minds. It's about money and it never was about democracy. By your account, we have failed with democracy in our own country. So does Glenn Beck, Rush and Hannity. I agree.

Here is article from the Salinas Californian on the Tea Party. Politoco on Harry Reid. It is a conservative blog. Mitch McConnel won't campaign for Sharron Angle (Business Week)! , The National Journal: The Tea Party Paradox. Fox News:Political Polarization and Demonization Must End.

I believe the US is in a failed policy. But what's new. You are afraid of putting the war on the table. So are the Dems. I don't care if the senate is Republican. They are part of the problem. The No Leadership Party.

It is our job to criticize. It's our right. I have my facts and my opportunity. Stop accusing me of trying to take my country down. I want to take it back-and get a refund! The world will not fall if the US fails. We are not that powerful anymore. Perhaps if the citizens of this country accepted the truth, we might start fixing things.

Never be to proud to think it can't happen. I don't need a gun. That's your militaristic thinking not mine. I am just exposing the liars for who they are. They don't speak for me and I am insulted for them to use the term "Americans are against this and that". I am against them! I am NOT one of their Americans.

To paraphrase Rush, I want THEM to fail. Rot in their own political graveyard. Anyone that does not have a plan a is lost in the political rhetoric, I want them to fail. Here's Glenn Beck saying he does not care a "flying crap about the boarder or illegals" Flip flop!! Sharon Angle outake on FOX. She's like dumb. Romney on mandates. This is why I would vote for him but he has a lot of baggage. He's about as conservative a Pelossi. Here Meg "the Hag" Whitman. Just another RHINO wacko. Jerry Brown is more conservative.

Christine O'Donnel running for Bidens seat in a special election. I still trying to source this but she looks like another tea party mistake:

O'Donnell fell into personal and political financial difficulties before, during, and after her 2008 campaign.[2]  She was unable to pay the mortgage for her Wilmington house and the mortgage company gained a judgment against her for $90,000; the house was due to be sold at a sheriff's auction in August 2008 when she sold it the month prior to her campaign's legal counsel.[2]  In 2009, she moved to a townhouse elsewhere in Delaware, where she pays half the rent with campaign contributions because it doubles as her campaign headquarters for her 2010 senate run.[2] Her 2008 campaign ended over $23,000 in debt, and between 2007 and 2009 the Federal Election Commission cited her eight times for failing to find contributions reports.[2] As of 2010 she owes payments to staffers, consultants, and volunteers from that campaign.[2][14] The Internal Revenue Service placed a lien on her in 2010 for over $11,000 in taxes owed for 2005.[2] O'Donnell noted that the IRS agent handling the matter claimed the agency's action has been inappropriate.[2] She listed herself as self-employed and said she was doing "odd jobs" to make ends meet.

Sounds like a loser to me.

Scott Brown-the brainless beefcake. John McCain-Captain Trade. And Palin can't win. Even you know that. If she can't stand up to Katy Couric, for God's sake, what makes you think she can stand up to Pelossi?

Anti War, Pro Health Care, Conservative Democrat. I don't care what either party thinks. They are all fair game for attack. You support the politicians and big business. They are going to need it. It's not just me, Mom. The American public is angry and Republicans share the blame. I will smear anyone I want. They spend MY money. By the way the tax rollback will be repealed not health-care reform.

Good luck to the Repubs. They will need it. I think the public is waking up to their political scams too.
I have more and I am enjoying getting it out. You should see the hard core Liberal Left Smear Campaign. At least, I let these hacks tell their own lies........no I don't like them and I am glad my country is changing. It couldn't go on like this any longer. I am not angry. I am happy. God Bless America! We are waking up to the truth of our corrupt system. And our corrupt war. Our corrupt politicians, taxation and blasphemy. God Bless America! Case we are really gonna need it.

As long as we fight for the establishments of Islamic Republics, we are emboldening our enemies. I want out. We failed. Rush wants the Commander in Chief to fail! A blowhard patriot. He is a culpable a Assange of WikiLeaks. If they want to silence WikiLeaks, they should silence him as well. Your my mother so I don't have a beef with you.

Sorry those soldiers lost their lives. I truly am. I have heard there are a half a million soldiers with traumatic brain injuries. Nice job America.

²⁷And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me; ²⁸Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. ²⁹And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat. (Leviticus 26:27-29, King James Version)

God's Word doesn't flip flop.

Pentagon threatens to 'compel' WikiLeaks to hand over Afghan war data

Pentagon threatens to 'compel' WikiLeaks to hand over Afghan war data - CSMonitor.com

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

Recent posts

• 08.06.10
  Pentagon threatens to 'compel' WikiLeaks to hand over Afghan war data
• 08.05.10
  South Korea begins largest anti-submarine drills ever, despite North Korea threats
• 08.04.10
  Did Iran's Ahmadinejad just survive an assassination attempt?
• 08.04.10
  Pakistan President Zardari arrives in London, sparring with Cameron continues
• 08.03.10
  Iraq violence flares as US begins to draw down troop levels

Related Stories

• WikiLeaks case: Army charges soldier in release of Iraq cockpit video
• Julian Assange: the hacker who created WikiLeaks
• WikiLeaks: When is it 'right' to leak national security secrets?

With WikiLeaks now threatening to publish thousands more classified documents on the US war in Afghanistan, the Pentagon is demanding that the whistleblower website erase its extensive classified records and hand over all documents in its possession.

"The only acceptable course is for WikiLeaks to take steps to immediately return all versions of all of those documents to the US government and permanently delete them from its website, computers, and records," Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said on Thursday, according to the Guardian.

He added: "If doing the right thing is not good enough for them, then we will figure out what alternatives we have to compel them to do the right thing."

The White House had condemned the leak immediately after it appeared July 25, with National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones issuing a statement at the time that it "could put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk, and threaten our national security."

But now, with WikiLeaks threatening to release more classified documents, the Pentagon is upping the pressure. The New York Times reports:

Mr. Morrell’s appeal is the Obama administration’s latest response to the disclosure, which has set off a criminal inquiry by the Army and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, prompted a sweeping Pentagon review of the documents to hunt for any information damaging to troop safety and national security, and increased pressure on President Obama to defend his war strategy.

Adding to the urgency is that Wikileaks recently posted to its website a massive, encrypted file labeled "Insurance," which is 20 times larger than its last leak. Some speculate this latest file could be the 15,000 intelligence reports that Wikileaks purports to have and says it's holding back for vetting. Other guess they could be 260,000 diplomatic cables accessed by the now-imprisoned Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, the Associated Press reports.

Manning has been quoted as saying that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would "have a heart attack" when these files go public, and that they show "almost criminal political back dealings."

Some further speculate that WikiLeaks may be using the threat to publish more files as "insurance" should the government go after their staff or shut down their website, Al Jazeera reports.

Pentagon spokesman Morrell further criticized WikiLeaks for encouraging US insiders to engage in espionage. He called the website a "brazen solicitation to US government officials, including our military, to break the law," Al Jazeera adds.

But legal experts say that, other than going after individuals responsible for the leaks, there is little that the Pentagon can do, according to CNN. The opportunities to leak material has multiplied in the Internet era, compounded by the fact that the US military and 16 intelligence agencies are classifying more information and that more than 854,000 Americans have top-secret clearances, according to a recent Washington Post investigation.

"The classifying of information has gone way up – it's doubled or tripled since these wars began – and then we have nearly nine years and counting of Afghanistan and Iraq and the controversial practices associated with them," Coleen Rowley, a former field-office legal counsel for the Federal Bureau of Investigation told The Christian Science Monitor.

WikiLeaks appears to be showing some restraint in what it publishes. Founder Julian Assange has said that the organization is redacting names of those who could be harmed in the 15,000 documents that could be leaked. Through The New York Times, the group has asked the Obama administration to guide it on what should be redacted, CNN reports.

Steven Aftergood, a senior research analyst with the Federation of American Scientists who directs their Project on Government Secrecy, told National Public Radio that WikiLeaks made a "very important concession" to redact certain names and details from documents. "It means that transparency is not the unique and overriding value but that it needs to be factored in along with others, such as security and privacy."