It's hard to take an antiwar activist seriously who still believes that Al-Qaeda is not operating in Iraq.
Are they not paying any attention to any of the Al-Qaeda videos?...
Seriously, who's feeding them this junk?
Tonight, one of these antiwar liberal activists was put in his place...
Antiwar lib Jon Soltz from the Leftist VoteVets.org group and Yearly Kos fame got lambasted on Hardball. His ignorance on the situation in Iraq is shocking considering he was actually deployed there... But, then again, his new gig working with democrats and MoveOn.org and against the troops serving in Iraq demands that he repeat such nonsence.
On Wednesday's "Hardball with Chris Matthews," Move America Forward Vice Chairman, Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson (USAF, Ret.), took anti-war activist Jon Soltz to task. Soltz was in the news recently when at the the antiwar, anti-military "Yearly Kos" convention he silenced a U.S. Army soldier who supports the missions of our troops.
Soltz has repeatedly worked to undermine the missions of U.S. Troops serving in Iraq, and is active in the MoveOn.org affiliated group, Americans Against Escalation in Iraq.
News Busters has the transcript.
It's interesting that even the fickle Hillary Clinton with her many flips and flops on the War in Iraq and who Soltz wants as his Commander in Chief, knows Al Qaeda is in Iraq and said so yesterday.
Soltz's liberal handlers clearly have some work ahead of them.
It was nice to see he couldn't bully Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson.
++
ReplyDeletegood grief, not only didn't they let Buzz get a word in edgewise.. but Soltz is still preaching that there's a "civil war" that never occured in Iraq.. man, someone has a lot of catching up to do.. amazing what some people can say & get away with, and on a show called "hardball" to boot, what a joke..
==
I'd say it was the other way around. Soltz called Patterson out on his Potemkin Village tour of Iraq.
ReplyDeleteboondoggle,
ReplyDeleteBuzz Patterson has been been embedded with American Soldiers in Iraq.
Buzz Patterson has intereviewed hundreds of American Soldiers about Iraq.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTI4MTk0OGQ3MTc2ZGVkYmE0NTc5ZDhkM2JhY2E0ODQ=
Here is audio of Buzz Patterson's experience in Iraq and his opinion on Iraq:
http://blogtalkradio.com/showlauncher.aspx?show_id=37977&link_type=stream_downloads&link=http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia/blogtalkradio/show_37977.wax
Buzz Patterson quote:
“I was a little bit naive when I went to Iraq… I really thought the media was undermining our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and the War on Terror.
I found out it was much bigger than that; it is Democratic politicians; its academics, our professors and our deans and college presidents on university campuses across the country; its Hollywood popular culture; its anti-war organizations like Code Pink for Peace and United for Peace and Justice; its this “Wahhabi lobby,” I call it in the book, with funding from George Soros and MoveOn.org and the Ford Foundation that really wants to see America lose.
I think the bottom line is the left today only wins when America loses… It’s a de facto alliance the left has with our enemies.
They want to see America lose because they gain in Washington, D.C., if we do lose.”
++
ReplyDeleteAmerican Libertarian @ 11:15 PM
thanks!!
tinyurl [ http://tinyurl.com/38kxgn ] for:
Buzz Patterson has intereviewed hundreds
of American Soldiers about Iraq.
Soldiers’ Voices
tinyurl [ http://tinyurl.com/2aclqv ] for:
Here is audio of Buzz Patterson's experience
in Iraq and his opinion on Iraq:
Buzz on Iraq
and an fyi for the skeptics:
Lt. Col. "Buzz" Patterson was a top
military advisor to President Clinton
how to tinyurl
==
I second, BG.
ReplyDeleteThank you American Libertarian.
-Nice background on Buzz.
Hmmm, I can see boondoggle picked the name he/she/it did...:-)
ReplyDeleteTalk about an inability to come to grips with reality... Wow!
Then again Stoltz did work with that other seditious lying loser Kerry so now life's all about trying rationalize that stupid choice he made...
Stoltz also has been known to hang with that other pseudo patriot (another Clintonista that was long on political connections and short on soldiering) Wesley Clark...
People are known by the company they keep...
BTW when did, "Jon" get morphed from John?
The "catch" here is when Patterson asked Soltz if he was still in the military. Soltz has repeatedly said that he is a "private citizen" when in fact, Soltz is still IRR (immediate ready reserve) and still receives a DOD paycheck, as did John Kerry when he was tooling around with anti-war traitors like Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden and Teddy Kennedy.
ReplyDeleteThis, my friends, is against UCMJ regs and Soltz knows it and that explains his refusal to answer Patterson's question "Jon, are you receiving a DOD paycheck?"
So let me explain a few things, to you, boondoggle. Soltz is still in the military. He still receives a DOD paycheck. He is in violation of UCMJ regulations by a) pandering for a particular candidate b) using his military service to advance a political agenda and c) posting his picture while in uniform (fatiques) on the VoteVet website that promotes Democrat candidates and last but not least, d) speaking out against his superiors, especially his CIC, President Bush.
Also, this clown had the termerity to call down a subordinate, Sgt. Aguila, at the DailyKos Konvention while the Sgt. was quoting military regs. That also is a violation of the UCMJ. You cannot intimidate a subordinate if the subordinate is in the right.
This KosKommie has violated so many UCMJ regs that if brought up on charges before a courts martial, he could be looking at some serious time in Leavenworth. AND HE KNOWS IT AS DID COL. BUZZ PATTERSON.
Let's not drag this down into the mud. Lt. Col. Patterson, Jon Soltz, and General Clark should all be commended for their service. It is reasonable for people to disagree on how our troops should be deployed. That said, I'm in favor of victory in Iraq. In it to win it all the way.
ReplyDeleteYours,
Wince
Dear retire05 -
ReplyDeleteExcellent summary on Soltz's situation. Everyone should read that one again.
Problem is that Hardball may have known Soltz's actions to date have been inappropriate (and against the rules), and so they quickly shut off the conversation.
Shame, that viewers didn't get the chance to see Soltz for the fraud he really is.
I wasn't impressed. I expected Buzz Patterson to lambast this guy but it ended up being Soltz regurgitating talking points over top of him. To quote Al Franken this guy Soltz is "human filth".
ReplyDeleteUnless things have changed since I left the Nav 7 years ago, you don't get a DOD paycheck for being on IRR. Ususally, after being discharged you serve 2 years in IRR where you function like a normal civilian, with the caveat that you can be yanked back to active duty at any time if needed. It's not like a union job pool.
ReplyDeleteIn the interest of full disclosure, though, I didn't spend much time in IRR, since they counted my time in DEPS(Delayed Entry Program... I went to the recruiter a year or 2 before graduating HS). Either way, though, I was never paid for being in IRR.
I was truly hoping that I was going to see Patterson slapping Soltz down, as described in the blog entry. What I saw was Soltz running circles around Patterson. That's a damn shame...
ReplyDeleteHey Tom, what were those alledged circles you claim Stoltz was running?
ReplyDeleteAll Stoltz seemed to be doing was trying to yell over Buzz's words so as not to be exposed that he was hanging with the seditious...
retire05,
ReplyDeleteIt's the Individual Ready Reserve and you don't receive a DOD paycheck because you're not an active reservist. When one is in the IRR you don't perform any duty and you're basically a civilian that's on a list for a call-up.
Soltz is a punk and he was probably a shitty officer and was probably universally despised when he was a soldier. He showed his true colors on the video at Kos Convention.
Tom wrote: "What I saw was Soltz running circles around Patterson. That's a damn shame..." I watched the video and did not see Soltz do any running, around or otherwise. What I saw was Soltz trying to stop Patterson from speaking by loudly speaking over him. I must say too that he was evasive as to whether he were still receiving military pay. Why?
ReplyDeleteAQ is in Iraq because we are in Iraq. They weren't there before. No matter what you might want to believe, dictators don't like competition.
ReplyDeleteThe real question is what will AQ do when we leave? Oh, but no one wants to discuss that because leaving = losing. The argument is absurd, but it's the one we hear all the time.
Here's my 1 cents, cuz I'm sure I'll be flamed to hell and back: Once we leave, since Iraq is majority Kurd and Shite, not Sunni like AQ, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc, AQ in Iraq likely be destroyed or moved to the Afghan / Pakistan border. The Iraqis will be forced to deal with their own little issues and might even turn out the brand of "justice" W and this crowd likely wishes for. A humanitarian crisis might ensue, but that's never bothered you (and what would you call what they -- notice i didn't say we, cuz we're all sitting pretty in air conditioning -- have now).
War is only good for those who make money off of it. For the rest of us, it's the worst way to resolve anything, because nothing ever gets resolved.
The more y'all insist on staying in Iraq, the longer it'll take to get the locals to do their own dirty work.
You want to keep troops in the Middle East to protect "your" oil, it's not a really good idea. Not when 10s of millions of Arabs get offended, turn their oil money against us, and cause you fools to mortgage our country to China. And y'all worried so much about the Clintons' selling it. YOu just gave it away.
I saw the 'discussion' last night.
ReplyDeleteSoltz is a blowhard. He tried to pass himself off as having served in Iraq...
Matthews was just letting them swing away at each other, I think out of general disgust by Soltz' behavior.
MSNBC has gone out of its way to promote 'their' experts. Sharpton was a nobody, until he had msnbc's soapbox, and I think Soltz was trying to branch out away from Countdown.
MSNBC should take a serious look at who they are booking, and the people who are performing the bookings.
I can sit thru an ignorant matthews when they have quality guests, but this was a joke. It has been a joke for some time, but getting msnbc off my channel list was very cathartic.
I think Soltz is one of the best things going for those who favor the surge/continuing effort.
ReplyDeleteThe left is using a guy who has no charisma, no education,and no military service in Iraq to represent their beliefs.
I hope he becomes as popular a guest as Sharpton. The first question that a reasonable person would ask:
Does this guy have any crediblity? Is this the best that the progressives can do?
an embarrassing human being, who made the democratic party his primary focus, trying to springboard off of prior military service. He stopped being a soldier long ago, even if he is IRR.
retire05
ReplyDeleteI like all the "probably"'s in your comment. Sounds like you don't know too much for sure. Assume much?
With all the venom being spat at Soltz, I'd like to know how he's any different from the talking heads on the right. Fire with fire, boys and girls. This is the enlightened discussion we thought blogs would bring? Looks to me like it's just as you-hit-me, I-hit-you tit-for-tat as talk radio.
We're not engaging in the free marketplace of ideas, we're polluting it.
"I'd like to know how he's any different from the talking heads on the right."
ReplyDeleteUsing the death of Pat Tillamnn to advance his cause, by suggesting he was murdered. It is like a crow feeding off of a carcass. The crow cares about eating, not about the body.
IF, the conspiracy is true, the list of individuals that would have to be involved is ridiculous.
If the conspiracy were true, then it would be easy to provided a detailed list of indiviudals with knowledge. At minimum for that list would be 50 people, any of which by pointing out a deviation(or seeing one) from norm, would have a raised a red flag.
The promotion of the idea that a US soldier was murdered on orders, without any evidence, while the any further investigation is being conducted is absurd.
I'm betting Soltz watched Apocalypse Now-50 times minimum, and finds it an accurate portrayel of the way things are.
Anonymous wrote:
ReplyDeleteWar is only good for those who make money off of it. For the rest of us, it's the worst way to resolve anything, because nothing ever gets resolved.
Funny, but somehow, I doubt that the losers in wars, from the Confederates to Nazis, from Imperial Japan to the South Vietnamese, would agree that "nothing" got resolved.
And I'm sure anonymous, mouthing such platitudes, agrees that nothing would have been resolved by intervening in Rwanda, or was resolved by intervening in Bosnia, or will be resolved if there is an effort to save the people of Darfur.
As for boondoggle, if you believe that such exchanges are polluting the blogosphere, feel free to stop commenting.
Or is this the typical example of your comments are polluting the blogosphere, whereas my comments bring goodness, light, rainbows, and ponies?
the world according to Soltz:
ReplyDelete"You don't mistake someone from 10 yards away."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-soltz/time-for-president-to-com_b_58212.html
30 feet, twilight in a canyon, during a perception of a fire-fight?
The one thing this demonstrates is that Soltz has never been in a fire-fight. Given his axiom of infallability within ten yards, we should charge every friendly dire incident that close as murder.
"You don't mistake someone from 10 yards away."
tell that to the guys who were disciplined. The accounts are here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/03/AR2005050301502.html
Soltz just called these guys murderers.
One can get a paycheck in the IRR - you can request to do AT, ADSW or schools - this will allow you to not nly do things and get paid, but get qualifying years toward retirement. A while back, it was called IRR- Control Group for Annual Training.
ReplyDelete++
ReplyDeletemay be a tad OT, but here ya go anyways.. ;)
"This Is Part Of The Battlefield"
excerpt:
["Technically, he was right," Aguina concedes. "He is a commissioned officer in the army and I follow the rules. I will respect his authority which is why today, I came in civilian uniform."
Aguina spoke to Pajamas Media on Saturday, returning to YearlyKos the day after he was led away from the panel by Soltz, now blending into the crowd in a charcoal gray suit with a white shirt and a black tie.
Despite his change of wardrobe, he remains boiling mad at Solz for angrily chastising him in public for violating military regulations. If he wants to get technical about it, Aguina counters, two can play at that game.
"If I'm in violation of AR670-1 which is the regulation he brought up, then he's in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 88 which says no commissioned officer can criticize a government official."
Aguina also pointed out that Stolz violated the code of behavior between a commissioned and non commissioned officer. "Article 91," he said, forbids a commissioned officer from criticizing a non commissioned officer, and behaving in the "condescending" manner in which he was treated. "People in that audience didn't have to see an American soldier be as rude and disrespectful toward another American soldier."]
==
Buzz should know that with a few exceptions not applicable here, the UCMJ applies to members of a regular component of the armed forces or to reservists on inactive-duty training.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.military-network.com/main_ucmj/SUBCHAPTERI.htm#802
And so should you, retire05.
Full cite:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.military-network.com/main_ucmj/SUBCHAPTERI.htm#802
Dang. Oh well, it's Art. 2, Ch. 47, 10 USC
ReplyDeletebg - Arguina, like Buzzie, is wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe UCMJ applies to him because he is a member of the regular armed forces. Soltz is not.
See Art. 2 of the UCMJ, cited above
Oh and PS to retire05 - Kerry was not "receiving a DoD paycheck" as a member of the IRR when he was "tooling around" with Fonda, Hayden, and Kennedy back in the day. You could look it up.
ReplyDelete++
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 9:15 AM
well i honestly don't know my butt from my elbow when it comes to this stuff, just following what i've been reading.. of which the consesus is, as far as the following issue is concerned, in agreement..
Why Jon Soltz Blew It
excerpt:
[What was not appropriate was to "pull rank" while a YearlyKos moderator from the session's stage. The moment Mr. Jon Soltz announced himself as Captain Jon Soltz and threatened the Sergeant [Aguina] from a position of military authority - by virtue of his rank - from the stage of the YearlyKos session, he may have put himself in a deeper predicament than the Sergeant [Aguina] faced (see 5 C.F.R. 2635.807(b) Reference to official position.).]
as to whether or not Soltz recieves a DOD paycheck, i certainly don't know, and he's certainly not telling.. however, it stikes me odd that he just didn't come right out and say "no, i do not recieve a DOD paycheck" regardless..
and please pardon if a dumb question.. but if Soltz is classified as a civilian, then how can he pull military rank, and why might he be in trouble for it??
thanks..
==
Soltz was entitled to question the propriety of a uniformed soldier speaking in that environment, even threatening to report him, regardless of his military background - any citizen has a right to do so. Speaking as "a captain to a sargeant" is really meaningless in this context, and I suspect he just got carried away by the affront to protocol.
ReplyDeleteAs to whether he violated that provision of the CFR, Soltz is not an "employee" for purposes of the prohibition on reference to official position. Even if he were - say he was on active duty or inactive duty training - it would only apply if he was engaged in "teaching, speaking or writing as outside employment or as an outside activity" to identify himself in connection with that activity or to promote the outside undertaking. Using the info for biographical purposes doesn't count. Responding to someone by saying "I am speaking as a captain" wouldn't count either.
If Soltz is a member of the Individual Ready Reserves, he doesn't get a DoD paycheck. However, Buzz Patterson, as a retired military officer, probably does - and if so he is subject to the UCMJ.
So maybe we should consider the appropriateness of some of Buzz's statements, especially in light of Article 88.
Sorry, I meant to respond to the other part of your question, bg.
ReplyDeleteWhy didn't Soltz just say "I don't get a DoD paycheck"?
Probably didn't get a chance to squeeze a word in edgewise.
It came off almost as an afterthought that Patterson tossed out at the end.
++
ReplyDeletethanks Anonymous @ 3:45 PM & 3:48 PM
while i don't agree in totality, Soltz is a political anti-war activist.. speaking in regards to his activities in realtion to the Military.. whereas Aguina (albeit in uniform), was not speaking "politically".. but at any rate.. i did get a big laugh out of the following..
[Probably didn't get a chance
to squeeze a word in edgewise.]
either you didn't watch the tape,
or didn't listen very well.. :D
==
We'll have to agree to disagree on that one, bg. ;-)
ReplyDeleteWow, that's embarrassing, honestly, for both of them. It was basically, Soltz: "I was there, man!" Patterson: "So was I, you idiot!"
ReplyDeleteBoth of them sounded nutty. And Patterson should have nailed Soltz on the whole "Al Qaeda is not in Iraq" from the beginning but he *didn't*. Instead he came across as yet another Republican obsessed with Clinton. Soltz didn't come across well, either, because he was obviously trying to prevent anyone else from talking.
"why might [Soltz] be in trouble for [pulling rank]??"
If a civilian "pulls rank" he might be charged with impersonating a commissioned officer. But I doubt they would go after him simply because they wouldn't want to give him another soapbox.
Most everyone seems to be missing the point about the topic of the discussion. The question was whether Hilary is a Hawk or a dove? There is no possible way Soltz could speak to this better than Buzz, a man who was around the Clinton White House for two years. To pull the conversation away from that fact, Soltz steered the conversation into an argument about who has more combat service. Soltz is a sorry example of a military officer turned beltway liberal. He needs to just shut up go away.
ReplyDeleteFrom:
Former Marine and National Guardsman
To Former Marine:
ReplyDeleteActually, it was a silly question. There's no way that one can prove Hillary is 100% hawk or 100% dove.
Solz pointed that out, and then talked about verifiable information - her work on the Armed Services Committee, her votes, her public statements, and her work over the past 6 years as a U.S. Senator.
Buzz, on the other hand, resorted to his personal opinion of her as a "Wellesely, Socialist, anti-American" etc etc, based on his time working in proximity to Bill Clinton. Did he sit in on war policy discussions led by Hillary? Evidently not, because when pressed for evidence by Matthews, he could only pull up the old, long-debunked urban myth that Hillary "tried to ban uniforms" at the WH.
I know CPT Soltz, and I think he should be relieved for cause of his command. How can soldiers trust him enough to follow him in combat when he's doing this back home. Resign your commission then protest CPT Soltz.
ReplyDelete