If you would like to add a comment to any of the threads here on AADB, registration with blogspot.com is not required. Simply click on the ‘comments’ link at the bottom of an essay, and either enter a nickname under ‘choose an identity’ or post your comment anonymously. Serious comments are always welcome.

REQUIEM

Below are the two final essays to be posted on Allegiance and Duty Betrayed. The first one is written by a friend -- screen name 'Euro-American Scum' -- who, over the past four years, has been the most faithful essayist here. He has written about everything from his pilgrimage to Normandy in 2004 to take part in the 60th–year commemoration of the invasion, to his memories of his tour in Vietnam. His dedication to America’s founding principles ... and those who have sacrificed to preserve them over the past 200+ years ... is unequaled. Thank you, E-A-S. It has been a privilege to include your writing here, and it is a privilege to call you my friend.

The second essay is my own farewell. And with it I thank all of the many regular visitors, and those who may have only dropped in occasionally, for coming here. I hope you learned something. I hope a seed or two was planted. But, even if not, I thank you for stopping by ... 25 March, 2010

7/04/2008

Celebrating Independence Day in Baghdad

July 4, 2008

In what is being described as the largest re-enlistment ceremony in the history of the American military, 1,215 servicemen and women signed up for a combined 5,500 years of additional service earlier today in Baghdad:

re-enlistment.jpg

General David Petraeus oversaw the ceremony:

Petraeus, reiterating earlier remarks made by Command Sergeant Major Hill, said that the unprecedented ceremony sends a “message to friend and foe alike.” He told those assembled that it is “impossible to calculate the value of what you are giving to our country . . . For no bonus, no matter the size, can adequately compensate you for the contribution each of you makes as a custodian of our nation’s defenses.”

Fittingly, the re-enlistment took place in one of Saddam's former palaces.

submitted by John Cooper
(contributing team member of Allegiance and Duty Betrayed)

22 comments:

daveburkett said...

Awesome!

I can hardly wait to see the ceremony on the evening news.

(/sarc)

John Cooper said...

Dave B. My thoughts exactly. Maybe Fox will show it...

Remember this? John Kerry: "You get stuck in Iraq" (short YouTube video)

lori_gmeiner said...

Cooper, in one sense you've made my day. I'm so proud of these men and women!

In another sense, it's terribly depressing because NO ONE is covering the very important story and Congress is still doing everything they can to lose the war and discredit the military.

Damn them!

John Cooper said...

To give credit where it's due, Powerline Blog originally posted the story.

There are more photos, comments, and a video of the ceremony that will bring tears to your eyes at their Powerlineblog. (hope the link works)

Hooo-Ahhhh!

John Cooper said...

Fox didn't let me down. They're gonna' show the story after the commercial!

Luis said...

Amazing spectacle.

Happy Independence Day from me (if a Brit is allowed to do that :-))

smithy said...

Cooper, Joanie has a link to the original Powerline Blog thing (under the July 4, 2008 at the top).

How well did Fox cover this?

Anonymous said...

To quote Dickens: "God bless them, one and all!"

John Cooper said...

Smithy: Fox did a terrible job of covering the ceremony. In the first place, they didn't show the troops taking the oath:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Instead, they showed Gen. Patreus making some joke about the Air Force.

Then, to add insult to injury, they "interviewed" (read: prompted) several of the troops into saying - in effect - that they were only doing it for the $15,000 bonus and VA benefits.

Fox News has become a real disappointment.

johnsteever said...

Fox News has become a real disappointment.

They've been a real disappointment for a very long time. Their commentators are much better, and more fair, than the other networks, but they cover the same stories and leave the stories that beg to be covered (correctly) on the shelf. They are no longer dedicated to informing the public.

Anonymous said...

What percentage of FOX is owned by the Saudis?

hussein said...

Saudi says he nixed Fox News 'Muslim riots' banner

Shareholding prince claims change made
after he called Rupert Murdoch


December 09, 2005

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=33772

By Art Moore

A Saudi prince who owns shares of the Fox News Channel claims he persuaded network chief Rupert Murdoch to change a screen banner during a broadcast that identified the recent unrest in France as "Muslim riots."

Speaking on a panel at the Arab and World Media Conference in Dubai Monday, billionaire Prince al-Walid bin Talal criticized U.S. media for being generally "pro-Israel" and said Arabs are not doing enough to counter that, according to Middle East Online.

The prince then pointed to his own experience as an example of what can be done.

During the violent street protests in France one month ago, the prince said, Fox News ran a banner at the bottom of the screen that said "Muslim riots."

"I picked up the phone and called Murdoch ... [and told him] these are not Muslim riots, these are riots out of poverty," al-Walid said.

"Within 30 minutes, the title was changed from Muslim riots to civil riots."


Asked by WorldNetDaily to respond, Fox News Channel spokeswoman Irena Briganti said she was not aware of any phone call from the prince but acknowledged the network changed the banner after receiving complaints.

"We had several calls from people around the world and discovered the issue was a little more complicated than how it was being characterized," she said.

The unrest, which eventually spread to neighboring countries, began Oct. 27 with thousands of mostly French Muslims in impoverished Paris suburbs engaging in violent clashes with police as they torched cars and buildings. After 20 nights, French officials gave a count of 8,973 vehicles burned, 2,888 arrests and 126 officers injured.

Analysts pointed to many factors behind the riots – including poverty, France's immigration and integration policies and French attitudes toward minorities.

But some, including frequent Fox News contributor Daniel Pipes, saw a connection to the Islamist goal of gaining a foothold in Europe in its global jihad.

"The great majority of Muslims in Europe see themselves as bearers of a superior civilization and see themselves growing prodigiously," Pipes told WND in an interview during the riots. "Through a cultural, religious and demographic confidence they feel scorn towards European ways and conspire to take it over."

Pipes, director of the think tank Middle East Forum, was appointed by President Bush to the board of the United States Institute of Peace despite the protest of many Islamic groups, which claim he unfairly paints Muslims in broad strokes.

Al-Walid, who drew international attention when his gift for 9-11 relief was rejected by New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, said in a CNBC interview in September that he owned a 5.5 percent voting stake in News Corp., Murdoch's parent company.

The prince said, at the time, he was willing to increase his share in order to prevent a takeover by rival Liberty Media.

"Clearly, this is something we will not accept, because we are very happy as shareholders with what Mr. Murdoch is doing," the prince said.

Company sources, according to CNBC, said the Saudi prince has long been regarded by Murdoch as an ally in his showdown with Liberty Media owner John Malone.

Al-Walid visited the site of the World Trade Center one month after Sept. 11, 2001, and presented Giuliani with a $10 million donation to a relief fund, calling the terrorist attack "a tremendous crime."

But in a written statement issued by his publicist during the visit, the prince declared:

"At times like this one, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance toward the Palestinian cause."
An angered Giuliani returned the donation.

A few days later, the prince blamed the mayor's decision on "Jewish pressures."


The prince reportedly gave half a million dollars to the controversial U.S. Muslim lobby group Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, in 2002 for a campaign to defend Islam in U.S. society, according to ArabicNews.com.

The donation, given to Executive Director Nihad Awad during a visit to Saudi Arabia, helped buy a collection of Islamic books for 3,000 public libraries in the U.S. The contribution also financed a media campaign in the U.S. for CAIR, which was founded as a spin-off of the Islamic Association for Palestine, identified by two former FBI counterterrorism chiefs as a "front group" for Hamas.

An estimated 80 percent of U.S. mosques are supported largely with funds and imams from Saudi Arabia, where the strict Wahhibist interpretation of Islam dominates the kingdom.

As WorldNetDaily reported, the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings in October in response to a yearlong study by a Washington human-rights group asserting the government of Saudi Arabia is disseminating propaganda through American mosques that teaches hatred of Jews and Christians and instructs Muslims that they are on a mission behind enemy lines in a land of unbelievers.

In March, 15 senators, including Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., responded to the report by the Center for Religious Freedom at Freedom House with a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice demanding the Bush administration take stronger action against Riyadh.

barack said...

Saudi Billionaire Boasts of Manipulating Fox News Coverage

Press Release | December 7, 2005

http://www.aim.org/press-release/saudi-billionaire-boasts-of-manipulating-fox-news-coverage/

WASHINGTON—Accuracy in Media (AIM) is urging a full inquiry into a report that a Saudi billionaire caused the Fox News Channel (FNC) to dramatically alter its coverage of the Muslim riots in France after he called the network to complain. The Saudi billionaire, Al-waleed bin Talal, is a friend of News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch and controls an influential number of voting shares in the company.

“This report underscores the danger of giving foreign interests a significant financial stake in U.S. media companies,” declared Cliff Kincaid, editor of Accuracy in Media.

The controversial comments came at an Arab media conference featuring representatives of Time magazine, USA Today, PBS, The Wall Street Journal, and other news organizations. The conference and the Saudi Prince’s growing influence in News Corporation are among the subjects of a new December-A AIM Report that has just been posted at the AIM website (http://www.aim.org). The report raises the specter of Arab money influencing News Corporation and other U.S. media companies.

Liberal journalist Danny Schechter, a participant in the conference, reports that Al-waleed, who is a member of the Saudi Royal Family and investor in the Fox News parent company News Corporation, gave an interview boasting that he had called Fox to complain about coverage of the “Muslim riots” in France. He said he “called as a viewer” and “convinced them to change” the coverage because “they were not Muslim riots but riots against poverty and inequality.” And “they changed” the coverage, the Saudi reportedly said.

Another report on the comments, carried by the Dubai-based newspaper the Khaleej Times, says that Al-waleed personally called Rupert Murdoch to complain. The Saudi said, “After a short while, there was a change” in the coverage.

An AIM call to Fox News asking for comment was not returned.

This is not the first time that Al-waleed has made controversial statements. His $10 million contribution to a 9/11 fund was rejected when he blamed the terror attacks on U.S. Middle East policy. Fifteen of the 19 terrorist hijackers on 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia.

Brian Spear said...

As has been said here often, Fox News has more than its share of "conservative" commentators and pundits. Krauthammer and Cavuto are among the best.

But when it comes to covering major news stories they aren't a whole lot more "fair and balanced" than the rest of the drive-by.

Cooper's description of how they covered this re-enlistment ceremony is a good example. They could have made it a story that showed our troops in the best (deserved) light. Instead they took the same tack that the rest of the biased media do. They underplayed the sacrifice and heroism, and sought out the few who were re-enlisting for less noble reasons.

99% of the media is corrupted, either by leftist ideology, allegiance to certain groups, or monetary interests. And Fox's only claim to honor is that they are "less corrupted"...for now.

marcus aurelius said...

"Hussein"--

Occurrences such the changing of the Fox banner from "Muslim riots" to "civil riots" goes on all the time, behind the scenes.

So much of the Muslim-caused violence in this country (and elsewhere) is never described as such. The perpetrators' identities as Muslims are withheld, and one has to dig to discover the thread that connects them all.

There are reasons for the cover-ups, and you hit on just one of them. Strings are pulled by people in positions of political or financial power, and as a result the American public is kept in the dark.

Good information.

daveburkett said...

Al-waleed bin Talal was honored by membership in Time Magazine's "2008 100". Read this blurb about him in Time and you'll think they're nominating him for sainthood. It's disgusting, to put it mildly. And note that the author is associated with Al Jazeera English. Sure does leave enormous room for blatant bias, wouldn't you say?

Builders and Titans

NoWayALiberal said...

Do not trust anything a Muslim claims. The Koran says it is okay to lie and do anything dishonest to further the cause of Islam.

I believe Fox changed the "crawl" but not because of this one Saudi investor but because of a concerted effort of the "Muslim" community as orchestrated by groups such as CAIR. These efforts are part of the Islamifiation plan for the west.

Hussein said...

I believe Fox changed the "crawl" but not because of this one Saudi investor but because of a concerted effort of the "Muslim" community as orchestrated by groups such as CAIR. These efforts are part of the Islamifiation plan for the west.

"this one Saudi investor" bankrolls CAIR.

He also bankrolls the "Middle East Studies" departments at Georgetown University, Harvard, etc. to the tune of zillions of dollars for each.

Money talks.

Look him up sometime.

calbrindisi said...

"this one Saudi investor" bankrolls CAIR.

He also bankrolls the "Middle East Studies" departments at Georgetown University, Harvard, etc. to the tune of zillions of dollars for each.


BINGO! Give that man a cigar!

Buster said...

Money talks.

If it weren't for the lure of money and power, three-quarters of the politicians in Washington would be doing something else. The days of the "public servant" are over in D.C.

As for the influence that money has in the media, combine that with the desire to increase the power of the left, and there is no longer anything left of "unbiased reporting."

The Islamification of the West is 50% accomplished. With the election of Obama, the train will start rolling downhill fast.

Rev. Wright said...

daveburkett said...

Al-waleed bin Talal was honored by membership in Time Magazine's "2008 100". Read this blurb about him in Time and you'll think they're nominating him for sainthood. It's disgusting, to put it mildly. And note that the author is associated with Al Jazeera English. Sure does leave enormous room for blatant bias, wouldn't you say?


The US and UK media always refers to muslim terrorists as "militants" "youths" "fighters" etc.

Those "youths" are burning a lot of cars in France.

And in Britain, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Belgium etc.
they have their own "no pass" areas where even the police are afraid to go.

The US is infested with MS 13, which works closely with muslim terrorists through Mexico.

Meanwhile the US Defense Dept. and State Dept. sends out directions that muslim terrorism should not be called what it is.

The politically correct US system is played liked a violin by the muslim organizations in the US.

And I wonder who bankrolls all of this?

KOS boy said...

Obama: 9/11 Was 'A Failure of Empathy'
Little Green Footballs ^ | 7/14/2008 | Charles Johnson

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30635_Obama-_9-11_Was_A_Failure_of_Empathy

Eight days after the atrocities of September 11, 2001, Barack Obama wrote a piece for the Hyde Park Herald—and blamed the attacks on “a failure of empathy.”

"Even as I hope for some measure of peace and comfort to the bereaved families, I must also hope that we as a nation draw some measure of wisdom from this tragedy. Certain immediate lessons are clear, and we must act upon those lessons decisively. We need to step up security at our airports. We must reexamine the effectiveness of our intelligence networks. And we must be resolute in identifying the perpetrators of these heinous acts and dismantling their organizations of destruction."

"We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."

"We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe—children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores."

___________________________________

Obama’s comments display an appalling disconnect from reality.

Osama bin Laden came from one of the richest families in the world. None of the 9/11 attackers were poor;
if anything, they could be considered “middle class.” Ringleader Mohammed Atta was educated as an architect in the West.

Almost everything Obama wrote in this article was proven wrong.
And he gave absolutely no consideration at all to the ideology of radical Islam, which is much more to blame than any imaginary “poverty” or “lack of empathy.”

And now he’s within reach of the presidency.