You got to be kidding me!

A proposed new handbook for Americans serving in Afghanistan warns them not to speak ill about the Taliban, advocate women’s rights or criticize pedophilia, and the general in charge is not happy with it.
The draft of the newest Army handbook seems to suggest that ignorance of Afghan culture is to blame for deadly attacks by Afghan soldiers against the coalition forces, according to The Wall Street Journal, which got a peek at the 75-page document. But its message of walking on eggshells around the locals is not going over well with U.S. Marine Gen. John Allen, the top military commander in Afghanistan.
"Gen. Allen did not author, nor does he intend to provide, a foreword," said Col. Tom Collins, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan. "He does not approve of its contents."
More than three dozen attacks by Afghan soldiers have claimed the lives of some 63 members of the U.S.-led coalition this year. The insider attacks could jeopardize plans to transfer full security control to Afghan forces in 2014.

"He does not approve of its contents."

- Col. Tom Collins, a spokesman for U.S. Marine Gen. John Allen

But a claim by their own government that they’re to blame is not likely to buoy the spirits of Americans risking their lives to serve.
"Many of the confrontations occur because of [coalition] ignorance of, or lack of empathy for, Muslim and/or Afghan cultural norms, resulting in a violent reaction from the [Afghan security force] member," the Journal quotes the draft handbook as saying.
The version reviewed by the Journal is still subject to revisions,  Lt. Gen. David Perkins, commander of the Army's Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., told the Journal.
The study, based on interviews with 600 members of the Afghan security forces and 200 American soldiers, painted a grim portrait of opposing cultures with simmering disdain for their counterparts.
The draft handbook includes a summary stating that some U.S. soldiers consider Afghan forces to be “basically stupid” thieves, "gutless in combat," "profoundly dishonest" and engaged in "treasonous collusion and alliances with enemy forces."
The draft handbook offers a list of "taboo conversation topics" that soldiers should avoid, including "making derogatory comments about the Taliban," "advocating women's rights," "any criticism of pedophilia," "directing any criticism toward Afghans," "mentioning homosexuality and homosexual conduct" or "anything related to Islam," according to the Journal.

That was from the Wall Street Journal

    This is little more than political kid gloves BS. When fighting an enemy it is important to know him and what he is about in this case the political machine has taken this a step farther and have decided to comply to the enemy's rules of engagement and there by handy cap are own men and women for there political gain and to feel good about themselves.  When you take such actions you are no longer seeking to win a victory but rather trying to full fill some self loathing point of view that has no place in war and will only cost lives that obviously these people don't really care about other wise they wouldn't be going about things in this way. Was is not a place to win political points at the cost of our youth because they are the ones who pay for such actions. It must take a lot of distant for America and the things her people believe in to take such a action, if not its shear madness to ask your troops to show such a level of plasticity toward the enemy that is killing there friends and loved ones in grotesque and demeaning ways. But what do you expect from a president that after being elected went around and apologized to other nations for 2 months.

Thanks for reading and as always I welcome your comments.

Change I hope

 

 

 

A former U.S. Marine who served in Iraq and Afghanistan has been chained to a bed in a Mexican prison since August. Jon Hammar faces up to 12 years in a Mexican jail on what may be a trumped-up charge of possessing an illegal shotgun. Customs officials had already cleared the shotgun before he entered Mexico.

On August 23, Hammar and his friend Ian McDonough were en route to Costa Rica on a surfing vacation when they ran into trouble after crossing the Mexican border.
According to McClatchy newspapers, Hammer brought “a six-decade-old shotgun into Mexico,” which his mother referred to as a “glorified BB gun,” that was passed down to him by his grandfather.

McDonough said the Customs and Border Protection Agent said, “All you have to do is register” the gun, and gave them a registration paper to give to the Mexican authorities. 
When Hammar gave the registration form to the Mexican agents, he and McDonough were immediately taken into custody and Mexican prosecutors looked at the “disassembled relic in the 1972 Winnebago motor home” and “dismissed the U.S. registration papers Hammar had filled out,” charging Hammar with the serious crime of “possession of a weapon restricted for use to Mexico’s armed forces”:

Curiously, it wasn’t the type of shotgun that broke Mexican law. It was the length of the barrel, which the formal citation said was shorter than 25 inches, although a discrepancy has emerged over how the barrel was measured.

It is worth noting Mexico’s gangs “routinely wield AK-47 and AR-15 assault rifles, high-powered .50-caliber sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and other potent weaponry," and Hammar's shotgun is rendered useless against such high-powered weapons.

The Mexican lawyer representing Hammar said he faces three to 12 years in a Mexican federal prison if convicted on the gun charge. Mexican authorities released McDonough, Hammar's friends, who was able to walk back to Texas, most likely because he had been living part-time in Argentina.
Marine Sgt. James Garcia served with Hammar in various combat situations and said he was heartbroken because Hammar was “one of the best we had.” According to McClatchy, Hammer, now 27 years of age, “joined the Marines and deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq before receiving an honorable discharge in 2007, serving another four years in inactive reserve.”
After Hammar was sent to a state prison in Matamoros, his parents in Florida received phone calls demanding $1,800.


According to McClatchy, Hammar’s family did not pay the extortion and contacted U.S. diplomats, who got Hammar into solitary confinement and out of the wing controlled by a Mexican drug cartel. 
This is not the first time Mexican authorities have captured an American on dubious gun-related charges. Mexican officials arrested a Dallas truck driver in April, "carrying 25,000 pounds of ammunition in his 18-wheeler," after Customs and Border Protection agents instructed him to briefly cross the border to make a U-turn.  Mexican prosecutors "charged him with crimes that could have brought more than 25 years in prison" but -- after Congressional intervention -- they ultimately released the truck driver (Jabin Bogan) on November 23.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), who is the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Hammars' Congresswoman, said she would do her best to help the Hammar family get their son back from Mexican authorities.
“His family has described a very disturbing situation that includes their son being chained to a bed in a very small cell and receiving calls from fellow inmates threatening his life if they did not send them money,” Ros-Lehtinen said. “The family also says that the jail where their son is being held is controlled by the dreaded and brutal Zetas drug cartel. The family wants their son back home, and I will do my best to help them."
Garcia, who served with Hammar, emphasized how the United States should not leave one of its own behind.
“He doesn’t deserve this,” Garcia told McClatchy. “We never leave a brother behind. We never leave a Marine behind. We have to do something.” 

That from http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/09/Former-U-S-Marine-Chained-To-Bed-In-Mexican-Jail-On-Trumped-Up-Gun-Charge 


The only thing I can really think of this is maybe we need to pull some of are forces out of the middle east and start cleaning up some of this crap that's going on closer to home. And yes I mean saying take Mexico over they have done nothing but give us problems in the past and cost us trillions of dollars in aid and workers on the boarder because there crappy government is full of ether rich over stuffed aristocrats or cartel bosses. So maybe its time we just take the place over its not like they can stop us and I am willing to bet that the majority of the people would love to be part of the us after all how many millions keep coming here a year. Also just think of the economic gain in taking a Mexico they have oil great beaches and lots and lots of unused land full of untapped natural resources like natural gas, coal, silver and many others but because there infrastructure is next not 3rd world country status even after all the aid we have given them over the years.  Also this will get rid of that nasty little immigration problem that's been bouncing around for what seems like forever. All and all I think this would be for the best in the long run and would easly push the us back to the top of the world and out of this hellish economy we have been strapped with for the past 7 years or so.

 Today in the local news

and my thoughts on the event

Kirkwood Council shows support for protections for sexual orientation and gender identity

    "KIRKWOOD • The City Council gave preliminary approval Thursday night to extending the protections of the city anti-discrimination ordinance to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
The council’s unanimous voice vote followed a long parade of speakers and activists on both sides who addressed the council.
Mayor Arthur McDonnell said later that he expected the measure would easily be passed at the next council meeting.
On Thursday, he told residents that he believed “in Kirkwood as well as the United States of America, all citizens should be treated equally under the law. I am very much in favor of this.”
Councilman Bob Spears said: ”There are lots of issues that come before council that are difficult for me. Of all of these, this is the easiest one for me to approve. I am very proud of this.”
Those who spoke against the measure included some activists who  have appeared at other municipal meetings where similar measures have been passed. Those include St. Louis County, University City,Clayton, Creve Coeur, Ferguson, Maplewood, Olivette and Richmond Heights, as well as the city of St. Louis.
The Kirkwood Human Rights Commission had recommended that the council approve it and had worked with City Attorney John Hessel.
Darnel Frost, chair of the HRC, said at the meeting, ”I challenge each and every one of you to ask yourselves how would you handle being told you don’t belong, or you’re not good enough or you don’t look or act the right way, or that you can’t be with the person you love?”
Several residents who opposed the measure asked whether the existing laws already protected “all the people.” Some also said the bill seemed too vague.
Among these people, resident David Geger said, “I don’t see the need for any further rights for a special group.” He said there could be unintended consequences.
Raynell Geger, his wife, asked if the Human Rights Commission had ever received a complaint regarding discrimination against people who are gay, lesbian, bi-sexual or transgender."

And now my thoughts!

    

       I really don't get these kind of things I mean is it really needed shouldn't people just I don't know LEAVE OTHERS ALONE if you don't like something someones doing don't act all offended and get uppity just leave they aren't forcing you to watch a TV show or think there way or anything like that. we wouldn't need stuff like this if people would just stop hiding behind the PC mantra and be American which is to say if you don't like gay marriage don't have of,if you don't like abortions don't have one but for my sake and the sake of the people around you don't be uppity and claim offense at something and hide under the guise of religion or morality which your solely based on your point of view and nothing else use reason and logic....and just maybe when your working through the what and why you might find the real reason for your feelings and think to yourself "hey that how I feel about but if I was in his place then....." FYI this works both ways just because you don't hold the same views as another don't claim racism or bigotry and try and shame that person into silence, Again use reason and logic to understand that persons views and then you can better explain yourself to them in away they might understand and if that doesn't work just remember they are welcome to think differently than you but not force you to think as they do or beat you over the head with their point of views till your silent. So if all else fails walk away and take the moral high ground that will always work better speak loader in the long run than getting upset and yelling at them that they are foolish and acting like child by saying accepting the right to free speech and belief and yet not extending the same to others. 

As always thanks for reading 

Jim

Hey Bob thought you might like to know guns don't kill people anymore than a stone or tree does. This was the actions of one person and his alone and you can't protect anyone from themselves if he had driven his car into a river would people be talking about putting a ban on water? No. Most of the people that want tougher gun laws are reacting out of fear which is a base emotion and should be tempered with logic but in this case it seems way too many people have forgotten ten this bit of common scene and have let their emotions get the better of them. Yes this is a sad set of events but it isn't the fault of an inanimate object. The fault falls on the person who made the choice and took the actions that lead to this event. It is called personal responsibility and it is something that America has been running from for the past 20 years so in the words of one of my favorite movies "Its time to nut up or shut up"

As always thanks for reading

Jim