Dayhoff Soundtrack

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

20070903 DoD Transcript News Briefing with Secretary Gates Al Asad Air Base in Iraq

DoD Transcript News Briefing with Secretary Gates and National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and Deputy National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute at Al Asad Air Base in Iraq

U.S. Department of Defense

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

News Transcript

Presenter: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, National Security Advisor

Stephen Hadley and Assistant to the President and Deputy National

Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute

September 03, 2007 2:00 PM EDT

DoD News Briefing with Secretary Gates, Stephen Hadley and Lt. Gen. Lute from Al Asad Air Base, Iraq

SECRETARY GATES: Well I hope that you all thought that the trip was worthwhile. Because we were concerned that you all might not be adequately cared for since we were separate – we came in separately from the president’s plane, I wanted to do this. So I have a “three-for” you here tonight. Steve Hadley, myself and Doug Lute. And I’ll ask Steve to just say a few about the purpose of trip, and then we’ll open it up for questions – all on the record.

MR. HADLEY: We thought about this five or six weeks ago. Obviously we’re going into an important week, week after next in Washington with General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker coming back and reporting. And the president thought it was important for him to come to Iraq and hear firsthand from Gen Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker about how they saw the situation – the assessment, their assessment of the situation.

He also thought it was important to have a face-to-face meeting with the leaders of the Iraqi national government before we went into this important week and important debate back in Washington. And it was particularly appropriate to do so since just a little over a week ago the five principal leaders of the various groups in this country got together and signed a document, in which they as you well know, talked about how they were going to work together to move an agenda forward in this country, had made some progress on issues involving de-baathification and provincial powers, which hopefully will set up some provincial elections, and talked a way forward about addressing some other issues.

So the president wanted to congratulate them, and he did in his meeting today. Congratulate them for the achievement of a week, 10 days ago, but also emphasize that that could only be a starting point. They now need to press forward to get resolution of a number of those issues as well.

And finally, he thought it was appropriate to come to Anbar province. A lot of discussion about what has gone on here on this province, which is very important for the future of Iraq. You may remember in the speech he made in January of ‘07, when he talked about the reinforcement for the surge. It was really for two purposes. One, to get sectarian violence down, which was centered in Baghdad. And secondly, to try and take advantage of what was beginning to happen in Anbar provinces (sic) with local political leaders and tribal sheiks coming together to fight al Qaida.

And that process with the leadership of our civilians here and with the huge contribution made by our men and women in uniform. And the reinforcement of those troops that the president announced last January. We’ve really seen some remarkable progress here. A progress against al Qaida. A coming together of local political leaders to begin to provide security and services to the locality. And beginning to reach out and connect with the Iraqi government. The president wanted to hear from those leaders firsthand – thank them for what they’ve done for Iraq, what they’ve done for the war against al Qaida, and for helping to make Anbar a place that will not be a safe haven from which al Qaida can plot against the United States.

And finally, in that meeting, he wanted to have a session with both the Anbar leaders, but also Iraq’s national leaders to encourage this connection – support from the national leaders to the Anbar leaders here in terms of economic and other support so they can begin to show a difference in the lives of their people. And similarly inviting the leaders of Anbar to begin to try and make a contribution for the broader reconciliation process that needs to go forward in Baghdad.

So, that was the concept of the trip, and it reflected in the meetings that the president had today. And it’s been a good day, and of course, the most important thing is then to end it speaking directly to the men and women in uniform and thanking them for their terrific contribution they’ve made here.

SECRETARY GATES: I might just say a word since we haven’t talked for several days about the process that we went through this week. I felt it was very important that the president have the opportunity to speak directly to each of his senior military commanders and to get their views on the way forward. Admiral Fallon and Central Command had been doing their own analysis. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, under the leadership of General Pace, have been doing their own analysis. And, of course, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker have been doing theirs. So we had opportunities on these conference, televised conference settings, for General Petraeus to tell the president his assessment and what he was thinking about. We had an opportunity for Admiral Fallon to do the same with the president. Actually during that same session, but Admiral Fallon was there in person. And then as you well know, the president came over to the Pentagon on Friday and heard from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

And so I thought it was important for the president to hear directly from these commanders, not filtered through me, or even summarized by General Pace. And I think that’s been a very satisfactory, a very satisfactory process.

Q: Mr. Secretary, we wanted to ask you about one of the comments the president made outside that caught our attention, which was his reference to if security conditions continued to improve that it would be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces. Could you elaborate on that a bit in terms of what time frame he’s talking about and if he’s talking about Anbar province in particular (inaudible) ?

SECRETARY GATES: Well I don’t want to, first of all I don’t want to preempt General Petraeus’ testimony on the hill a week from I guess today and tomorrow. But clearly, that is one of the central issues that everyone has been examining. What is the security situation? What do we expect the security situation to be in the months ahead? And I would say in the next several months. And what opportunities does that provide in terms of maintaining the security situation while perhaps beginning to bring the troop levels down? That’s what everybody’s been looking at. That’s what we’ve been examining. And I think I’ll just let the president’s words speak for themselves without foreshadowing what General Petraeus is going to say.

Q: If I could just follow up Mr. Secretary. Was he referring to Iraq as a whole or specifically about Anbar in those remarks? Or how do you view the situation?

SECRETARY GATES: I think he was referring to Iraq as a whole.

Q: (inaudible) If I could just follow up one more – (inaudible) you’ve stated quite often that troop numbers will come down as conditions permit. So I guess I’m sort of wondering whether there’s some new understanding that withdrawals are possible. Whether there’s a timetable under consideration for withdrawing troops or whether we’re still at the stage we were, we’ve been at for a number of years, which is as security improves we will look at it and then make a decision (inaudible) troops?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, let me answer and then invite Steve to answer. I think there is the general view that certainly her in Anbar the security situation has improved. It has improved in other parts of Iraq as well. And so we’re trying to look at Iraq in its different pieces, and clearly there is hard work that remains to be done in some, but the situation elsewhere is in pretty good shape. And so that’s the kind of analysis that has been driving the work that’s been going on.

MR. HADLEY: He said security; we’ve seen some improvements of security. A lot of work ahead. We’ve seen some improvement in the Iraqi Security Forces. So the issue is, are we at the point where we can continue to make security progress and reduce the number of forces. As the president said very clearly, the starting point for that debate, for him, is the report from our commanders on the ground, informed by Admiral Fallon and secretary of defense, and Pace and the joint chiefs. And that’s what will begin to play out when General Petraeus returns to Washington and begins his testimony to Congress a week from today, a week from tomorrow.

Q: (cross-talk)

MR. HADLEY: So, what he was trying to do was frame the issue, and then give General Petraeus an opportunity to present it to the Congress and to the American people. And that’s how he wants to proceed.

SECRETARY GATES: I might add I also have an opinion on this.

Q: What is your opinion?

SECRETARY GATES: I will share it at the appropriate time.

Q: (inaudible)

SECRETARY GATES: Yes, I think so.

Q: Can you talk about how important it was that all the commanders give the president directly their thoughts? How are the differences between where your commanders and your military commanders are? Are they wide difference or are they very narrow – there’s general agreement on some principles? (inaudible).

SECRETARY GATES: I’m going to answer that question kind of enigmatically. Just because I wanted the commanders to present their views independently and directly to the president does not necessarily mean they were in disagreement.

Q: (inaudible) presented their analysis will come in the future, and will be presented separately or together?

SECRETARY GATES: The president already has it. That’s what we did this week.

Q: Are you expecting the president to make some sort of major speech or pronouncement on the way forward for the next several months after he gets the Petraeus/Crocker report?

MR. HADLEY: I think you can expect at some point the president will, having had General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker and an opportunity to speak to the Congress, the president having heard from them, the secretary of defense, his combatant commander Admiral Fallon, General Pace, the joint chiefs, Secretary Rice, and having heard the political side from Ambassador Crocker, and then pulling on what he’s learned today, I think you can expect at some point the president is going to tell the American people what he thinks, and outline the way forward based on these inputs.

The president actually said that several months ago. He said he would get the reports that I’ve just described. He would talk to, consult quietly with members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, and then he would make his decision. And when he does make that decision, I’m sure he’ll have an opportunity to explain it to the country.

STAFF: In the interest of preserving your filing time, let’s take one more question.

Q: When the American people look at the surge strategy and whether it’s had a positive impact, has it had a positive impact in Anbar or is the successes in Anbar been kind of a serendipitous event that’s been extraneous to the surge?

SECRETARY GATES: Let me start and then Steve follow up, and Doug if he wants to say something. I think that what has happened in Anbar is not just fortuitous. The strategy out here to try and enlist the help of the sheikhs, for the tribal leaders to come together began, for all practical purposes, almost a year ago. We have seen, the fruit of that effort has really become more apparent in the last few months, but it has been underway for quite some time with a lot of courageous leadership by the Anbaris themselves.

But they were very explicit in their comments to the president today that it was the additional, the presence of the additional U.S. forces, the Marines that came in, that helped cement the gains they felt they had made but were at risk and made the situation in their view one that is pretty stable as far as they’re concerned. General Lute.

GEN. LUTE: Yeah, I’d just add that the president last January announced an addition of 4,000 Marines to al Anbar, and they’ve been here serving since then. But the Anbaris themselves have added 20,000 Anbaris to the rolls of the Iraqi Security Forces. So you get a sense of order of magnitude here. Four thousand additional Americans perhaps served as a catalyst for something that actually started before they arrived, and helped us promote the addition of about 20,000 Anbaris to Iraqi Security Forces.

MR. HADLEY: This is not serendipity. If you remember the president’s speech January of last year, he focused on two things. Reinforcements into Baghdad to deal with sectarian violence, and reinforcements to Anbar to take advantage of the opportunities that he saw emerging and that had been worked on. So this was part of the plan, and an essential part of the plan that he outlined in January of last year.

GEN. LUTE: If I may, one other thought on Anbar, though, and we shouldn’t leave without this. There an the American contribution, there was an Anbari contribution; we should not underplay the prominence of what al Qaida did here to spark these moves. It was really al Qaida which overplayed its hand here, and I think if you look across the Arab world, Anbar province in Iraq is the place where al Qaida said it was going to plant its flag and create Anbar as the cornerstone of its caliphate. And what we’ve seen now, I think first time in the Arab world, is that the Anbaris have said, “Not here; you’re not doing that.” And they rejected the al Qaida vision. So al Qaida played a role in what happened here in Anbar as well.

SECRETARY GATES: In fact, it was said explicitly today that for the first time a Middle Eastern people got to see what rule by al Qaida would be like, and the Iraqis rejected it.

Q: Mr. Secretary, if I may, what was the atmosphere like in the meeting between the tribal sheikhs and the Maliki government. I mean I think anyone would acknowledge there’s still strains in those relationships. Could you give us a sense of whether they just showed up or if there was a feeling of reconciliation? What was it like?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think, actually, there was, I think, a good feeling, and each of the elements – there was also some military in there, we had the provincial governor there, we had the sheikhs, and we had the national leaders. And I would say there was a sense of shared purpose among them, that they were all in this together. And then there was some, what I consider some good-natured jousting about resources, and who’s going to get what in terms of reconstruction and so on.

STAFF: Thank you all.

http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=4031

But I actually think I frist had this transcript called to my attention on the Global Security web site…

####

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

20070903 Remarks By The President To The Troops

Remarks By The President To The Troops

September 3^rd, 2007

As you are aware, President Bush made a surprise visit to Iraq to spend time with our troops. Here are his remarks. The President is now off to Australia for an APEC Summit.

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

(Al-Anbar Province, Iraq)

For Immediate Release September 3, 2007

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

TO THE TROOPS

Al-Asad Airbase

Al-Anbar Province, Iraq

9:43 P.M. (Local)

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. General, thank you very much. It's an honor to be with you.

As you know, today is Labor Day back home -- (hooah) -- so I thought I'd come by to thank you for all your hard work. (Hooah.) Every day -- every day -- you show bravery under incredibly difficult circumstances. Every day you're doing work on the sands of Anbar that is making it safer in the streets of America. And every day the United States of America is grateful for what you're doing. I want you to tell your families the Commander-in-Chief stopped by to say hello, and he said, I'm incredibly proud to be the Commander-in-Chief of such a great group of men and women. (Applause.)

I'm keeping pretty good company, as you can see. I brought out the A Team so they could be with the folks who are making a significant difference in this war against these radicals and extremists. In Anbar you're seeing firsthand the dramatic differences that can come when the Iraqis are more secure. In other words, you're seeing success.

You see Sunnis who once fought side by side with al Qaeda against coalition troops now fighting side by side with coalition troops against al Qaeda. Anbar is a huge province. It was once written off as lost. It is now one of the safest places in Iraq. (Hooah.) Because of your hard work, because of your bravery and sacrifice, you are denying al Qaeda a safe haven from which to plot and plan and carry out attacks against the United States of America. What you're doing here is making this country safer, and I thank you for your hard work. (Hooah.)

The surge of operations that began in June is improving security throughout Iraq. The military successes are paving the way for the political reconciliation and economic progress the Iraqis need to transform their country. When Iraqis feel safe in their own homes and neighborhoods, they can focus their efforts on building a stable, civil society with functioning government structures at the local and provincial and national levels. And that's important, because a free Iraq, an Iraq that's an ally against these extremists and murderers will be a major defeat for the terrorists.

Earlier today I met with some of the tribal sheiks here in Anbar. It was a really interesting meeting. And at the table were the leaders of the central government, as well. They told me that the kind of bottom-up progress that your efforts are bringing to Anbar is vital to the success and stability of a free Iraq. See, Iraqis need this stability to build a more peaceful future. And America needs this stability to prevent the chaos that allows the terrorists to set up bases from which the y can plot and plan attacks on our homeland.

The very people that you helped the Iraqis defeat in Anbar swore allegiance to the man that ordered the attack on the United States of America. What happens here in Anbar matters to the security of the United States.

And so I thank you for your sacrifice. I thank you for volunteering in the face of danger. I thank you for your courage and your bravery. Every day you are successful here in Iraq draws nearer to the day when America can begin calling you and your fellow servicemen and women home.

But I want to tell you this about the decision -- about my decision about troop levels. Those decisions will be based on a calm assessment by our military commanders on the conditions on the ground -- not a nervous reaction by Washington politicians to poll results in the media. (Hooah.) In other words, when we begin to draw down troops from Iraq, it will be from a position of strength and success, not from a position of fear and failure. To do otherwise would embolden our enemies and make it more likely that they would attack u s at home. If we let our enemies back us out of Iraq, we will more likely face them in America. If we don't want to hear their footsteps back home, we have to keep them on their heels over here. And that's exactly what you're doing, and America is safer for it.

In Anbar you're doing this hard work every day. We've all come to say thank you. We've come to tell you the American people are standing with you. They're grateful for your sacrifice. As Commander-in-Chief, I'm proud to be in your presence on this Labor Day. I ask for God's blessings on you and your family, and may God continue to bless America. Thank you. (Applause.)

END 9:49 P.M. (Local)

20070824 Louna Primm joins New Windsor State Bank

Louna Primm joins New Windsor State Bank

September 4^th, 2007 - - Got some feedback and questions about this earlier in the day – and this is all I know:

Press Release – August 24, 2007

New Chief Lending Officer/Executive Vice President
Joins New Windsor State Bank

The New Windsor State Bank is very pleased to announce that Louna S. Primm recently joined the bank in the position of Executive Vice President and Chief Lending Officer and is responsible for all of NWSB’s lending activities which include commercial, residential and consumer lending.

Mrs. Primm has more than 40 years of community banking experience in Carroll County. Mrs. Primm’s office is located in New Windsor State Bank’s Professional Center Offices located at 222 East Baltimore Street in Taneytown. Mrs. Primm can be contacted at 410-871-0797.

Mrs. Primm is a graduate of The National Commercial Lending School, The Maryland Banking School and The Stonier Graduate School of Banking.

Mrs. Primm currently serves as Vice Chairman for the Carroll Community College Foundation Board of Trustees, member of the Board of Managers of the YMCA of Central Maryland Carroll County Family Branch, member of the Board of Trustees of Carroll Hospice, Inc., member of the Board of Directors of the Warfield Development Corporation, member of the State of Maryland Economic Development Assistance Authority (DEBD), member of the Board of Trustees of Carroll Lutheran Village, and is a member of the Greater Westminster Development Corporation and McDaniel College Women’s Leadership Network Committee.

The Daily Record named Mrs. Primm as one of Maryland’s Top 100 Women for the year 2003 and again in 2005.

The New Windsor State Bank, headquartered in New Windsor, Maryland, has been proudly serving the financial needs of the citizens and businesses of Carroll County since 1932 and is celebrating its 75^th Anniversary. New Windsor State Bank is a full service community Bank with convenient branches in Westminster, New Windsor, Mt. Airy and Taneytown.

For further information regarding the above, or about the New Windsor State Bank and our approach to true community banking, please contact:

The New Windsor State Bank

Attn: Lisa Monthley, 222 East Baltimore Street, Taneytown, Maryland 21787
(410) 549-1414

20070904 Quote of the day - Two things

Quote of the day – Two things

Tuesday, September 4^th, 2007

To do great and important tasks, two things are necessary: a plan and not quite enough time.

Author unknown

Thanks TC

20070904 An answer to Mr. Duck’s question about Port Tobacco

An answer to Mr. Duck’s question about Port Tobacco

September 4^th, 2007

Dear Mr. Delusional Duck,

Of course, you are aware that there is no such thing as a silly question.

Although I have not dealt with Port Tobacco officials in recent years, to the best of my knowledge, Port Tobacco is still a functioning municipality with active government officials and an active government. I just called the executive director of the Maryland Municipal League, Scott Hancock and he confirmed it.

The current information on Port Tobacco can be found on the Maryland Municipal League web site, which can be found here: http://www.mdmunicipal.org/mmlhome/index.cfm

A brief description of Port Tobacco can be found here: http://www.mdmunicipal.org/cities/index.cfm?townname=PortTobacco&page=home

A link list for all Maryland municipalities can be found here: http://www.mdmunicipal.org/cities/citiesweb.cfm

Please save/bookmark the Maryland Municipal League web site address: http://www.mdmunicipal.org/mmlhome/index.cfm

For any questions about municipalities in the state of Maryland, the Maryland Municipal League (MML) should be your first stop.

If the information is not readily available on the web site, there are phone numbers on the web site for you to call a Maryland Municipal League staff member (http://www.mdmunicipal.org/about/staff.cfm) who you will find to be very much in the customer service business and will be very helpful and knowledgeable. They are a wonderful, friendly, and extraordinarily helpful group of folks.

Please find an overview of the organization here: http://www.mdmunicipal.org/about/overview.cfm

Briefly: The Maryland Municipal League, founded in 1936, works as a advocate for municipalities throughout the State of Maryland, strengthening the role and capacity of municipal government through research, legislation, technical assistance, training and the dissemination of information for its members.

MML is a statewide organization in Maryland composed solely of municipal officials.

The Maryland Municipal League represents 157 municipal governments and 2 special taxing districts throughout the state of Maryland. The MML is a voluntary, nonprofit, nonpartisan association controlled and maintained by city and town governments.

Disclosure: I served on the Maryland Municipal League Board of Directors annually for five consecutive years, from June 2000 to May 2005.

I graduated from the University of Maryland Academy for Excellence in Local Government in June 2001.

I served on the Maryland Municipal League’s Legislative Committee in 1999-2000 and 2001-2002.

I served as Secretary/Treasurer of the Carroll County Chapter of the Maryland Municipal League for five years (12/07/1999 – 05/16/2005).

I was first elected to the Westminster City Council in May of 1999 and served as the Mayor of Westminster from May 2001 until May 16th, 2005.]

Any additional questions – never hesitate to be in touch. Although I am no longer an elected municipal official, I remain passionate about the good work most local municipal government performs for the citizens we serve. I have not a clue as to why all urban concentrations are not incorporated. Local folks making decisions for local families is always the best way to preserve and protect quality of life and health, safety and welfare.

Thanks for all the great work on the blog. We were all happy for ya to get the attention of the Washington Post… “'Duck' Blog Spreads Its Wings in Charles” on August 26^th, 2007

Kevin Dayhoff www.kevindayhoff.net

Posts on “Soundtrack” about the Maryland Municipal League: http://kevindayhoff.blogspot.com/search/label/Maryland%20Municipal%20League

Pasted here for your convenience are links for information on all of Maryland municipalities – on the MML web site:

A B C D E F G H I J K L

Chevy Chase Section 3

Chevy Chase Section 5

M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

20070904 How to Avoid the Freshman 15

How to Avoid the Freshman 15

September 4^th, 2007

This post is dedicated to everyone who just dropped-off a loved-one at college.

I try and follow nutrition issues because a younger family member wants to be a nutritionist and I felt that a good uncle would wanna participate in meaningful conversations… I’m not sure that it’s working, but that might be the stuff of another conversation.

I was howling when I read the part “Unfortunately, as a diet plan, 47 bowls of cereal per day doesn't work so well.”

Our loved-one, whom we just dropped-off at college, immediately bypassed the fresh fruit, tempting wraps, and salads and began wolfing-down bowls of cereal… As much as I am also a cereal-lover myself, cereal must be a college freshman thing.

Me, I was addicted to macaroni and cheese in college. We would purchase it by the case.

Anyway… I just received this in an e-mail…

from Jen Hubley

When I was in school, there was a rumor going around that the cafeteria meat arrived in large crates marked: GRADE D. SUITABLE FOR PRISONS AND STATE UNIVERSITIES. The taste of the food did nothing to dispel the myth.

In the Spotlight

5 Ways to Get Fat in College

Surprisingly, the general yuckiness of the food did nothing to prevent me from overeating. If anything, it made me stuff food down faster and pig out on desserts more than I normally would. And, of course, all of that led to a common college student disorder: The Mysterious Shrinking Pants Syndrome.
- Exercise Guide Paige Waehner

Fight the Freshman 15

The real culprit was probably the overabundance of carbs we were all eating. If dinner is lousy, it makes sense to load up on free cereal. Unfortunately, as a diet plan, 47 bowls of cereal per day doesn't work so well.

Weight Loss Guide Jennifer R. Scott

Stress and the Freshman 15

If you're an emotional eater, freshman year of college is extra hard. For most of us, it's the first time we were away from home and responsible for ourselves.
- Stress Management Guide Elizabeth Scott, M.S.

####

20070817 “Retirement Wave Building Among House Republicans” by Congressional Quarterly

“Retirement Wave Building Among House Republicans” by Congressional Quarterly

September 4^th, 2007 – Researching different dynamics of the 2008 elections, I recently came across an article in the Congressional Quarterly that helped lay out some of the challenges… Writing for the Congressional Quarterly, Greg Giroux reports that five House Republicans have recently announced their retirement from office – and not seeking re-election…

Retirement ‘Wave’ Building Among House Republicans?

Congressional Quarterly

By Greg Giroux | 3:45 PM; Aug. 17, 2007 |

The announcement Friday by former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., that he will not seek re-election in 2008 capped a week in which three veteran House Republicans in a 24-hour span declared that the current 110th Congress would be their last.

Hastert’s announcement — coupled with similar ones Thursday by Ohio Rep. Deborah Pryce and Mississippi Rep. Charles W. “Chip” Pickering Jr. — brought to five the number of House Republicans who are not seeking re-election next year, compared with two on the Democratic side.

While nearly 15 months remain until the November 2008 election, the retirement decisions of Hastert, Pryce and Pickering will stoke speculation of a larger “wave” of GOP departures that would seriously hamper the party’s quest to make the 16-seat gain that they need to regain the House majority they lost last November.

[…]

Read the rest of the article here: Retirement ‘Wave’ Building Among House Republicans?

20070904 Submerging the truth about the fate of the Chambers Farm

Submerging the truth about the fate of the Chambers Farm.

September 4^th, 2007

Contrary to what is being circulated; the Union Mills reservoir project in Carroll County will add another layer of protection to the site of the “pumpkin papers,” and this national treasure is not threatened.

I just finished reading Submerging History on “Red Maryland” by Mark Newgent - Crossposted: on “The Main Adversary.”

I read – and appreciate both blogs. In my appreciation of both blogs I can only understand that the authors on both blogs want to get it right and understand the importance of making available factual information about any particular subject.

I have also read with great sadness: The House of Chambers [Miller, John J.]

… tried to kill himself, Whittaker Chambers wrote a letter to his . . . spy case, which had driven Chambers to what he called "spiritual . . . land that their son, John Chambers, never has left. "My family will . . .

Posted in National Review / Digital on Friday Aug 10, 2007 at 11:25 AM

I can perhaps understand why Mr. Newgent felt alarmed – and the need to spread that “alarm” about the future of the integrity of such a national treasure as the “Pumpkin Papers”….

In “20070307 A sordid saga of communists, reservoirs, congressman, and pumpkins,” I wrote:

“Folks who have been “had” by the great “seizing” conspiracy are in good company - with ah, count them, 12 members of Congress who wrote to the Carroll County Board of Commissioners on January 12th, 2007…”

[…]

In a response to Congressman Bartlett’s January 3rd, 2007 letter, which he penned in addition to the gang of twelve Congressmen’s January 12, 2007 letter, the Carroll County Board of Commissioners wrote on January 18th, 2007:

“With regard to the Pipe Creek Farm specifically, Carroll County has no intention of negatively impacting the field identified as the location of the famed “pumpkin patch” and has designed the reservoir in a way that minimizes impacts on the balance of the farm. Indeed, the impact anticipated by the planned reservoir… is limited to the northeastern edge of the farm where the Pipe Creek stream crosses the property.

The Pipe Creek farm is already protected from future residential development by easement sold to the Maryland Agricultural land Preservation Foundation (MALPF) in 2001. Carroll County has no interest in acquiring Pipe Creek Farm land for the purpose of constructing the reservoir beyond… the ‘normal pool level.’ We estimate this direct impact on the Pipe Creek farm to equal roughly 15.5 acres. The balance of the farm, approximately 346.5 acres, remains undisturbed and under the full control and ownership of its present owner…”

The “National Review” article painstakingly attempted to be as factual as possible, it nevertheless unfortunately did a disservice to not only the reader but also to the “National Review.” It seemingly purposefully mislead or at least at a minimum easily allowed the reader to be left with the impression that the site of the “Pumpkin Papers” was in danger – when this impression could not be farther from the truth.

I know Carroll County history and I am familiar with the history Whittaker Chambers and the Pumpkin Patch – and I also know the history of the deliberations about building a reservoir at the Union Mills location since it was first discussed in the mid-1970s.

The protection of the site of the Pumpkin Papers and the Chambers Farm has always been of the foremost concern in any discussion. I have known many of the folks behind the proposal and the conservative credentials of one of main promoters of the reservoir (he has since passed away) in the 1970s is beyond reproach.

To be certain, the Union Mills Reservoir is a proposal on a piece of paper and has many regulatory hurdles to cross - - including a survey and assessment of any and all national treasures that may lie within binocular range of the proposed reservoir.

Also, please be aware that the protection of the site of the Pumpkin Papers is important as is the basic health safety and welfare of all Carroll Countians who would benefit from having adequate supplies of drinking water in the future.

These two protections and dynamics are not mutually exclusive.

At this point the only thing “splashing about” in the discussions and deliberations is the misinformation that are being promulgated about the proposed Union Mills Reservoir and any perceived impact on the site of the Pumpkin Papers.

For additional reading please see my other “Soundtrack” posts: Chambers – Whittaker Chambers and the “Pumpkin Papers”

But if you are concerned about the future of the “Pumpkin Patch,” the Chambers Farm and what, if any impact the proposed Union Mills reservoir will have on this irreplaceable national treasure, please read in particuler:

20070323 A reader responds to my post on the Chambers Property and reservoir

And: 20070308 Winchester Report: “A Sordid Saga.”

If anyone has addition thoughts or concerns, please feel free to be in touch.

Kevin Dayhoff

20070831 Hugh Hewitt: A book about Iraqi interpreters in need of being published

Hugh Hewitt: A book about Iraqi interpreters in need of being published

September 4^th, 2007 – I have been meaning to write about the Iraqi translators and interpreters – and as yet have not made the time available. For other posts on Soundtrack on this go to: Iraq War Iraqi translators and interpreters, D9000

And/or read the post: 20070719 AP: Denmark Pulls Out Dozens of Iraqi Aides

Meanwhile Hugh Hewitt has a post about: A book about Iraqi interpreters in need of being published

Friday, August 31, 2007

A Book In Need Of A Publisher

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 10:51 AM

Robert C. J. Parry is a California Army National Guard officer who was in South Baghdad during 2005. While he was there, he worked to train Iraqi police officers, and quickly found that the most important - and undervalued - tool that he had was the Iraqi interpreters who translated everything his team said.

Without them, there was no training. And without training Iraqi Security Forces, there is no way we can be victorious. However, just being an interpreter means taking you life into your hands - hundreds of them have been murdered - and going on patrol means facing the same risks as soldiers. One "terp" from Robert's battalion was killed by an IED.

Robert is a public relations executive, a recently graduated USC MBA and published author of several OpEds in the Los Angeles Times and Los Angeles Daily News.

He's currently circulating a manuscript, and is looking for an agent or publisher who is interestd in telling this compelling story of brave Iraqis who have gone "all in" with their American liberators. They remember what life was like under Hussein, and what life will be like if freedom fails.

[…]

It is a short post – read the entire article here: A Book In Need Of A Publisher

20070903 Panama set to begin $5bn project

Panama set to begin $5bn project

Monday, 3 September 2007

This very brief article caught my eye as I have always been fascinated with the history of, and the building and operation of the Panama Canal. I have had friends take a cruise through the canal and their reports confirm that it remains on my list of “must things to do” before I get too old to enjoy.

Panama is set to start work on a $5bn (£2.4bn) building project to widen the Panama Canal to increase its capacity.

The project involves adding a third set of locks that will enable modern ships to use the canal. Many tankers are now too large for the 50-mile (80km) route.

Panama residents overwhelmingly backed the plan in a referendum held in 2006.

The entire, albeit very short article can be found here: Panama set to begin $5bn project

Sunday, September 02, 2007

20070828 Gonzales and the D.C. sharks

Gonzales and the D.C. sharks

Jay Ambrose (read his brief bio here: Jay Ambrose Senior Fellow Independence Institute brief bio) has written an illuminating take on Alberto resigning as U. S. attorney general.

Hat Tip: Carroll County Times: Gonzales driven by beliefs By Jay Ambrose in the Sunday, September 02, 2007 publication of the paper

Gonzales and the D.C. sharks

Alberto Gonzales is resigning as U.S. attorney general, and here is what critics of all stripes are saying: He was blindly, brainlessly loyal to President Bush, gave atrocious advice, was an incompetent managerial mangler and klutzy in his own self-defense.

[…]

Where some critics go wrong is in supposing the Gonzales recommendations were nothing more than a lickspittle exercise of telling Bush what he wanted to hear. The assumption is that, for this hardworking son of a construction worker, being constantly in agreement was the loyal thing to do to a benefactor who as governor of Texas had appointed him to three top state positions and then, as president, brought him to Washington's upper echelons.

Gonzales has surely been loyal to Bush, but a better explanation of his advice comes from a supporter pointing to Gonzales' far-from-erroneous belief that the 9/11 attacks revealed a major security threat requiring different answers from what previously had protected the nation. It wasn't spineless groveling that brought him to some advice that, in the estimation of many, went much too far, but a sense of immense responsibility for keeping this nation safe.

The critics seem to me most amiss in applauding the all-out assault on Gonzales for the firing of nine U.S. attorneys. While there are hints of unethical doings here, that's about it: hints. Nothing illegal has been demonstrated, and it remains a fact despite leftist shoulder-shrugging that President Bill Clinton fired 93 U.S. attorneys as his political prerogative with scarcely a murmur of protest.

[…]

In the end, the Gonzales story seems one about a decent man who came to Washington not as a total innocent, but as someone who didn't know exactly what he was letting himself in for and without certain skills required for thriving or even surviving at top levels. He's headed elsewhere soon, but may find himself pursued by D.C. sharks intent on taking more bites out of his hide. That possibility speaks more poorly of the country's current political temper than it does of Gonzales.

Jay Ambrose, formerly Washington director of editorial policy for Scripps Howard newspapers is a columnist living in Colorado.

Read the entire column here “Gonzales driven by beliefs By Jay Ambrose” on the Carroll County Times website or if you are reading this at a later date and the Carroll County Times’ link is dead – go here: Gonzales and the D.C. sharks