THE US, THE UN AND THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES, V. 7.0

I hope they do capture the fellow. But the benefits gained are likely to be about the same as when Sadaam was found...cheerleaders waving pom poms madly, but the scoreboard unaffected in any real or substantial way.

gel

Elsewhere, I passed on a wonderful golf anecdote, but it fits here. Trevino and Rodriguez were walking down a fairway at a big PGA event, and as they passed a row of porto-potties, Trevino pointed to them and said, "Look, Puerto Rican townhomes." To which Rodriguez replied, "Yes. We lease out the basements to Mexican families."

Bush Photo with Teen Shows Conviction and Compassion Editorial by CK Rairden
May 10, 2004

It started out as a fluke. Lynn Faulkner had been offered an extra ticket to a Bush campaign event by his neighbor Linda Prince. Mr. Faulkner decided to offer it to his 15-year old daughter Ashley who he expected would decline, as she would have to miss some school to attend. But his daughter surprised him. Ashley reminded her dad how four years ago they attended a similar event when then Texas Governor George W. Bush visited the same spot on the campaign trail.



Ashley remembered attending that event with both her father and her mother Wendy Faulkner. It was raining that day and they all stood in the rain awaiting Governor Bush "eating Triscuit crackers" enjoying the time together and hoping to get a glimpse of the would-be president. Ashley recalled holding her mothers hand as they waited. So she decided to go again this year, but this time her mother could not attend. Wendy Faulkner was murdered on 9/11/01 in the south tower of the World Trade Center. She was there on the 104th floor for a one-day meeting. Ashley decided to miss school in honor and remembrance of her mother and attend the event.



So the trip was on. Linda Prince, along with Lynn and Ashley Faulkner, were off to the Golden Lamb Inn in Lebanon, Ohio for the event. The group arrived early and got a spot close to the front. As the event wound down, the president worked the line in full campaign mode shaking hands and signing autographs. As the president passed the group, Mr. Faulkner got an autograph, and the president continued on until Linda Prince spoke up, "This girl lost her mother on 9/11," Prince told the president.



Then everything changed.



"The president's entire expression transformed," Mr. Faulkner told me on Sunday. "He turned and came back against the flow and his eyes locked on Ashley's. His face showed a man who was no longer the president, he was a father and a husband." President Bush made his way back to Ashley and he embraced the 15-yeal old young woman. "She snuggled in with the president just like she did when she was a little girl with her dad," Mr. Faulkner said. "I know it's hard," Mr. Faulkner heard the president tell his daughter. "I'm okay," Ashley told the president. The embrace continued.



Mr. Faulkner had his Kodak digital camera with him and debated on invading this very private moment between his daughter and the leader of the free world. "For 20-30 seconds the president belonged exclusively to Ashley," Lynn Faulkner told me. So he decided to capture the moment without invading Ashley and the president's privacy. He held up his digital camera, not even aiming with his eye and with one click snapped just one picture. It showed in detail the face of a compassionate man who just happens to be the president comforting a young woman who lost her mother in the 9/11 attacks on America.



Mr. Faulkner told me that he saw tears in his daughter's eyes, and saw emotion that he hadn't seen from his daughter in 2 ½ years. Ashley told her dad, "The way he was holding me, with my head against his chest, it felt like he was trying to protect me, he wanted to make sure that I was safe." That feeling is captured in a very clear way in this moving unscripted photo. It's the only photo of this special embrace as the press corps had already been ushered back on the bus. And the photo was never meant for publication. All Mr. Faulkner did when he returned home from the event was e-mail it to 15 friends and family. But by the middle of last week, I had received the photo from eight different people. Others were also receiving the photo and forwarding it along. It became an Internet phenomonen, as it was e-mailed around America.



Mr. Faulkner called the embrace "President Bush's precious gift to my daughter." And with his small act of e-mailing that photo to friends and family, the picture can now become a gift to the American people.



And as sad as the story is the release and publication is a good thing. Disgusting photos coming out of Iraq for the past 10 days have shocked Americans, as they should have. But no longer are the terrible images of 9/11 shown. While the Iraq prison photos have been picked up by the elite media and shown time and again, this touching photo has gone largely ignored by the mainstream media. But the alternative media has made this touching powerful photo one of the most e-mailed photos of last week. The Internet once again took over where the elite media failed. Matt Drudge ran it on May 7th, as did the Page 2 Politics journal, and hundreds of other blogs. Millions have now seen it, but millions more need to. It gives a stark reminder why America is at war with radical Islam and other terrorists around the world that are determined to cause this kind of pain to other American families.



The images of 9/11 have faded in the minds of far too many Americans. This picture and this family's riveting story give a stark reminder of why America is at war. Each day around the globe our soldiers are fighting in an attempt to prevent any other event as terrible as the murders that took place on 9/11. Look hard at this picture. See the compassion and sadness on the president's face. Look at this young woman, see her grief and listen her father's words. Ashley and her sister Loren just spent their third Mother's Day without their mother, as did thousands of other children who lost their mothers on 9/11 at the hands of ruthless uncaring terrorists. Imagine yourself in that position.



Then remember why America is at war, and consider the type of person America should have leading that war.



The Faulkner family is continuing Wendy Faulkner's legacy of giving by setting up The Wendy Foundation which sends packages of clothing, food, medicine, toys and other items to orphanages and impoverished families in Third World countries. You can visit their Website at www.wendyfoundation.org.



CK Rairden is the Editor of The Washington Dispatch.

I hope they do capture the fellow. But the benefits gained are likely to be about the same as when Sadaam was found...cheerleaders waving pom poms madly, but the scoreboard unaffected in any real or substantial way.

Surely you recognize the symbolic significance of Saddam Hussein's capture? Do you think Iraq would be expecting 80% turnout next week if Saddam were still at large? We all hope they capture the fellow, but why do you feel a need to belittle or marginalize every potential sign of progress?

We have had an interesting diversion through the worst excesses of the Boer War, the Sepoy Uprising and the Boxer Rebellion, but have skated over the fact that it is against international law and the US Constitution to attack another sovereign country.

Clever. Almost compelling... but almost completely non-responsive as well. You answered the first question, I suppose, but no one had asked you to measure anything. Belief in Christ can't be measured either but it would be foolish to deny His symbolic importance. You ducked the question of 80% expected turnout... and is that last obvious revelation about insurgency growing since it's birth supposed to be an answer to why you feel a need to belittle or marginalize every potential sign of progress? Actually, despite lacking in coherence, that's probably quite accurate...

Joe(This is not Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas, Toto.)Nation I believe whole heartedly that Iran, Syria and the Saudis are on the same side with the Iraqi insurgents (against us). Was I not Supposed(sic) to?

[size=7]That al Qaeda declared war on Americans is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda, ican.
That Al Qaeda declared that American civilians and military must be killed wherever they can be found is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That Al Qaeda murdered American civilians is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That Al Qaeda murderers were trained in al Qaeda camps is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That Al Qaeda were encamped in Afghanistan and in Iraq prior to the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That US air attacks on Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan did not remove al Qaeda camps from Afghanistan is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
US ground and air attacks in Afghanistan DID NOT remove al Qaeda camps from Afghanistan. The al Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden and his closest subordinates are probably still in the area. US ground and air attacks in Afghanistan are not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That Kurds defeated al Qaeda in northern Iraq by 1999 is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That Al Qaeda reformed in northern Iraq by 2001 is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That the US claims it requested that Saddam Hussein's regime extradite the leadership of the al Qaeda encamped in northern Iraq is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
Your claims that Saddam Hussein’s regime did not attempt to extradite the leadership of the al Qaeda encamped in northern Iraq are not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
Your claims that Saddam Hussein’s regime did not attempt to remove al Qaeda camps from northern Iraq are not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That the US invaded Iraq on the ground and in the air in 2003 is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
Your claims that the US removed al Qaeda camps in northern Iraq are unfounded. There are "al Qaeda" camps all over Iraq subsequent to our invasion and occupation thereof. Your claims that the US removed al Qaeda camps in northern Iraq are not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.

That the US's discovery and destruction of the al Qaeda encampment in northern Iraq is evidence that at the time of the US's invasion of Iraq 3/20/2003, the al Qaeda were encamped in northern Iraq is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That that in turn, plus the fact that Saddam Hussein NEVER claimed that the taQeinI (the al Qaeda encamped in northern Iraq) were NOT so encamped, plus the fact that Saddam NEVER claimed he tried to remove taQeinI, are evidence that Saddam did NOT attempt to remove taQeinI is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
Your allegation that that in turn is evidence that Saddam tolerated taQeinI is a leap of logic.
Your allegation that that in turn is evidence that Saddam harbored taQeinI is a leap of logic.
That YOU, ican, believe that in turn, plus the fact that the Kurds were NOT able to prevent the taQeinI from reforming by 2001 after the Kurds had defeated taQeinI by 1999, are evidence that a US invasion of Iraq was required to remove taQeinI is merely speculation on your part. Your speculation is not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda.
That YOU believe that in turn, plus the fact that air attacks in Afghanistan were insufficient for removing al Qaeda camps from Afghanistan, plus the fact that a US ground and air invasion was required to remove al Qaeda from Afghanistan, is evidence that the US had to invade Iraq on the ground and in the air in order to remove taQeinI from Iraq is merely speculation on your part. A US ground and air invasion has not removed al Qaeda from Afghanistan. Your speculations are predicated on erroneous assumptions. Your speculations are absolutely not evidence of Saddam's alleged harboring of al Qaeda, ican.[/size]

McTag wrote:

We have had an interesting diversion through the worst excesses of the Boer War, the Sepoy Uprising and the Boxer Rebellion, but have skated over the fact that it is against international law and the US Constitution to attack another sovereign country.

McTag is wrong on both counts. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution prohibits war. Moreover the process through which we began... (the) Iraqi interventions was fully in accord with the requirements of the Constitution.

Similarly there is nothing in International law that prohibits what we have done.

Possibly there is something in the air or water in Scotland that causes this disability. McTag imagines things that are not true and blithely makes comparisons of incomparable events. What he calls a diversion was instead an attempt to ground his fanciful excursions in some facts relating to the real history of the real world.

We had an acronym in the Navy for one who is wrong a lot, WEFT. McTag is WEFT.

... As to 80% turnout...projected by whom? To be measured by whom? Is it good that Iraqis, the ones still alive, get to vote? Sure. But that's a sliver of the whole picture. And I think the whole picture is a bloody stupid and dangerous mess...

Patrick Henry: "It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry peace, peace!—but there is no peace. The war is actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms. Our brethen are already in the field. Why stay we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me: give me liberty, or give me death!"

I don't think you're brief summary was long enough to include the fears of a possible successful transition in Iraq. Oil-> Money-> Greed-> selfishness -> Western thinking.