You want a glimpse of the future that crime-coddling Eric Holder and the White House will be bringing up en masse?

Right now, in New York City, jihad scientist Aafia Siddiqui is on trial.

See here, here, here, and here for background on the MIT-trained microbiologist/suspected KSM operative who went missing after 9/11 — and was caught, shot, and extradited two years in Pakistan after threatening to kill American soldiers.

The Pakistani government is paying for part of her defense. She has used the civilian court system to shout anti-American propaganda and spew hatred against Jews, cause legal chaos, and make a mockery of the rights she has been granted. al Qaeda has been trained to game the system. The Western-educated Siddiqui is milking it for all it’s worth.

On Monday, she was thrown out twice for outburts. Her defense team is now asking for, you guessed it, a mistrial.

A U.S.-trained Pakistani scientist linked to al-Qaida got into trouble again Monday in federal court after twice interrupting the sometimes tearful testimony of an American solider who claimed he shot her in self defense in Afghanistan in 2008.

“I feel sorry for you,” Aafit Saddiqui blurted out at one point at her attempted murder trial in Manhattan. After a judge had deputy U.S. marshals remove her, she pointed at the witness and muttered something else before disappearing behind a side door.

U.S. District Judge Richard Berman allowed Saddiqui to return later, but kicked her out again amid another rambling tirade about injustice. At the end of the day, the defense argued that the removals made her look bad in front of the jury and asked for a mistrial, which the judge denied.

“It’s highly appropriate for her to be escorted out of the courtroom when she acts out,” he said.

Siddiqui – a specialist in neuroscience who trained at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Brandeis University – has insisted in previous courtroom rants that she’s innocent. She also has refused to work with her defense attorneys, including some paid for by the Pakistani government.

The soldier described Siddiqui’s 2008 ambush:

He testified Afghan authorities had told him Siddiqui had been restrained, and was shocked when she sudden appeared from behind a curtain wielding his M4 rifle and yelling, “Allah akbar,” Arabic for “God is great.”

“It was pretty amazing she got that thing up and squared off,” he said. “She was looking at me and aiming dead at me.”

Hearing the rifle go off, the officer said he followed his military training and pulled his pistol. Siddiqui was wrestling with an interpreter when he shot her in the stomach.

“I operated within the rules of engagement to eliminate the threat,” he said.

Two jurors were also let go after a man sitting in the courtroom pointed at them, used his finger as a gun to pretend to shoot them, and mouthed an obscenity.

Reports the NYPost: ” The unidentified man in a white headdress was taken into custody but it was unclear if charges were filed following the incident in Manhattan federal court.”

An al Qaeda suspect given free reign with her tongue in a public courtroom. Jurors threatened. Prosecution in jeopardy.

Now, imagine the scene being repeated in 12 or 20 or 25 more courtrooms across America simultaneously with similar high-value suspects and the jihadi dregs of Gitmo.

Are you ready? It’s coming.

Wishing you all a joy-filled Christmas!

“Gloria in excelsis Deo” – King’s College Choir:

Please keep our troops in your prayers. In Afghanistan, our soldiers are hard at work:

”This is my third Christmas away from family, the first two were in Iraq and then one here,” Sgt. David Nix, from Charlotte, North Carlina, said, adding that he misses waking up on Christmas morning with his wife and kids. ”It’s the only thing that goes through my mind … being around my family,” he said.

“A Soldier’s Christmas Poem,” written by LCDR Jeff Giles, CS, USN, stationed in Al Taqqadum Iraq:

A Christmas video from the soldiers of the Dragon Brigade:

Here’s a look at the plight of Christians in Iraq.

Pope Benedict XVI recovered from the bizarre attack yesterday well enough to deliver Christmas Day mass this morning.

Lombardi identified the woman who toppled Benedict as Susanna Maiolo, 25, a Swiss-Italian national with psychiatric problems. He said Maiolo, who was not armed, was taken to a clinic for necessary treatment.

She was the same woman involved in a similar incident at last year’s Midnight Mass, Vatican officials said. In that case, Maiolo jumped the barricade but never managed to reach the pope and was quietly tackled by security.

In both cases she wore a red sweat shirt.

During Thursday night’s service, Maiolo jumped the barricade and lunged for the pope as he processed down the aisle toward the altar. As security guards brought her down, she grabbed Benedict’s vestments and pulled him down with her, according to witness video obtained by The Associated Press.

After a few seconds on the floor, Benedict stood up with the help of attendants, put back on his miter and took hold of his staff, and continued to process down the aisle to the cheers of “Viva il Papa!” (“Long live the pope”). He continued to celebrate the Mass without incident.

It was the first time a potential attacker came into direct contact with Benedict during his nearly five-year papacy. Security analysts have frequently warned the pope is too exposed in his public appearances.

After getting up, Benedict, flanked by tense bodyguards, reached the basilica’s main altar to start the Mass. The pope, who broke his right wrist in a fall this summer, appeared unharmed but somewhat shaken and leaned heavily on aides and an armrest as he sat down in his chair.

Benedict made no reference to the disturbance after the service started or on Friday.

The full transcript of President Obama’s long-delayed speech on Afghanistan is here. You can watch it in full here.

Bush-bashing? Check.

Noxious complaining about the cost of fighting a necessary war? Check.

Disingenuous denial that he dithered? Check.

“Let me be clear”s/”clear”s = 9.

Self-congratulations for sticking to Gitmo closure policy = 1.

Self-referential “As your Commander-in-Chief”s = 2.

References to global jihad = 0.

Charles Krauthammer tonight called the speech “strange,” “defensive,” “hedging,” and full of “uncertainty compounding uncertainty.”

Way to restore America’s standing in the world, eh?

***

Pray for our troops tonight and every night. They need ‘em now more than every.

***

Andrew Ferguson has a different take on the speech:

Obama is the first Democratic president in forty years to call for a significant deployment of American troops in the national security interest of his country. This is very big news. His predecessor, President Clinton, could give a stirring address dispatching bombers over Bosnia and be confident of the support of his fellow Democrats, because the show of power was purely humanitarian and had nothing to do with keeping us safe from our enemies. With great courage, Obama is trying something that hasn’t been tried within the living memory of most of the members of his party. He may even recall the era when liberal Democratic presidents — Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson — could lead a fight because it was in the interest of the country to fight.

This is a historical moment, and one we should be grateful for. It’s worth an extra twenty minutes of presidential gassing off. It’s even worth a lot of guff about beginning to pull the troops out by a date certain, no matter what. (I’ll believe it when I see it.) If this is what he needs to mollify his political supporters, let him talk and talk and talk.

Alas, Obama’s “gassing off” is not so much a matter of spouting “essential platitudes” as it is a down payment on future pandering to the Left that will not be in the national security interest of our country.

Paul Mirengoff is dead-on:

Earlier today I wondered whether President Obama’s speech about Afghanistan would sound more like a description of a war plan or a structured settlement of a legal dispute. What I heard tonight tilted decidedly in the latter direction. To be precise, the speech sounded to me like a slick lawyer trying to sell a dubious settlement to a skeptical client or, in this case, set of clients.

Consistent with slick salesmanship – as well as the president’s character – the speech was quite self-referential. Providing a potted history of our military efforts in the war on terrorism, Obama took shots at his predecessor and attempted to cast himself as the hero throughout. Thus, he patted himself on the back for opposing the war in Iraq, on which he blamed the current difficulties in Afghanistan.

Obama also patted himself on the back for bringing the war in Iraq to a “responsible end.” But he failed to mention the surge in Iraq, which was instrumental in turning the tide to the point that it became possible to speak of a responsible end.

The omission was odd inasmuch as Obama was pitching a similar surge in Afghanistan. This meant that the Iraq surge was more relevant to tonight’s speech than any other element of Obama’s potted history. Yet he was too partisan, and too embarrassed by his own opposition to the surge, to mention this vital decision.

It was therefore rank hypocrisy for Obama latter to decry the partisanship that has plagued the war on terrorism.

***

Bonus emetic: Chris Matthews referring to West Point as the “enemy camp.” But we already knew which side he was on. Vid via Allahpundit:

That’s right. Matthews smeared the cadets for behaving properly and not showing overt political preferences for Obama. He wanted to see more “warmth” — e.g., twitching legs, tears of joy, and fainting a la the Obamedia.

Oh, and yes, MSNBC was still as monochromatic tonight as it is monodogmatic.

***

If West Point is the “enemy camp,” what does Chris Matthews call Gitmo?

Here’s a clear-thinking cadet who was in the audience sending a clear message of unwavering resolve. Matthews won’t get a leg tingle, but he might wet his pants over it:

Several readers note the active service campaign ribbons and medals on the man’s chest and identify one of them as the Combat Infantryman’s Badge, showing he has been an Infantry Soldier under Combat. D. O’Brien writes: “The Cadet pictured in your piece on President Obama’s speech at West Point (December 1, 2009) is not a ‘traditional’ cadet. He is a former enlisted man – and an Infantryman who wears the Combat Infantryman’s Badge. This award is given only to Infantrymen who have participated in direct-fire engagements against the enemy.”

While Obama took his sweet time, our men and women in uniform will now be sent scrambling. Wait, wait, wait..now, hurry up!

President Obama has decided to expedite the deployment of 30,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan over the next six months, in an effort to reverse the momentum of Taliban gains and create urgency for the government in Kabul to match the American surge with one using its own forces, according to senior administration officials.

In bringing the total American force to nearly 100,000 troops by the end of May, the administration will move far faster than it had originally planned. Until recently, discussions focused on a deployment that would take a year, but Mr. Obama concluded that the situation required “more, sooner,” as one official said, explaining some of the central conclusions Mr. Obama reached at the end of a nearly three-month review of American war strategy.

… The new strategy draws heavily on lessons learned from President George W. Bush’s “surge” and strategy shift in Iraq in 2007, which Mr. Obama opposed as a senator and presidential candidate. Mr. Obama’s advisers are even referring to his troop buildup as an “extended surge.”

However officials said that Mr. Obama in his speech will give a time frame — something Mr. Bush did not do — for when the United States will start pulling the reinforcements out and begin turning over security responsibilities to Afghan forces one province at a time.

Mr. Obama’s aides would not say how specific he would be on Tuesday night about the time frame of the American presence. But clearly it would be well more than a year. That would take him to 2011 or 2012 — when Mr. Obama is up for re-election — before the troop levels would begin to fall again to fulfill the president’s oft-repeated assertion that he would offer no “open-ended commitment” to the Afghan government.

It is that date that is bound to be the focus of attention for his own party, at a time when many Democrats are openly opposed to sending more troops. Some have questioned how Mr. Obama can simultaneously argue for a troop increase and a relatively quick pull-back. But in interviews, administration officials said that without the accelerated deployment, there was little hope of being able to stabilize the situation in the region enough to start withdrawals.

“This is to speed the process,” one said.

If you haven’t watched the video of VP Cheney’s remarks blasting Obama for projecting weakness, go here.

Somebody needs to say it.

***

John Hood sums up The Obama Doctrine: “We Surrender” — Pretty Soon.

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Speaking by telephone from an undisclosed location, Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said the U.S. bombarded the outpost with airstrikes after leaving, as well as the local police headquarters.

“This means they are not coming back,” Mujahid said. “This is another victory for Taliban. We have control of another district in eastern Afghanistan.”

“Right now Kamdesh is under our control, and the white flag of the Taliban is raised above Kamdesh,” Mujahid said.

A senior official of the Nuristan provincial government confirmed Taliban forces were in control of the village and Afghan police and soldiers had withdrawn from the district. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

Provincial police chief, Gen. Mohammad Qasim Jangulbagh, said the pullout “has had a direct affect on the morale of Afghan forces.”

“If Afghan soldiers are losing support, how can they stay there?” he asked. “We need the coalition to send their forces back. We need more police, more soldiers.”

The battle marked the largest loss of U.S. life in a single skirmish in more than a year. Besides the eight Americans slain, three Afghan soldiers and an estimated 100 insurgents died, according to NATO.

Via Breitbart/AP.

This is the least we can do.

Please join me in contributing to the Combat Outpost Keating Relief Fund. Please.

COP Keating was one of two outposts attacked this weekend in the siege at Kamdesh.

Mothax at the American Legion’s Burn Pit blog writes that “[i]n the battle for Combat Outpost Keating, the men of Bravo Troop 361 Cavalry lost every possession they had, save for the clothes on their backs.” Read the entire post.

Then read this account from milblog ArmyHousehold6.

Then use and spread this information to everyone you know:

Here is where to donate online using your credit card.

Here is where to mail checks:

COP Keating Relief Fund
PO Box 1954
Indianapolis 46206

Here is an online form that you can send in with your checks. Make sure you have COP Keating Relief Fund on the check so we can allocate it correctly.

If you want to send stuff today, and do it completely on your own, please mail to:

CSM Robert Wilson
TF Mountain Warrior
FOB Bostick
APO AE 09354

Support the troops who support our freedom.

Remember: We are the land of the free because of the brave.

The Colorado Springs Gazette tells their stories here and here.

Many were fathers. All were patriots. They were stationed at Fort Carson, Colorado. They leave behind grieving wives, girlfriends, young children, family, and friends. Remember their names. Remember their heroism:

Spc. Stephan Lee Mace, 21
Sgt. Joshua Kirk, 30
Pfc. Kevin Thomson, 22
Spc. Christopher T. Griffin
Spc. Michael P. Scusa, 22
Sgt. Vernon W. Martin
Sgt. Justin T. Gallegos, 22
Sgt. Joshua M. Hardt, 24

Spc. Mace’s family is speaking out. Let’s pray the White House is listening:

Stephan Mace of the Army’s 61st Cavalry Regiment knew the Taliban would be waiting for him when he returned to eastern Afghanistan in September.

During a two-week leave in early September, the 21-year-old specialist sat on his father’s couch in Winchester, Virginia, and discussed his concerns over Forward Operating Base Keating in Kamdesh District, a region known as a Taliban stronghold.

“He talked about the village next to the base, that it had 300 Taliban, and they couldn’t do anything about it because they were in mosques hiding or with other civilians,” says his father, Larry Mace.

“They knew they were there and they couldn’t do anything about it and they killed them.”

Sgt. Gallegos is survived by a 5-year-old son and friends and family who remember his fighting spirit:

t was Gallegos’ third deployment to the Middle East. His family says he did two tours in Iraq before he went to Afghanistan.

It was only after he died that [family friend Bessie] Guadiana-Hoffman says his family learned he’d won two Purple Hearts for being wounded. Now, she says, the Army will award him a third for being killed and a Bronze Star.

Guadiana-Hoffman says, “He was an unsung hero. He was not the type of a man who touted his accolades. That’s Justin.”

The father of a 5-year-old son, Guadiana-Hoffman says he loved his country. “He would get really upset when people would put down the United States for being at war. He said we don’t choose to be at war. We choose to help end the war. Unfortunately the war ended his life.”

But, Guadiana-Hoffman says it didn’t end his memory. She says, “That’s the type of individual Justin is. I won’t say was because his sprit is still here. That’s how he is.”

***

Fort Carson lost yet another soldier yesterday in a separate incident:

One day after a firefight killed eight Fort Carson soldiers in Afghanistan, a ninth soldier from the post was killed in a separate incident, the Department of Defense announced this afternoon.

Spc. Kevin O. Hill, 23, of Brooklyn, N.Y., died Oct. 4 at Outpost Dehanna, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked his unit using small arms and indirect fire. He was assigned to the 576th Mobility Augmentation Company at Fort Carson.

His death marks the 279th fatality from Fort Carson since 2001, and the 24th in Afghanistan, records show.

Support a charity that supports the troops in Colorado here.

Flying into the besieged Afghan base during a nighttime firefight this weekend is a harrowing mix of overwhelming noise, stomach dropping maneuvers and shadows hurrying through the gloom.

When the chopper lifted off moments later with three wounded soldiers, it left behind others who were wounded but refused to be MEDEVACED out of the combat zone so they could return to fight with their buddies.

As fighting at two U.S. outposts raged on the ground this weekend, the MEDEVAC team at a nearby base waited – with both patience and frustration.

MEDEVAC teams are known for flying into some of the most deadly areas in the world to rescue injured soldiers. MEDEVAC helicopters are unarmed so they often need supporting aircraft to protect them, and sometimes the cover of darkness is their only defense.

On Saturday night, the team finally received the go-ahead as the sun set. Within moments of receiving the call, we rushed to the helicopter and quickly sped to the outposts.

As we were flying into the attack space, the MEDEVAC team with one medic and a doctor were preparing for the oncoming patients, setting up IV’s, pulling out medical equipment and making other last minute preparations…

The eight American troops killed in the battle were all from Fort Carson in Colorado Springs:

In the deadliest day for Fort Carson since Vietnam, eight soldiers from the post’s 4th Brigade Combat Team died in Afghanistan on Saturday when insurgents attacked a pair of remote outposts in Nuristan province.

The Army hasn’t identified the dead, but several military sources confirmed that all eight were from the 4th Infantry Division’s 4th Brigade, which went to war in May and in recent days began withdrawing from remote areas to better provide security in cities and villages.

“My heart goes out to the families of those we have lost and to their fellow Soldiers who remained to finish this fight,” Col. Randy George, the brigade’s commander, said in a statement late Saturday. “This was a complex attack in a difficult area. Both the U.S. and Afghan Soldiers fought bravely together; I am extremely proud of their professionalism and bravery.”

Support a charity that supports the troops in Colorado here.

Firing rockets and rifles, Taliban militiamen attacked American and Afghan military outposts in a daylong siege on Saturday that killed eight U.S. soldiers and two Afghan security forces in one of the deadliest battles in months, according to U.S. and Afghan officials.

The fighting began early Saturday morning and raged throughout the day in a remote region of eastern Afghanistan in Nurestan province, which borders Pakistan. Staging their attack from steep mountainsides that overlook the outposts in the valley below, on a morning when weather made visibility poor, the Taliban fighters attacked the small American and Afghan bases using rifles, machine guns, grenades and rockets, according to U.S. military officials.

By Sunday morning, when the U.S. military made the attack public in a statement, the area was “largely secure but I do think there is still some activity,” said Capt. Elizabeth Mathias, a U.S. military spokeswoman.

In addition to the eight soldiers killed, several others were injured, Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, but he did not specify the number. The American soldiers called in ground reinforcements, along with attack helicopter, airplanes and surveillance drones during the fighting. U.S. forces eventually repelled the attack while inflicting “a significant amount of casualties” on insurgents, Smith said.

Due to the “very challenging terrain,” the insurgents had “pretty effective firing positions,” Smith said. “It was obviously a very, very difficult day.”

…The U.S. military said it was not immediately clear how many insurgents were involved in the fighting. The attack involved Taliban fighters and appeared to be led by a local commander of the Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin insurgent group, which is run by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a former mujaheddin leader during the Soviet war in Afghanistan during the 1980s.

The attack took place in a sparsely populated area of forested mountains near the town of Kamdeysh. The deputy police chief of Nurestan province, Mohammad Farouq, said the insurgents intended to seize control of the Kamdeysh area and that hundreds took part in the fighting. He said more than 20 Afghan soldiers and police have gone missing since the fighting began and may have been taken hostage.

***

Thanks to all of you who gave generously to Lt. Daniel Cnossen’s support fund last week. Lt. Cnossen lost both legs while on a mission in Kandahar and is recovering at NNMC Bethesda — where he recently received both the Purple Heart and Bronze Star for Valor. I heard from LT Brian Ray, his best friend and website administrator, who e-mailed that “directly through your link we were able to raise enough money to move Dan’s mom and sister into an apartment to be near him during his recovery.”

A reminder that you can contribute right here.

Fellow Vets for Freedom members:

U.S. Veteran, Iraq and Afghanistan
Missouri State Captain, Vets for Freedom

Within 24 hours of the leak of the Afghanistan assessment to The Washington Post, General Stanley McChrystal’s team fired its second shot across the bow of the Obama administration. According to McClatchy, military officers close to General McChrystal said he is prepared to resign if he isn’t given sufficient resources (read “troops”) to implement a change of direction in Afghanistan…

…Today, the military is perceiving that the administration is punting the question of a troop increase in Afghanistan, and the military is even questioning the administration’s commitment to succeed in Afghanistan. The leaking of the assessment and the report that McChrystal would resign if he is not given what is needed to succeed constitute some very public pushback against the administration’s waffling on Afghanistan.

***

The Washington Post blasts the wavering, too:

IT WAS ONLY last March 27 that President Obama outlined in a major speech what he called “a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan” that, he added, “marks the conclusion of a careful policy review.” That strategy unambiguously stated that the United States would prevent the return of a Taliban government and “enhance the military, governance and economic capacity” of the country. We strongly supported the president’s conclusion that those goals were essential to preventing another attack on the United States by al-Qaeda and its extremist allies.

So it was a little startling to hear Mr. Obama suggest in several televised interviews on Sunday that he had second thoughts. “We are in the process of working through that strategy,” said on CNN.” The first question is … are we pursuing the right strategy?” On NBC he said, “if supporting the Afghan national government and building capacity for their army and securing certain provinces advances that strategy” of defeating al-Qaeda, “then we’ll move forward. But if it doesn’t, then I’m not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan.”

…It’s hard to see, however, how Mr. Obama can refute the analysis he offered last March. “If the Afghan government falls to the Taliban or allows al-Qaeda to go unchallenged,” he said then, “that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.” Afghanistan, he continued, “is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan,” where al-Qaeda and the Taliban now aim at seizing control of a state that possesses nuclear weapons. Moreover, Mr. Obama said, “a return to Taliban rule would condemn their country to brutal governance . . . and the denial of basic human rights to the Afghan people — especially women and girls.”

“To succeed, we and our friends and allies must reverse the Taliban’s gains, and promote a more capable and accountable Afghan government,” Mr. Obama concluded. As Gen. McChrystal’s report makes very clear, keeping faith with that goal will require more troops, more resources and years of patience. Yet to break with it would both dishonor and endanger this country. As the president put it, “the world cannot afford the price that will come due if Afghanistan slides back into chaos.”

NATO-led forces are investigating the death of four Marines in eastern Afghanistan after their commanders reportedly rejected requests for artillery fire in a battle with insurgents, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.

Tuesday’s incident was “under investigation” and details remained unclear, press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference.

A McClatchy newspapers’ journalist who witnessed the battle reported that a team of Marine trainers made repeated appeals for air and artillery support after being pinned down by insurgents in the village of Ganjgal in eastern Kunar province.

The U.S. troops had to wait more than an hour for attack helicopters to come to their aid and their appeal for artillery fire was rejected, with commanders citing new rules designed to avoid civilian casualties, the report said.

Morrell said the helicopters were not hampered by any restrictions on air power but had to travel a long distance to reach the Marines at the remote location near the Pakistan border.

“I think that it did take some time for close air support to arrive in this case, but this is not a result of more restrictive conditions in which it can be used,” he said.

“It was the result, as is often the case in Afghanistan, of the fact that there are great distances often between bases where such assets are located and where our troops are out operating.”

Morrell could not confirm whether appeals for artillery fire were denied by commanders.

According to the McClatchy report by Jonathan Landay, the U.S. advisors assisting Afghan forces had been assured before the operation that “air cover would be five minutes away.”

The incident comes after the top commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, issued new restrictions on the use of military force and air raids in a bid to prevent civilian deaths.

Why, the Huffington Post reprinting a massively large version of the image on its front page with an accompanying blog commentary praising the AP photographer’s work as “tasteful” — along with thousands of comments praising the decision and calling for even more bloody US troop photos to be published.

***

And no, I’m not done with the AP yet. Blogger Ztower points out that the AP refused to reprint the Mohammed Cartoons because they were “offensive”
, but has no problem offending a dead Marine’s family for the Greater Journalistic Good of ginning up anti-war sentiment.

Slimeballs.

Responding to a question about Afghanistan during today’s White House press briefing, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs assailed Bush/Cheney for having “under-resourced Afghanistan for the better part of a decade” and declared the region “the most important part of our war on terror.”

Whoops. That’s “Overseas Continegency Operation” to you, Bobby.

Flashback:

After days of confusion and denial about whether the Obama administration was officially no longer using the term “War on Terror,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that the Obama administration is no longer speaking of a “War on Terror.”

“I haven’t gotten any directive about using it or not using it. It’s just not being used,” said Clinton during a briefing with reporters aboard her plane to the Hague to attend an international conference on Afghanistan.

“The administration has stopped using the phrase and I think that speaks for itself,” she said at a different point during her trip. “Obviously.”

***

President Obama hasn’t yet read Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s report on Afghanistan delivered to NATO allies and the Pentagon earlier today.