Posts Tagged: rushes

Dec 10

Obama Administration Rushes to “Clarify” Holbrooke’s Final Words

The State Department appears to be in a white-hot panic over the possible consequences of Richard Holbrooke final words before surgery yesterday:

The Washington Post first reported that Richard Holbrooke’s last words, according to his family, were to his Pakistani surgeon, asking him to “stop this war.”

State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley clarified today:

I should note that a lot of media coverage this morning about the interaction between Ambassador Holbrooke and his medical team as he was preparing for surgery for Friday — I’ve consulted with a number of folks who were in the room.

There was a, you know, lengthy exchange with Ambassador Holbrooke and the medical team, probably reflecting Richard’s relentless pursuit of the policy that he had — he had helped to craft and was charged by the president and the secretary with carrying out.

At one point, the medical team said, “You’ve got to relax.”

And Richard said, “I can’t relax. I’m worried about Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

And then after some additional exchanges, you know, the medical team finally — finally said, “Well, tell you what; we’ll try to fix this challenge while you’re undergoing surgery.”

And he said, “Yeah, see if you can take care of that, including ending the war.”

But certainly it — it says two things about Richard Holbrooke in my mind. No. 1, he always wanted to make sure he got the last word. And — and secondly, it just showed how he was singularly focused on pursuing and advancing the — the process and the policies in Afghanistan and Pakistan to bring them to a successful conclusion.

It was just a joke! He didn’t mean it!

Amanda Terkel has a more detailed quote:

The Obama administration said Tuesday that the reported last words of veteran diplomat Richard Holbrooke, its point person on Afghanistan and Pakistan who passed away this week, were meant as humor.Administration officials sought to clarify that, according to people who were present, Holbrooke’s final words, “You’ve got to stop this war in Afghanistan,” were part of a jovial back-and-forth with the medical staff.

“At one point, the medical team said, You’ve got to relax,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters on Tuesday, relaying what he said he had heard from people who were in the room with Holbrooke at George Washington University Hospital. “And Richard said, I can’t relax, I’m worried about Afghanistan and Pakistan. After some additional exchanges, the medical team finally said, Tell you what, we’ll try to fix this challenge while you’re undergoing surgery. And [Holbrooke] said, Yeah, see if you can take care of that, including ending the war.”

Added Crowley: “But certainly, it says two things about Richard Holbrooke in my mind. Number one, he always wanted to make sure he got the last word. And secondly, it just showed how he was singularly focused on pursuing and advancing the process and the policies in Afghanistan and Pakistan to bring them to a successful conclusion.”

The two Washington Post staffers who reported Holbrooke’s comments yesterday — Karen DeYoung and Rajiv Chandrasekaran — hastened to do damage control in a blog post today — no doubt at the behest of P.J. Crowley or some other administration flack:

Following Holbrooke’s death, The Washington Post, citing his family members, reported that the veteran diplomat had told his physician just before surgery on Friday to “stop this war.”

But on Tuesday a fuller account of the tone and contents of his remarks emerged.

And blah blah blah.

Robert Mackey, writing at the New York Times blog The Lede, is happy to give the Obama administration’s version of Holbrooke’s words more credence than his own family members, who after all were there and heard what Holbrooke said whereas Crowley was just repeating what he had been told after “consult[ing] with a number of folks who were in the room.” Interesting word choice, there, “consulting.” Here is Mackey:

It used to takes decades for legends about the supposed last words of famous people to seep into the culture and morph through constant repetition, until some enterprising scholar would look for hard evidence and soberly conclude that the well-known observation was most likely a myth or misunderstanding.

In the case of Richard C. Holbrooke, the hard-charging diplomat who died on Monday, in the Internet age, that process took less than 24 hours. …

Mr. Holbrooke, who was best-known for his role in helping end the war in Bosnia in 1995, and who spent the last two years trying to emulate that success in Afghanistan, was initially reported to have made what sounded like a heartfelt plea for peace moments before surgeons tried to save his life. Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s obituary for the diplomat in Tuesday’s Washington Post ended this way:

As Mr. Holbrooke was sedated for surgery, family members said, his final words were to his Pakistani surgeon: “You’ve got to stop this war in Afghanistan.”

Within hours, those words were repeated and parsed thousands of times across the Web. “What did Holbrooke mean? Did he oppose the war?” Blake Hounshell asked on Foreign Policy’s Passport blog. “Holbrooke was the author of one of the volumes of the Pentagon Papers — which revealed that government officials knew of the futility of the Vietnam War at the same time they were falsely assuring the public they could win — and Afghanistan seems to be no different,” Glenn Greenwald reflected in a post for Salon. “As official Washington rushes forward to lavish praise on Holbrooke’s wisdom and service,” he added, “undoubtedly they will studiously avoid acknowledging his final insight.”

Then Mackey quotes from the WaPo’s “clarification,” and Crowley’s “clarification,” and then adds this little gem:

The debate about the war in Afghanistan, and Mr. Holbrooke’s attempts to end it, will, of course, continue long after this mistaken anecdote is forgotten. In particular, questions will be asked about his relatively swift success in ending Bosnia’s war and the long slog that still seems to lie ahead before any peace arrives in Afghanistan.

In a reflection for the BBC, Alan Little, a correspondent with a deep knowledge of both Bosnia and Afghanistan, wrote that Mr. Holbrooke’s approach to ending the war in the Balkans was not as dovish as some might think. Mr. Little recalled:

European governments, fearing for the safety of their troops on the ground, seemed reluctant to blame anyone until all sides could be blamed equally. As the war went on and on, American officials came to condemn what they saw as the timidity and ineffectiveness of European policy.

Richard Holbrooke believed that the European approach demonstrated that humanitarian aid alone could prolong a war without changing its outcome. He argued for something more robust.

Two things changed fundamentally when Holbrooke took the leadership of the peace process. First, he was ready to apportion blame to one side more than the others. Second, his was a policy predicated on a readiness to use military force.

As Mr. Little explained, what really tilted the balance of power in the Bosnian war, and made peace possible, was the eventual military intervention of American-led forces[.] …

Looking back at that Glenn Greenwald quote above  — “As official Washington rushes forward to lavish praise on Holbrooke’s wisdom and service,” he added, “undoubtedly they will studiously avoid acknowledging his final insight”  — which, of course, he wrote before the administration spinmeisters got to work — it looks like a rare example of Glenn missing the mark. He gave the Obama administration too much credit.

The Moderate Voice

Dec 10

FBI rushes to investigate veiled email threat to Cincinnati mosque, ignores open threats to anti-jihadists

There is no excuse for threats of violence sent through emails to people with whom one disagrees. It is noteworthy, however, that there have been no arrests and no FBI investigation of these emailed death threats and others like them that I have received, although I have contacted the FBI repeatedly and do so whenever a new death threat comes in. Yet the Cincinnati mosque email is not even as clear a threat as these below, and the FBI is all over it. Why the double standard?

“Robert Spencer has his right to speech. But someday he will slip up, he will visit a place that doesn’t honor such infidel ‘rights.’ And what a day they will have with him. You’ve heard of head cheese and blood pudding? See, modern hip Muslims like me like to be look different than everybody else in Western society. And we don’t like to believe Islam has any real enemies left. But Robert Spencer, well, he will see the sacred text come to life…’fuel the fires of hell…’ only when they are done with him. Peace and Love.” — September 29, 2010

“Robert Spencer the Second, born on February 27, 1962, is a hairy man who…currently lives on [specific street] in [specific city] with [specific relatives]…” — July 28, 2010, from Greenbelt, Maryland

“Killing of this man is a model… SPENCER-Model..Spencer himself deserves the same? he should be sloughtered like that man. Silencing the EVIL.” — April 4, 2010


“Yes. Yes..We finally reached out him. Ka’ab Binu Ashraf has been traced. He will be soon found. Will this be like VAN-Goooordhd. I am not sure. Allah Knows.. But Spencer you will pay the price…Just wait to pay the price.” — September 28, 2009

“Robert….It was really good I found you in a local supermarket. and I followed you.. so i know your address now..tell you fool followers you are going to be deceased very soon… any one taking your seat and getting killed? I am sure most of your followers are cheeky cowards.” — September 28, 2009

“Do me a favor Spencer and put this as a blog post like you do to all those threatening mails. Be careful, I am very near to you. I located you and I know you have little security around you. I am coming to slit your throat with a bland knife.. and it will pain a lot.. since you misled a lot of people and became a fitnah on earth.. it is a duty of a good muslim to kill you! go report this to FBI or CIA..And don’t worry, I won’t attack you unguarded.. but i will surely kill you in the most easy manner possible because I don’t like to slaughter human beings.. Die and go to hell.. for sure..and yea I have a new name for you…Robert ‘hawknoseinhell’ spencer.” — September 28, 2009

I’ve received many, many others. Here is just one more, a classic from a few years back:

“YOu are the most f**king person I have ever seen. Enrooted in islamic hatred, you think your personal statements on Prophet Muhammed will be deemed appropriate. Motherf**ker, I am coming to kill you. I will hack the head off your face and i will kill your family. Wait for your doom. From A mujahid” — October 2, 2006

“FBI investigating mosque threat,” by Dan Horn for the Cincinnati Enquirer, December 14 (thanks to Andrew):

The FBI is investigating a threatening e-mail sent to a Clifton mosque that was the target of a pipe bomb attack almost five years ago.

FBI officials say they have no evidence the e-mail is connected to the previous attack, but they are taking no chances.

“That’s certainly something we will investigate,” said FBI spokesman Mike Brooks.
The e-mail was sent Saturday from an anonymous Yahoo account to the Islamic Association of Cincinnati, which oversees the mosque.

“You should know that you are not wanted in Cincinnati,” the e-mail states. “We don’t want you here. Mohammad is a joke. Go back to your desert. Beware. We may just declare jihad on you.”

Officials with the [Hamas-linked] Council on American-Islamic Relations said that although the e-mail does not contain a direct threat, it is a concern because of the previous attack on the mosque and because of growing animosity toward Muslims in the decade since the 9/11 attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.

“I don’t want to blow this out of proportion, but we don’t want to dismiss it and assume it’s nothing,” said Karen Dabdoub, executive director of [Hamas-linked] CAIR in Cincinnati. “You just don’t know.”…

Indeed you don’t — especially given the fact that Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslims have not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. CAIR and other groups like it want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they can use them for political points and as weapons to intimidate people into remaining silent about the jihad threat.

So what happened in Cincinnati is anybody’s guess. And it’s good that the FBI is on it. I just wish that the FBI were as proactive and energetic in investigating the many death threats that anti-jihadists such as Pamela Geller and I have received as they are when they rush to investigate allegations of threats against mosques and Muslims.

Jihad Watch

Nov 10

Westbrook rushes for 136 yards; 49ers roll 27-6 - San Jose Mercury News

Kansas City Star
Westbrook rushes for 136 yards; 49ers roll 27-6
San Jose Mercury News
GLENDALE, Ariz.—Brian Westbrook finally got an opportunity to show he can still do it. News that San Francisco's Frank Gore has a broken right hip means more chances are just ahead. Westbrook rushed for 136 yards and a
49ers' Anthony Davis grows up against ArizonaSan Francisco Chronicle
NFL: Resurgent Westbrook leads San Francisco past ArizonaPhiladelphia Inquirer
Cardinals QB Derek Anderson blows up at reporter after lossUSA Today
all 1,484 news articles »

Sports - Google News

Aug 10

The New York Times Rushes to Defend Ground Zero Imam

The New York Times offered still more moral support for the controversial Ground Zero mosque on Sunday’s front-page profile by Anne Barnard of the man behind the building project, imam Feisal Abdul Rauf — "For Imam in Muslim Center Furor, a Hard Balancing Act." Among the contributors to the report: Thanassis Cambanis and Mona El-Naggar in Cairo, and Kareem Fahim, Sharaf Mowjood and Jack Begg in New York.

Mowjood? As Alana Goodman of the Business and Media Institute reported earlier this month, Sharaf Mowjood is a former lobbyist for the Council on American Islamic Relations, an interest group that strongly supports the mosque. Mowjood coauthored a glowing Dec. 9, 2009 article on the mosque with reporter Ralph Blumenthal and also contributed to a sympathetic story by Barnard August 11 about public relations missteps by the mosque sponsors.

Barnard began with an anecdote about a Rauf lecture in Cairo where the imam (with a voice the Times describes as "soft, almost New Agey") was accused by radical Islamists of being an American agent (a story which of course bolsters Rauf’s moderate credentials). Barnard seemingly took it as her mission to rebut charges of extremism against Rauf.

In his absence — he is now on another Middle East speaking tour sponsored by the State Department — a host of allegations have been floated: that he supports terrorism; that his father, who worked at the behest of the Egyptian government, was a militant; that his publicly expressed views mask stealth extremism. Some charges, the available record suggests, are unsupported. Some are simplifications of his ideas. In any case, calling him a jihadist appears even less credible than calling him a United States agent.

Barnard insisted that Rauf’s views, in context, placed him "as pro-American within the Muslim world."

He consistently denounces violence. Some of his views on the interplay between terrorism and American foreign policy — or his search for commonalities between Islamic law and this country’s Constitution — have proved jarring to some American ears, but still place him as pro-American within the Muslim world. He devotes himself to befriending Christians and Jews — so much, some Muslim Americans say, that he has lost touch with their own concerns.

Barnard set up more criticisms for the sole purpose of rebuttal, and waited until paragraph 34 out of 35 to bring up, defensively, Rauf’s failure to describe Hamas as a terrorist organization.

Mr. Abdul Rauf also founded the Shariah Index Project — an effort to formally rate which governments best follow Islamic law. Critics see in it support for Taliban-style Shariah or imposing Islamic law in America.

Shariah, though, like Halakha, or Jewish law, has a spectrum of interpretations. The ratings, Ms. Kahn said, measure how well states uphold Shariah’s core principles like rights to life, dignity and education, not Taliban strong points. The imam has written that some Western states unwittingly apply Shariah better than self-styled Islamic states that kill wantonly, stone women and deny education — to him, violations of Shariah.

After 9/11, Mr. Abdul Rauf was all over the airwaves denouncing terrorism, urging Muslims to confront its presence among them, and saying that killing civilians violated Islam. He wrote a book, "What’s Right With Islam Is What’s Right With America," asserting the congruence of American democracy and Islam.

That ample public record — interviews, writings, sermons — is now being examined by opponents of the downtown center.

Those opponents repeat often that Mr. Abdul Rauf, in one radio interview, refused to describe the Palestinian group that pioneered suicide bombings against Israel, Hamas, as a terrorist organization. In the lengthy interview, Mr. Abdul Rauf clumsily tries to say that people around the globe define terrorism differently and labeling any group would sap his ability to build bridges. He also says: "Targeting civilians is wrong. It is a sin in our religion," and, "I am a supporter of the state of Israel." - Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Aug 10

Politico rushes to do Nancy Pelosi’s bidding, investigating funding of Ground Zero mega-mosque foes

Cost of New York bus ads: $ 10,000
Cost of press release: $ 1,500
Cost of watching the lapdog media track the sources of these sums while ignoring the questionable funding of a $ 100 million dollar mosque: Priceless

I just got a call from Kenneth P. Vogel of Politico, asking me a series of questions about donations to our efforts against the Ground Zero mega-mosque, and growing increasingly hostile and belligerent when I declined to answer.

Well, Politico can be very proud of itself. Instead of looking into where the pro-Sharia, anti-freedom of speech, refuses-to-denounce-Hamas Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his thug developer Sharif El-Gamal are getting their $ 100 million to build the mega-mosque, when they haven’t ruled out funding from Iran and Saudi Arabia, they’re spending their time trying to trace the few thousands it will take Pamela Geller and me to mount our rally against the mega-mosque on 9/11.

Bravo, Politico. Do your worst. When this all comes down, you’ll be in the running for a Walter Duranty Award. Don’t know who he was? Look him up.

Jihad Watch