Saturday, March 3, 2007

The Iranian Threat


Adel Assadinia, a former career diplomat who was Iran's consul-general in Dubai and an adviser to the Iranian foreign ministry before defecting to the West, is alleging that Iran is infiltrating the Shia populations throughout the Middle East and establishing sleeper cells.


Were America or Israel to attack Iran, such cells would be instructed to foment long-dormant sectarian grievances and attack the extensive American and European business interests in wealthy states such as Dubai and Saudi Arabia. Such a scenario would bring chaos to the Gulf, one of the few areas of the Middle East that remains prosperous and has largely pro-Western governments.

Read the whole story here.

Read More...

Whither France?

With the first round of elections in France seven weeks away, the Telegraph peers across the channel to take a look at the state of France and the voters' choices -- Nicholas Sarkozy and Segolene Royal.

Sarkozy is certainly the most pro-U.S. candidate to have graced French politics in many a year, and his instincts seem to be good.


In his thirties he became close to Jacques Chirac, then Mayor of Paris, and rose quickly through the ranks of Chirac's RPR party, although the pair later fell out and now barely speak. By then, Sarkozy had made a reputation for himself as a straight-talking Rightist with an unusual disdain for France's attachment to welfare and workers' "rights". He has balked at the near-ritual obligation to badmouth America, called for the European Union to scale down the grandiosity of its political ambitions, and as Interior Minister condemned mobs of predominantly-Muslim rioters as "scum", demanding tougher controls on immigration.


His opponent is the far left Ms. Royal, an incredibly utopian socialist.


Certainly in comparison to Segolene Royal, his glossily-packaged, 52-year-old socialist rival whose hyper-choreographed campaign appearances resemble electoral karaoke. Hailing from the over-educated administrative elite, Segolene is living proof of the argument that France needs to change. Declaring, before an ashen-faced gathering of business leaders, that "money is my lifelong enemy", she announced plans to strip everyone earning above £30,000 a year of even more of it.

Right now, Sarkozy is leading in the polls. But even if he wins, he will face tremendous problems.
Sarkozy portrays modern France as a failing society; arrogant, workshy and perniciously resistant to change. In contrast, he holds Britain up as an example to be emulated: "London has become the seventh largest French city," he writes. "It ceaselessly sucks in thousands of young French people - including my own daughter - who find it easier to succeed there than at home. How shameful is it that a young person wanting to get on is obliged to leave?"
. . . .
France's idea of immunity to progress is a dangerous one. [A French business owner] will typically be paying 50 per cent income tax and 19.6 per cent VAT, plus property tax, business tax, rubbish collection tax, licensed premises tax, and a special "solidarity" tax to support the unemployed. Sarko knows it can't go on. "How," he asks, "can we continue to believe that by taxing more and working fewer hours, we can ever create wealth and jobs?" His problem is that the voters know he knows it, and an alarming number of them wish he didn't.

We will have to wait for the results of the election. But if, as seems probable, Sarkozy wins, we may be treated to a sea change in French politics and foreign policy. Regardless, any change has to be an improvement over the current craven and oh so cynical Mr. Chirac.

Read More...

The Cross and the Nuke

In an interesting opinion piece, the Bishop of Rochester comes out in support of modernizing Britain's nuclear weapons stockpile and criticizes the Church of England for taking a 'holier then thou' contra opinion. Read the entire article.

Read More...

Panacea of Diplomacy and Senator Borah


Dr. Santy, with help from Sigmund, Carl and Alfred, examines the left's panacea of engaging in diplomacy with Iran and Syria as the best, and indeed, only possible solution to the threats those countries represent. She believes, and I agree, that such diplomacy presents no realistic possibility of working and, indeed, would likely be counterproductive. As Dr. Santy explains:

Expecting diplomacy--that refuses to take into account the psychological or social realities of North Korea or Iran and the psychopathologies of its leaders--to alter those dysfunctional regimes is completely unrealistic. In this sense, the West is behaving similarly to the battered spouse who fervently believes that a spoonful of medicine down her own throat will change the abusive behaviors of her husband.

It won't.

Diplomacy by itself, that ignores external reality is destined not to work either.
. . . .
. . . I'm not sure that the [left] who are vocally for "peace in our time" will grasp what it is they are doing to enable the enemies of peace, and to make the liklihood of our being attacked much greater.

Please read her entire post. I could not agree more.

In Iran, and indeed, througout the world where Wahabbi Islam is practiced, we face an existential foe whom we will defeat or by whom we will be defeated. The disconnect with reality of the liberals today can best be shown by historical analogy to Senator William Borah of Idaho (pictured above) who, in 1939, after learning that Hitler had invaded Poland, said, "Lord, if only I could have talked with Hitler, all this might have been avoided."

Read More...

"Cold Cash" Jefferson, the Bush Dept. of Justice, & a Lingering Question


In the American Thinker today, Phillip Gallagher asks Where's the Outrage about William Jefferson, the Democratic representative caught with almost $90,000 of bribe money in his freezer, but who was subsequently reelected to his seat, to this day remains unindicted, and is now on the verge of being named to the sensitive Homeland Security panel by Nancy Pelosi -- the woman who promised us the most ethical House in history. She is not off to a good start.

There are at least three troubling aspects to this whole story, not the least of which is how Ms. Pelosi could think it appropriate to assign Cold Cash to a panel that deals with classified information and national security. But that aside, as Mr. Gallagher notes, "it is the Justice Department that is to blame."

I have to concur. This whole situation surrounding William Jefferson has taken so much time as to border on the surreal. A New Orleans newspaper advanced the theory that the Justice Department did not want to indict Cold Cash before the November election and thus stand accused of partisanship. But that theory does not hold water now.


Well the election is long over and we have the specter of a suspected major security risk sitting on one of the most sensitive congressional committees and still no action by the Justice Department. What can be the reason? Are they being careful, are they just slow, or are they simply incompetent?


I do not know the answer to Mr. Gallagher's question. I do know that whatever words one could choose to describe the performance of the Bush Justice Department, "stellar" would not be among them. Leaving Cold Cash aside, one of the great threats to our national security has been leak after leak of classified information subsequently gracing the front pages of the major newspapers. We do not yet have a single indictment for any of these leaks, nor, as I understand, any ongoing investigations. And now there is the ham handed firing of various U.S. attorneys in a manner that raises questions of true motivation. All in all, the Bush DoJ has dropped the ball far too often.

And then there is a third issue, one that I have pondered but never been able to answer. When there is a scandal involving a conservative elected official, as a general rule, the subject of the scandal resigns in short order, knowing full well that the people who elected him or her would never vote to reelect. Mark Foley is but the most recent example.

But it seems that when the scandal involves a liberal, not only do they often not resign, but they are quite often reelected. Ted Kennedy is the poster boy for this, having been responsible for the vehicular homicide of Mary Jo Kopechne in 1969. Others notables include Cold Cash Jefferson himself (bribery), Gerry Studds (bending over a paige), Alcee Hastings (bribery), John Murtha (Abscam), Barney Frank (boyfriend running a prostitution ring out of Frank's apartment) and Marion Berry (drug use), just to name a few.

I make no claim that either party has a lock on the moral high ground, nor that either party tends to be more ethical in comparison. My only point is to question how an informed electorate can send people, some of them clearly tainted with scandal, back to positions of responsibility in government? Is it that ethical standards do not matter to them except as a tool to attack conservatives?

Perhaps someone on the liberal side can answer that one for me -- but please do so coherently, with facts, and minus, bald assertions, labels or profanity.

Read More...

A Poem by Wajiha Al-Huwaider

Ms. Al-Huwaider is a Saudi who laments the state of the middle east today. It is quite a moving indictment. If you happen to know any adherents to multiculturalism, you might recommend this poem to them. Ma. Al-Huwaider is all too often a lonely voice in the wilderness.

WHEN

"When you cannot find a single garden in your city, but there is a mosque on every corner - you know that you are in an Arab country…

"When you see people living in the past with all the trappings of modernity - do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country.

"When religion has control over science - you can be sure that you are in an Arab country.

"When clerics are referred to as 'scholars' - don't be astonished, you are in an Arab country.

"When you see the ruler transformed into a demigod who never dies or relinquishes his power, and whom nobody is permitted to criticize - do not be too upset, you are in an Arab country.

"When you find that the large majority of people oppose freedom and find joy in slavery - do not be too distressed, you are in an Arab country.

"When you hear the clerics saying that democracy is heresy, but see them seizing every opportunity provided by democracy to grab high positions in the government - do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country…

"When monarchies turn into theocracies, and republics into hybrids of monarchy and republic - do not be taken aback, you are in an Arab country.

"When you find that the members of parliament are nominated by the ruler, or else that half of them are nominated and the other half have bought their seats through bribery… - you are in an Arab country…

"When you discover that a woman is worth half of what a man is worth, or less - do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country…

"When you see that the authorities chop off a man's hand for stealing a loaf of bread or a penny, but praise and glorify those who steal billions - do not be too surprised, you are in an Arab country…

"When you are forced to worship the Creator in school and your teachers grade you for it - you can be sure that you are in an Arab country…

"When young women students are publicly flogged merely for exposing their eyes - you are in an Arab country…

"When a boy learns about menstruation and childbirth but not about his own body and the changes it undergoes in puberty - roll out your prayer mat and beseech Allah to help you deal with your crisis, for you are in an Arab country…

"When land is more important than human beings - you are in an Arab country…

"When covering the woman's head is more important than financial and administrative corruption, embezzlement, and betrayal of the homeland - do not be astonished, you are in an Arab country…

"When minorities are persecuted and oppressed, and if they demand their rights, are accused of being a fifth column or a Trojan horse - be upset, you are in an Arab country…

"When women are seen as house ornaments which can be replaced at any time - bemoan your fate, you are in an Arab country.

"When birth control and family planning are perceived as a Western plot - place your trust in Allah, you are in an Arab country…

"When at any time, there can be a knock on your door and you will be dragged off and buried in a dark prison - you are in an Arab country…

"When fear constantly lives in the eyes of the people - you can be certain that you are in an Arab country."



Hattip: MNN

Read More...

Switzerland invades Liechtenstein; France Surrenders

This one is funny. Instapundit has all the details. I would only add, go easy on the Swiss infantry, night land nav is not the easiest thing in the world.

Read More...

Trade, China, and Economic Reform


1776 was a watershed year. Not only was America born, but Adam Smith penned his famous treatise on capitalism, "The Wealth of Nations," wherein he advocated for free trade and the dismantling of protectionist schemes. His ideas were as true then as they are today, and in the long run, nations which follow his advice are the most wealthy. But it is a constant battle, as governments have a natural inclination to protectionism and, in many cases, subsidization of elements of their domestic economy. And we see these forces playing out in the grand stage today in China and the U.S. It was the recent topic of an interview on NPR with United States Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.


BLOCK: People whom you might consider protectionists would say, 'We're defending American workers who have seen their jobs shipped overseas. That's not – if that's protectionist, that's protecting people at home.'

PAULSON: Oh, absolutely. That's absolutely what they're saying. And another point I made in the speech is, let's not trade away the benefits of the future to deal with short-term problems, dislocations. You know, we've always had – job losses are very painful wherever they occur, and I don't take them lightly, and I don't think at any point in our history people have taken them lightly — but the fact is more of the job losses, in my judgment, are coming from technology and automation than they are for global integration. But I don't have people – one of the things I said in the speech is, you don't hear people say, let's turn back technology; let's shut off the Internet.


Read the transcript of the entire interview here.


Update: Niall Ferguson has an article in today's Telegraph discussing the interrelationship of the Chinese and American economies, or as he terms it, Chimerica.

Read More...

Pot Tech

From bizarre news, technology for pot-heads had ceased for many years with the development of the water bong. But now, it appears to have taken one giant toke forward, so to speak. See the article here. We need to decriminalize marijuana, take its production out of the hands of drug barons, and tax the hell out of it.

Read More...

Another WP Hit Piece on Iraq

It certainly would be good -- and add a sense of balance and realism for its readers -- if the Washington Post, when running an article on violence in Iraq since the start of the surge, would discuss the violence within the context of the ongoing efforts and successes of the surge. Yet, after reading the WP article "Sunni Insurgents Ascendant in Iraq's Caldron of Violence," I walked away with the impression that no success has been made, that Sunni's have increased the pace of their attacks since the start of the surge and, if anything, become even more deadly.

In recent months, al-Qaeda in Iraq and other Sunni groups have begun to use more sophisticated tactics, downing U.S. helicopters and staging large attacks that have claimed the lives of hundreds of Iraqi civilians.

. . . .
A suicide bomber detonated an explosives belt Feb. 25 at Baghdad's Mustansiriya University, where most students are Shiite, killing dozens.

In Sunni-dominated Anbar province, insurgents allied with al-Qaeda in Iraq have clashed with security forces and Sunni tribal groups that oppose them. One such battle occurred Wednesday.

And in a new tactic, insurgents recently have blown up trucks containing chlorine, killing seven and injuring dozens.

On Friday, a car bomb detonated in the Mahdi Army stronghold of Sadr City, killing 10 and injuring 17, the most serious attack in the area in several weeks. . . .


You get the picture, I am sure. The truth of course is that we are having success in Iraq, that for all the talk of insurgernt violence, the insurgents have never won even a platoon sized engagement against U.S. forces, and there is much promising news from the surge -- not the least of which is Sunni's in Anbar fighting alongside Iraqi police to take back their cities, to which the WP only pays passing mention. Unfortunately, one sided articles such as this one from the WP seem to form the overwhelming bulk of what you will find in MSM.

Read More...

The Importance of Iraq's Draft Oil Law


It is hard to underestimate the importance of the draft Iraqi oil law to the cause of unifying Iraq. It is a major accomplishment of a government not yet one year old. In today's Washignton Post, Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, has authored an opinion piece on the law.


Under the national hydrocarbon law approved this week by Iraq's Council of Ministers, oil will serve as a vehicle to unify Iraq and will give all Iraqis a shared stake in their country's future. This is a significant achievement for Iraqis' national reconciliation. It demonstrates that the leaders of Iraq's principal communities can pull together to peacefully resolve difficult issues of national importance.

Resolving concerns about control of oil is central to overcoming internal divisions in Iraq. The country has the third-largest oil reserves in the world, and more than 90 percent of federal income comes from oil revenue. The effective and equitable management of these resources is critical to economic growth as well as to developing a greater sense of shared purpose among Iraqi communities.

The goal of Iraq's leaders was to draft a law that ensured that all Iraqis could be confident they would receive their fair share of the benefits of developing the country's resources, that the revenue from oil and gas would enable a decentralization of power while maintaining national unity, and that Iraq would adopt the best international practices for the development and management of its mineral wealth. By these standards, the hydrocarbon law is a great success. . .


Read the whole piece here.

Read More...

U.K. Insanity - Criminalizing Criticism of Islam

Several months ago, students at Clare College in the U.K. published an edition of their unofficial newspaper that satarized religion, including Islam. The paper included an editorial titled "Why I Hate Islam" and a front page headline "Ayatollah rethinks stance on 'misunderstood' Rushdie." On the back page of the publication was a picture of the student publisher and a cartoon depicting Mohammed, with the caption: "One is a prophet of God, a great leader and an example to us all. The other is a violent paedophile." Good taste - no. Criminal - one would think not in a country that holds insuring freedom of speech to be one of the prime functions of government. But the U.K. has already been altered from its anglo-saxon roots by the influx of wahabbi Islamists, and in the finest tradition of suicidal multiculturalism, Parliment codified the crime of criticizing Islam. And now . . . the student publishers of this satire at Clare College are being questioned by Britain's thought police for a violation of the Hate Speech law. It is an abomonation in a free society.

Read the story here.

Hattip: The Gathering Storm

Read More...

Friday, March 2, 2007

Turkey takes to Iran

I have long suspected that the great secular experiment undertaken by Attaturk to secularize and westernize Turkey would fall to radical Muslim resurgence in the middle east, particularly after Erdogan was elected. From all I have read and researched, it would seem that in Ankara, the two competing ideologies balance slightly in favor of Islamism at this point.

Now it appears that Iran is courting Erdogan with billions in cheap oil -- offering to increase trade from $6 billion to about $17 billion. Iran's purpose, of course, is to offset the effects of current and proposed sanctions over Iran's nuclear program. This could be ominous, or it could be simple a temporary engagement in byzantine politics that many full members of the EU are playing. By that I mean Germany and Italy have extensive economic ties to Iran, and neither is going along at this point with significant sanctions. In fact, both are seeking to hold off on further sanctions and reopen talks with Iran -- in essence, throwing in with Iran and allowing the U.S. and the U.K. to shoulder the vast majority of the burden and costs of protecting the West from the threat Iran poses. It may well be that, under the circumstance, Erdogan is playing real polotik and sees it to Turkey's advantage to take current economic advantage.

Certainly Iran and Turkey are not natural allies in the grand scheme of things -- Iran being a Shia nation, Turkey being a Sunni nation, predominantly Sufi with an increasing influence from the Wahabbists. And the U.S. has been a strong ally of Turkey for many years. Nonetheless, with Islamism on the rise, even a shia may appear more palatable to Erdogan in the long run then does the support of U.S. military action against a Muslim state.

Villagers with Torches, posting on the Maverick News Network site, sees this closening of ties with Iran as a very ominous step by Turkey out of the secular and into the Iranian camp. And he may well be right. I certainly agree with him that Turkey, as a member of NATO, cannot have it both ways in this matter and that we need to impress upon Erdogan, as well as our other European NATO allies that all of them need to make a choice of who to support in this matter. And they need to do so soon. The greater they delay and hinder sanctions against Iran, the greater looms the possibility of war, with all the attendant ramifications that such may have for NATO as a whole and Turkey in particular.

Read More...

Finnish Suicide

The suicidal acts of leftists as a whole, and particularly the leftists that hold sway in governments throughout Europe, simply boggle the mind. They are determined to hold true to their multicultural ethos regardless of the cost. See this from Finland:

The Helsinki and Kuopio Administrative Courts say that the Directorate of Immigration has given too much weight to statements by the Security Police (SUPO) when making decisions on residence permits for foreigners, and on applications for citizenship.

In the statements, SUPO assesses the possible threats that a foreign citizen might pose to public order and the security of the state.In just over six months, the courts have overturned five negative decisions on citizenship and residence permit applications that the Directorate has made on the basis of SUPO statements. In its statements, SUPO has said that an Afghani, a Pakistani, a Somali, and two Iranians would pose a threat to state security and public order.

According to the courts, the Directorate of Immigration cannot reject a foreigner’s application simply because the Security Police feels that the person is a threat to national security.


Gates of Vienna has the whole story and commentary.

Read More...

The Silence Is Deafening

And not to mention neither fair nor balanced. I am referring to the news coverage of the surge in the New York Times. While news from the surge appears uniformly promising at the end of the first two weeks, (see here, here, here) there is not a word of it on the front page of the New York Times. Instead, the lead is that the General in charge of Walter Reed Medical Center has been relieved of command. All I can say is thank God that the shrill leftist mouthpiece that the once respected NYT has become is continually dropping in value.

Read More...

"To Infinity and Beyond"

That's Charles Krauthammer doing his best impression of Buzz Lightyear in today's Washington Post. Mr. Krauthammer, with his elegant prose and relentless logic, presents his support for Bush's proposed manned space station on the moon. As are all articles by Mr. Krauthammer, this one is a fascinating read.

Read More...

Someone Call Murtha and Pelosi

They are going to have to move very quickly to stay ahead of the good news that seems to be piling up from just the first two weeks of the surge. I posted below here and here about the latest from Baghdad.

Now, Reuters is reporting on important success against al Qaeda in Anbar as the native Sunnis are try to wrest control back from the Wahabbi foreigners who dominate al Qaeda. And there are two other things of equal importance. One, the Anbar success involved Iraqi police operating without need for support from U.S. military. And two, as outlined in this report, the U.S. and Iraqi forces are on the verge of setting up in Sadr City. That is a major step.

Iraqi security forces killed dozens of al Qaeda militants who attacked a village in western Anbar province on Wednesday, during fierce clashes that lasted much of the day, police officials said on Thursday.

Sunni tribal leaders are involved in a growing power struggle with Sunni al Qaeda for control of Anbar, a vast desert province that is the heart of the Sunni Arab insurgency in Iraq.
. . . .
Interior Ministry spokesman Abdul Karim Khalaf said foreign Arabs and Afghans were among some 80 militants killed and 50 captured in the clashes in Amiriyat al Falluja, an Anbar village where local tribes had opposed al Qaeda.

. . . .
U.S. and Iraqi troops are gearing up to set up joint checkpoints in Sadr City and conduct large-scale, door-to-door operations on houses and buildings, signaling a significant escalation in the plan, officers in eastern Baghdad said.

Details of the plan emerged during a meeting of senior U.S. and Iraqi military commanders on Thursday in Sadr City, which was also attended by the city's mayor.

Sipping mint tea in a crammed police station as four helicopter gunships hovered overhead, they agreed to set up a joint security station in Sadr City in a few days.

"We have conducted special operations in Sadr City for some months but this will be the first time we will launch full-scale operations there and the first time we will have a permanent presence there," said Colonel Billy Don Farris, coalition forces commander for the Sadr City and Adhamiya neighborhoods


Read the whole article. Things are looking good.

Read More...

Thursday, March 1, 2007

Surge News: At the End of Week 2

Baghdadi resident Omar, the Sunni publisher of Iraq the Model, brings us news on the surge. As he states, the news is hardly perfect -- there are still the al Qaeda suicide bombers coming into Baghdad. But other then that, there are many promising signs.

Operation “Imposing Law” continues in Baghdad. In contrast with previous operations to secure the city, this one is managing to not only keep the initial momentum, but the operation’s effects seem to be growing as well.

. . . .
As we noted in earlier reports, we feel safer about moving around in the city now than we did a month before. I have recently been to districts in Baghdad where a month or two ago I wouldn’t have thought of going to. In the last week or two I’ve showed my ID to soldiers and policemen in checkpoints dozens of times. A few months ago this was considered an extremely risky thing to do — especially for someone whose ID shows a name and profession such as mine. “Omar” is a pure Sunni name and everyone here knows that scores of young Baghdadi men were killed by death squads just because they had the name.

Numbers are always useful in assessing results of any effort, and the numbers so far are on the good guys’ side. I read today that the count of various death squads’ victims for this month is one half that of January, and little more than one third that of December of last year. This comes from the official figures reported by the Baghdad morgue.

The other number that’s become one of the important parameters for assessing the situation in the Baghdad is the number of displaced families that have returned to their homes since the beginning of Operation “Imposing Law.” This one too is giving a positive sign. The last official count by the authorities brought the total to little over 1,020 families in just two weeks according to Baghdad paper al-Mada.

While many Iraqi families are returning to the homes they once were forced to leave, there are also Baghdadis who are reopening their stores, ending the months they spent out of business because of violence and intimidation. Some streets that were virtually deserted a few months ago are slowly showing signs of returning to life.
The reopening stores even include some liquor shops! There are two stores on one street that I used to shop that closed early last year when their owners received death threats from the insurgents and the militias. Yesterday I walked through that street and, to my amazement, I found both stores open and back in business.
. . . .
The results of Operation “Imposing Law” are not magical. We didn’t expect them to be magical. The commanders didn’t claim they’d be when the Operation began. Still these latest developments are certainly promising. And let’s not forget that what has been achieved so far was achieved while many thousands of the new troops assigned to Baghdad are yet to arrive.


Read the whole post here. Would someone please pass this information on to Pelosi and Murtha before they manage to pull a defeat from the jaws of victory.

Read More...

Barclay's Banks Go Barking Mad

Barclays in the U.K. has turned to trained Labs to assist the handicapped at their ATM's.

"The dog stands on its back legs, places its paws on the machine and takes the card, the money and the receipt in its mouth and gives it to the person in the wheelchair. It is quite impressive to see." Around 30 dogs - usually Labradors or retrievers - are trained by Canine Partners for wheelchair users each year.

Other tasks [service dogs can] learn include operating a pedestrian crossing button, loading a washing machine, picking items off supermarket shelves and helping their owners dress and undress.
Read the whole story here. Labs are the greatest. I have two females that are so smart, I expect to find them reading a newspaper when I get home. And then I have a gigantic male who is the most lovable of the three, but who will never be inducted into Canine Mensa. To his credit, he does have a taste for good books, but unfortunately I mean that only in a literal sense.

Read More...

Mullah Dadullah: The Taliban's Violent Commander

Der Spiegel has an ominous article on the new Taliban general, Mullah Dadullah, the reorganization of the Taliban in their Pakistani NWFP safe havens, and Dadullah's decision to invest heavily in suicide bombings.

Western intelligence agencies warn that the Taliban now have "their own star" in their struggle against Western soldiers and the Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai. The new nightmare from the Hindu Kush Mountains is called Mullah Dadullah. He sports a pitch black beard, always wears a military jacket and these days, he is omnipresent in the media.

Bloodthirsty propaganda is everywhere in northern Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan. Virtually every CD salesman in Peshawar is selling the latest films released by the Taliban leader. "Oh, you want the Dadullah tapes," says one. "They're very popular right now." He disappears for barely a minute and then returns with an entire stack. He charges about €3 ($4) per film. Those who buy several get a discount. But he doesn't want his picture taken. He says Pakistani police already causes him enough trouble when they find terror DVDs in the suitcases of journalists at the airport.

The images on these DVDs reveal the Taliban's self confidence and new professionalism. The films herald a bloody spring in Afghanistan, one in which Western troops will face a newly strengthened Taliban army under a re-organized leadership. Well armed and better logistically organized than ever before, the Taliban are preparing for their fight against the hated NATO troops, whose alliance has recently shown signs of internal division. "They say it will be the decisive summer," says a man who occasionally drinks tea with the Taliban commanders.


Read the whole article. There is only one way to defeat an enemy that will not surrender, and that is to take the offensive to to attack them wherever they are found. That means that the Taliban cannot be allowed a safe haven anywhere. Pakistan will either have to take control of the NWFP, or NATO will have to do it for them.

Read More...

Female Circumcision Debated on Egyptian Television

MEMRI has translated a debate between Islamic scholars on Egyptian television regarding the secular and religious nature of female circumcision -- i.e., a removal of the clitoris -- and the continued desirability of the practice. The debate was between M. Ashur, who argued that the practice was secular and should be outlawed, and M. Al-Mussayar, who argued that it is a part of religious practice acceptable under Sharia law and that it should be allowed.

Mahmoud Ashur: "Female circumcision is a traditional custom, and not a religious act. All the hadiths dealing with female circumcision are unreliable. . . . "Female circumcision is not part of Islam. Rather, it is a traditional custom. Under no circumstances should we follow this custom, because it leaves a deep wound in the souls of these girls,
. . . .
"This is a despicable, ugly, and evil custom. It is performed by a woman who uses inappropriate and non-sterile instruments. She may be passing on to the girl a terrible disease, or causing her a wound that never heals, because the person who performs this custom lacks expertise and experience, and does not know how to sterilize the instruments, and therefore she inflicts terrible diseases upon the girls."
. . . .
Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "All the jurisprudents, since the advent of Islam and for 14 centuries or more, are in consensus that female circumcision is permitted by Islam. But they were divided with regard to its status in shari'a. Some said that female circumcision is required by shari'a, just like male circumcision. Some said this is the mainstream practice, while others said it is a noble act. But throughout the history of Islam, nobody has ever said that performing female circumcision is a crime. There has been a religious ruling on this for 14 centuries."
. . . .
"First of all, there are reliable hadiths in Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim which support female circumcision. . . .

Interviewer: "Nevertheless, hypothetically speaking, what is the main reason for [female circumcision]?"

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "Some sources said: 'Reduce, but do not remove.' In other words, it is neither about removing the organ, nor about leaving it. It is a trustworthy Muslim doctor who makes the decision. She decides whether the girl needs it or not. We do not obligate every girl to undergo circumcision. We say it should be left up to the doctor, and she can evaluate the case and determine whether the girl needs circumcision or not."

Read the whole story here. One of the internal wars in Islam, hinted at in the above exchange, is whether to and how to modernize Islamic practices. Unfortunately, the Wahabbi form of Islam holds sway in many areas thanks to its propagation through Saudi oil wealth, and Wahabbi Islam is a true throwback to a world now more then a millenium gone. Further the means by which Mohamed left for his followers to modify their religion, ijtihad, has as a general rule, been deemed frozen for over one thousand years. It is more complex then that, but as generalities go, it is true.

Read More...

Anyone Up For A Good Book Burning?

How liberals can make common cause with the subset of Muslims who dream of implementing Sharia law in the United States is simply beyond me. Here is a report from the UPI about a book fair in Ridyah, Saudi Arabia.

Publishers displaying books at an international book fair in Saudi Arabia are coming under scrutiny and pressure by religious police. Saudi Arabia's semi-official al-Watan daily said Thursday the religious police tried to remove exhibited books on love and different religions at the Riyadh International Book Fair that opened Tuesday.

The paper quoted an Egyptian publisher as saying a group of young local men, accompanied by a mutawa, or government-authorized religious police enforcing Islamic law, entered his booth and asked the publisher to remove some books.

"This happened without official paper work and without officials, as they came in and began choosing titles they wanted removed," said the publisher, who was not identified. "The problem is they didn't even bother to read the inside of the books, in which one of them even defends Islam, but its title was about Christ; so they asked for their removal" from the exhibition.
Read the whole story here.

Read More...

Mentally and Emotionally Deficient . . . And Proud of It

Well, I am mentally and emotionally deficient according to certain psychiatrists who would label me a conservative. Their research, they claim, shows all conservatives to be mentally and emotionally deficient. But according to the Iron Shrink, that may be a suspect diagnosis.

Psychology Today recently offered an entirely uncritical account of two studies that characterize mainstream American conservatives as mentally and emotionally deficient. Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition (John Jost et al., 2003) and Nursery School Personality and Political Orientation Two Decades Later (Jack & Jeanne Block, 2006) defamed conservatives and were treated as gospel.

PT wasn’t the first to endorse the studies, and it won’t be the last. They have gained favorable treatment in both the professional literature and the mass media. But beneath a thin veneer of integrity, these studies are a morass of furious political ideology, circular reasoning, self-serving definitions, and a baffling degree of confirmation bias. Consider some of the sentiments tucked away in the footnotes and references:
. . . .
. . . Last year, our professional journals contained nearly 700 articles on the topic of cultural competence, which reportedly eschews maliciousness and degradation. Conservatives are excluded from that protection because – make no mistake about it – these “studies” are a shameless attempt to shape politics by vilifying the left’s ideological opponents. . .
Read the whole post here.

Read More...

Utopian Socialists vs Dr. Sanity

Guess who wins. A great post today from the e-psych who takes a critical look at the "do-gooder" nacissists in education and politics who hate free market capitalism. Read it here.

Read More...

Landmark Justice for an Honor Killing in Denmark

There will be no leniency for the murderers of Ghazala Khan. The Danish Supreme Court has upheld the verdicts — and then some — on her murderers.

Ghazala Khan, . . . was the victim of an “honor killing” in the Danish town of Slagelse. In a landmark legal decision, most of her extended family was convicted of murdering her, in addition to the young man who pulled the trigger.


The Gates of Vienna has the whole story here.

Read More...

News From the Surge

Ralph Peters has an article in the NY Post summarizing the news he is receiving from U.S. military officers on the ground in Baghdad. According to Peters, the officers with whom he has spoken "agree unanimously that the administration made terrible mistakes from which we and the Iraqis are still recovering. But not one of these soldiers is ready to quit."

Here are the key points I've heard . . . :

* Of the five additional U.S. brigades headed for Baghdad, only one is in place, with the second starting to arrive. Yet the city is already quieter and safer. The terrorists continue to detonate their bombs - with suicidal fanatics targeting the innocent - but sectarian killings (death-squad hits) have dropped from over 50 each night down to single digits.

* The tactic of stationing U.S. units and their Iraqi counterparts down in the Baghdad 'hoods is already paying off. (It should have been used from the outset - instead of hunkering down on massive bases. But better late than never.) The effort has triggered a flood of intelligence tips: When citizens feel safe, they cooperate. And when they help us, our success compounds.

* U.S. commanders now have a lot of experience in Iraq. They're not wide-eyed kids at the circus anymore. They understand there are no uniform, easy answers to Iraq's violence and complex allegiances. As a senior officer put it, "Every neighborhood and city is unique, with their own challenges."

I'll leave it to The New York Times to betray our military secrets, and just say I'm very impressed by the insight shown by our brigade and battalion commanders these days.

* We hear the bad news from the rest of Iraq, such as this week's monstrous car bombing of children at play on a soccer field in Ramadi, but we don't hear that such attacks by al Qaeda operatives have infuriated mainstream Sunni sheiks and their tribes - who increasingly make common cause with us and their government. And winning over the Sunni "middle" is crucial to Iraq's future.

* We'll never stop all suicide bombers and car bombers, but our security crackdown has already taken out two major Vehicle-Borne Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) factories. And we took down a huge arms cache late last week.

* No one's getting any "Mission Accomplished" banners ready to go, but front-line leaders in Iraq are convinced the situation just isn't as hopeless as politicians back home insist. I don't know a single officer in-country who believes the reporting from Iraq gives an honest, balanced picture.

Of course, there are serious worries:

* Above all, senior leaders worry that, thanks to political shenanigans back home, they won't be given the time it would take to win. Even with improved tactics, this just isn't easy work.
. . . .
* The sectarian violence between Sunni Arabs and the Shia that gathered strength after last year's Golden Mosque bombing has "damaged trust between the two sects enormously," as a U.S. official put it. It's possible that the damage is too deep to be repaired - we just don't know. At best, reconstructing a shared national identity is going to be hard. But many gruesome conflicts have ended in national reconciliation.



Read the whole story here.

Read More...

Pelosi & Murtha Plan Slow Bleed / Vote Buying Strategy

What does funding domestic farm programs and children's health insurance have to do with a supplemental appropriations bill to fund the war in Iraq? Well, nothing, at least unless you are Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha. Despite clear objections, the two have now devised a strategy to implement their slow bleed strategy -- by attaching billions in earmarks for various pet projects designed to buy the votes of other democratic, and possibly even republican, lawmakers

House Democratic leaders will add nearly $4 billion for farmers to a bill funding military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to attract conservative Democrats concerned that the measure would wrongly constrict President Bush’s power as commander in chief.

Democrats may also add money for children’s health insurance in the hope of winning the votes of Republicans . . .

Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee and a senior member of the Blue Dog Coalition of some 45 conservative Democrats, said, “I don’t think the supplemental will pass if we don’t” add disaster-relief funds. Without farm-relief funds the Iraq-Afghanistan bill would lose “quite a few” Blue Dog votes, said Peterson. “They’d lose mine,” he added.
. . . .
A lawmaker who attended a meeting of Blue Dogs Tuesday said half of the conservative Democrats who were there raised concerns about language that Defense Appropriations subcommittee Chairman John Murtha (D-Pa.) said he would include in the supplemental.

Murtha said he would include several requirements: giving soldiers returning from the war at least a year of rest before redeployment; limiting the Pentagon’s ability to extend enlistments, the so-called stop-loss policy; and stopping the Pentagon from extending combat tours. Murtha also said his bill would enforce equipment and training standards for troops.

Conservative Democrats met before the whole House Democratic Caucus convened to discuss war funding. Lawmakers at the second meeting failed to reach agreement because liberal lawmakers demanded that strict conditions be attached to funding while conservatives argued against interfering with Bush’s powers of command.

“I don’t think we should be interfering with military strategy,” said Rep. John Tanner (D-Tenn.), a leading Blue Dog, when asked about Murtha’s proposed restrictions.
. . . .
If Republican members of the Appropriations Committee and a significant number of Blue Dogs oppose the bill, it may not pass the House, seriously embarrassing the Democratic leadership.

Additional agriculture spending could make it harder for conservative Democrats from rural districts to oppose the war-funding bill. Murtha and Peterson said farm-relief funds would be added.

Peterson cited $4 billion to pay for disasters such as droughts, floods, frosts and snowstorms that affected farmers in about half of all states in 2005 and 2006. In California, farmers lost four-fifths of their orange crop to frost, he said. But farmers could only apply for relief for one of the two years, he added.

Murtha said Blue Dogs have not told him directly of their concerns, but extra agriculture funds could keep them from defecting. Another senior Democrat on Appropriations agreed that “it would help.”

Murtha said he and Young reached agreement on military funding levels. The supplemental would include at least $93.7 billion for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Appropriators may grant requests to allocate an extra billion for Afghanistan, which would boost the defense total to $94.7 billion, he added.


Read the whole story here. This looks like an atrocity in the making. It is more then a little sickening that the single most important issue of our time -- our national security during time of war -- should be decided not on the merits but rather on pay offs for legislative pet projects. One would think that this topic would transcend log rolling. But I guess one would be wrong.

If you agree that the Pelosi/Murtha Vote Buying is wrong and that the issue of the Iraq War should be debated alone on its merits, please contact your representative and tell them so. You can find your representative here.

Read More...

Euro War on War on Terror

As the U.S. fights against radical Islam, our natural partners in such a fight -- those countries generally considered a part of Western Civilization -- seem more intent upon punishing the U.S.

Many European lawmakers and human rights groups have accused the CIA of violating European sovereignty and international law by covertly apprehending and detaining terrorism suspects on the Continent. They have also criticized European intelligence services for taking part in the operations or failing to stop them.
Germany, Italy and the EU have each conducted investigations into activities by the United States in regards to the U.S. renditions program. Germany and Italy have both issued warrants against CIA employees, and the EU investigation resulted in a report that has been described as "unbalanced, inaccurate and unfair" by the State Department's senior lawyer, John Bellinger.

"I do think these continuing investigations can harm intelligence cooperation -- that's simply a fact of life," Bellinger said Wednesday.
Read the whole story here.

Read More...

Surge News: Soldiers Move to Outposts Throughout Baghdad

This from the Washington Post, discussing the move out of large cantonements into smaller bases throughout Baghdad occurpied in part by their Iraqi counterparts.

Informed by counterinsurgency theory that calls for placing units full-time among the people they want to sway, U.S. troops are using their new bases to work with their Iraqi counterparts, uncover more battlefield intelligence and reinforce, by their sustained presence, the message that they will not allow militants unfettered freedom of movement.

These little combat outposts, they are more exposed: Your routes in here are very limited, and they're definitely watching us," Staff Sgt. Marcel Weaver, 35, said of the insurgents operating in the neighborhood around the base. A grenade "attack is coming, I can guarantee that."

U.S. soldiers have opened 15 of about 30 planned "joint security stations" in the capital. They have also set up an unspecified number of smaller "combat outposts." U.S. military spokesmen did not respond to requests for information about how many such outposts are operating in Baghdad or how many times they have been attacked.
. . . .
Some American soldiers say the days patrolling the streets and nights drinking tea and playing dominoes with the Iraqis have fashioned a fledgling camaraderie. The Americans also have grown closer to one another while enduring the spartan lodgings -- sleeping on cots, living without showers or toilets, burning their waste -- that feel far removed from the buffet dinners and air-conditioned gyms on the Camp Liberty base, near the Baghdad airport, they left behind.

"Liberty's like being in Kuwait," Torres said. "If we stayed at Liberty the whole time, then we're not bringing the fight to them. This at least gives us an intimidation factor, knowing we're out here on the grind ready to take it to them."
Kuehl said he believes that over time, operating out of smaller bases will be safer for his soldiers as the neighbors grow to appreciate their backyard policemen and act as an alarm system about impending trouble.

"We're going to get more information, and when we get that information, we can target better, and if we target better, we can get more bad guys off the street and we don't hurt the locals while we do it," he said. "And the other part of getting out here, and I think it's something we've missed in the mission for a while . . . is our purpose to protect the people."

U.S. commanders say they choose the location of the security stations and combat outposts based on where soldiers can most disrupt the insurgency. Kuehl said he moved a platoon into the second floor of the al-Khadraa outpost to stop insurgent weapons traffic through the area.

Read the whole story here.

Read More...

UK Scientists Reporting Major Technology Breakthrough

The Times (UK) is reporting:

Scientists have created the thinnest material in the world and predict that it will revolutionise computing and medical research.

A layer of carbon has been manufactured in a film only one atom thick that defies the laws of physics. Placed in layers on top of each other it would take 200,000 membranes to reach high enough to match the thickness of a human hair.

The substance, graphene, was created two years ago but could be made only when stuck to another material. Researchers have now managed to manufacture it as a film suspended between the nanoscale bars of scaffolding made from gold.

Such a feat was held to be impossible by theorists, backed up by experimentation, because it is in effect a two-dimensional crystal that is supposed to be destroyed instantly by heat.

The crystalline membrane, comprising carbon atoms formed into hexagonal groups of six to create a honeycomb pattern, is thought to be able to exist because rather than lying flat it undulates slightly. Un- dulation provides the structure with a third dimension that gives it the strength to hold together, the researchers have reported in the journal Nature.

The graphene membrane has proved to be so stable that it holds together in vacuums and at room temperature. All other known materials oxidise, decompose and become unstable at sizes ten times the thickness.

It was created by scientists at the University of Manchester, working with the Max Planck Institute in Germany.

“This is a completely new type of technology — even nanotechnology is not the right word to describe these new membranes,” said Professor Andre Geim, of the University of Manchester.

“We have made proof-of-concept devices and believe that the technology transfer to other areas should be straightforward. The real challenge is to make such membranes cheap and readily available for large-scale applications.”

Kostya Novoselov, of the University of Manchester, said that its main applications were expected to be in vastly increasing the speed at which computers could make calculations and in researching new drugs.


Read the entire story here.

Read More...

The Netherlands Takes on Radical Islam

This today from the Telegraph on the meteoric political rise of Geert Wilders.

Geert Wilders, the 43-year-old leader of the Freedom Party, is convinced that governments are being forced to accommodate a 'tsunami of Islamisation' that is fundamentally incompatible with European social values.

"Islam itself is the problem. Islam is a violent religion," he told The Daily Telegraph. "The Prophet Mohammed was a violent man. The Koran is mostly a violent book. We should invest in Muslim people but they have to first get rid of half the Koran and half of their beliefs," he said.

The Freedom Party has jumped from six to 10 per cent in opinion polls since November. His passionate campaign for a ban on the Islamic veil, or burqa, in public places is gaining such momentum that the country's new coalition government could be forced to introduce the ban it does not support.

On the burqa, Mr Wilders is adamant: "It is a medieval token of a barbaric time, of how not to treat women, even if they want to wear it themselves," he argues.
Read the whole story here

Read More...

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Keeping an Eye On CAIR: Part I

And CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, does bear watching for several reasons, including their support of and ties to terrorist groups, their propaganda efforts in support of Wahabbi Islam, and their efforts to change the laws and culture of America. I previously posted on CAIR here, and most recently here, on their disgraceful part in promoting the canard of Israeli wrongdoing in making repairs to a walkway near the Temple Mount. Maverick News Network recently covered CAIR's support of convicted terrorist supporter Sami Al-Arian.

CAIR's latest act, shown in their post here, involves an attempt to change the laws and culture of the United States.

CAIR has asked the FBI to investigate a video on MySpace as a civil rights violation. The video, called "Kill the Koran," shows a Koran being shot and then deposited on the steps of a Mosque. Certainly while this may be distasteful to Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that alone does not constitute a civil rights violation. To the extent that CAIR is arguing that any desecration of the Koran should be a violation of law, they are in essence enlisting the FBI to help impose - by law or by coercion -- Sharia law in the U.S. Under Sharia, the Koran is considered holy and its desecration is a punishable sin. Under U.S. secular law, you of course, as the NYT will tell you, have a First Amendment right to speak out symbolically by showing such things as a cross in a glass of urine. I see no difference here.

The closest possible basis for a civil rights violation arises from the burning of a cross. In 2003, the Supreme Court held, in Virginia v. Black, that states can explicitly outlaw the burning of a cross on someones lawn, largely because the well known historical basis for that act was illegal coercion. But it is a far cry from that one exception to the rule to now say that the destruction of any religious icon amounts to coercion and is a civil rights violation. Indeed, CAIR cannot even claim coercion in this case since it is they, not the attendees at the mosque, who have brought this matter to the FBI. Moreover, the title of the video was "Kill the Koran," not "Kill Muslims." That also vitiates against any finding of coercion as opposed to simple exercise of free speech.

While CAIR could publicly condemn this act -- and I for one would join them in such condemnation -- instead they vastly, and foolishly, overreach. They have no right or basis to make the desecration of the Koran a crime in America.

I would urge you, if you see the actions of CAIR as a threat, to tell the same to your elected representatives, and ask them to make sure that our tools of government are not being improperly enlisted to further the goals of CAIR and Wahabbi Islam.

White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Sen: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Representative: http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Update: There is an excellent post from Martin McBride on the MNN site that strongly urges that anyone concerned about CAIR start attending their local functions and document for the world what is going on. I could not agree more. Here is the link to Mr. McBrides post.

Read More...

Talk About Getting Screwed?

Rarely have I felt so sorry for a guilty defendant.

Read More...

Thomas Sowell on Republicans & Supreme Court Nominees

Thomas Sowell takes Republicans to task for not making good choices for the Supreme Court and for failing to vote down the wildly liberal nominees of Bill Clinton. Read the whole article here.

Read More...

U.S. & Germany Address Leaks Of Classified Information

Secrecy News is reporting on legislation proposed by Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) to criminalize the unauthorized disclosure or publication of classified information "concerning efforts by the United States to identify, investigate, or prevent terrorist activity." Read the whole story here.

Apparently, Kyl's proposal is already generating significant organized opposition from liberal organizations. This is hardly a surprise, given just how much democrats and liberal organizations have relied on selected leaks to damage the Bush administration. At a minimum, I hope there are hearings on this legislation so that we are able to learn just how much damage has been done to the U.S. counter-terrorism efforts as a result of the New York Times' six years of leaking.

On a related note, Germany has taken the opposite approach, giving constitutional protection to the unauthorized disclosure of State secrets. Der Spiegel reports that "Germany's Constitutional Court ruled on Tuesday that journalists cannot be legitimately accused of betrayal of state secrets for publishing classified information obtained from informers." See the whole story here.

Update: The Hill is reporting that opposition to the Kyl bill will likely result in watered down legislation. See the story here.



Read More...

Conspiracy Theories Are Sometimes Right

The vast majority of conspiracy theorists are whack jobs, though quite tolerable for their entertainment value. It is a rare occurrence where a true government conspiracy occurs. It sounds, however, like such a situation has in fact come to light, involving FBI agents who knowingly allowed an innocent man to be convicted of crimes in state court. It does not sound pretty. Instapundit has the story, and you can follow the links from there.

Read More...

"Fanatacism" In Pakistan

There is an interesting editorial in the Pakistani newspaper, the International News, by Kamila Hyat. The author examines the spread of radical Islam and makes some suggestions for combating it.

There are other examples too of a new fanaticism that has crept into society. Middle-aged women walking in parks report repeatedly being asked by other walkers, including women, to cover their heads. Similar incidents have been reported from bazaars and other public places in several cities. In a posh Lahore bazaar, an old man armed with a megaphone delivered stern sermons against women out shopping on their own. Shopkeepers quickly chased him away, anxious he would frighten customers.

And the situation is of course considerably worse in the NWFP. Even in Peshawar itself, schools for girls have closed down after threats. Administrations have received warnings about dress codes and in some cases parents have been warned to keep daughters away from educational institutions.

Beyond the issue of women too there has been terrifying evidence of this extremist scourge. In the Swat area, people have been informed in sermons delivered over illegal radio stations that they should not get children vaccinated against polio, as those who "die in epidemics are martyrs". Reaching directly in to homes, other messages over radio stations in some areas have called on women to ensure their husbands grow beards, while in incidents that are being reported almost daily, video or music shops have been attacked, bans placed on the playing of music even in personal vehicles or homes and girls' schools attacked in several areas.

While the incident involving Maulvi Sarwar and the young minister has most vividly driven home the message concerning fanaticism in society, the evidence of its presence has been there now for many years. The attacks on New Year Eve parties, on marathon runners and on fast food restaurants are all symptoms of the same trend.

It is obvious that this malaise is expanding its tentacles, and assuming the shape of a giant monster that cannot easily be hacked down. This has happened because the threat was not tackled when it was smaller, and therefore relatively easy to deal with.

The need now is to confront it head on before it acquires still more alarming dimensions, which may prove impossible to take on. For this, a long-term, holistic set of strategies will have to be derived -- beginning with the acknowledgement that the issue does not involve merely the death of a single woman by a man who had obviously lost all connections with sanity, but runs far deeper than this.



Read the rest of the story. The NWFP long ago became radicalized, and it is there that the Taliban and al Qaeda are gaining safe haven. There is a sizable number of Muslims throughout Pakistan that support a radical Islamic agenda, but that has not been the case outside of the NWFP, though, as this story makes clear, Pakistan is awaking to that poison throughout the country now.

Read More...

Europe, NATO, Afghanistan and the War on Terror

Other then the U.S. and U.K., support of NATO members for the war in Afghanistan, as well as for U.S. efforts to protect itself and other Western nations from the threat of radical Muslim terrorism, has been problematic, to use the understated language of diplomacy. There is an excellent editorial on this topic from the WSJ, and I include it here in its entirity for those unable to access the WSJ pages.


'Allies'
February 27, 2007; Page A16
By BRET STEPHENS

On Oct. 2, 2001, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization took the unprecedented step of formally invoking Article 5 of its 1949 Charter, which says that "an armed attack against one or more of them. . . . shall be considered an attack against all of them." Lord Geoffrey Robertson, then NATO's secretary-general, gave a press conference saying he wanted to "reiterate that the United States of America can rely on the full support of its 18 NATO Allies in the campaign against terrorism."

In recent weeks, we've been reminded once again just how cheap those promises were. On Thursday, Stéphane Dion, who leads Canada's Liberal Party, announced that as prime minister he would bring an end to the country's 2,500-strong military commitment to southern Afghanistan. "Neither Canada, NATO nor the Americans anticipated how violent and dangerous Kandahar would become in 2006," he said, adding that the proper role for Canadian forces is "to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people."


Also in recent weeks, the Italian government of Romano Prodi briefly collapsed after it was unable to muster the votes to approve the enlargement of a U.S. Army base in Vicenza along with the continuance of Italy's 2,000-man deployment in Afghanistan. George W. Bush has had to plead publicly with NATO nations to increase their troop commitments and -- would it be too much to ask? -- deploy them in areas where they are likely to see combat. To make up for the NATO shortfall, Britain is sending in another 1,400 soldiers, while the U.S. is extending the tour of the Tenth Mountain Infantry Brigade and sending in troops from the 82nd Airborne.

It is a statistical certainty that American and British soldiers will pay a price in blood this spring because their French, Spanish, Italian, German and -- if Mr. Dion has his way -- Canadian counterparts mean to keep their moral slates clean. A century ago that would have been a mark of martial and national dishonor, of "letting the side down." Today, it is a concession to the political reality that most NATO governments cannot muster political support for anything except a "peace mission" in Afghanistan. "If you are non-U.S., implicitly there is a political calculus," says a senior U.S. Army officer about his NATO colleagues. "You are looking over your shoulder to Ottawa. You're asking: 'Will getting five killed-in-action mean a phone call about the wisdom of this particular operation?'"

Afghanistan, of course, was supposed to have been the "good war" -- the war that, unlike Iraq, everyone was willing to fight. Now the best that can be said for France, Germany, Italy and company is that they will not actively stand in the way of its being fought, so long as they're not fighting.

But even that is an improvement over the way some European governments are conducting themselves in the war on terror closer to home. Earlier this month, an Italian court named and indicted 25 CIA officers and five Italian officials for the rendition to Egypt of a cleric named Osama Mustafa Hassan Nasr, aka Abu Omar. Germany, too, has issued arrest warrants for 13 CIA officers involved in the abduction (in Macedonia) of a German man of Lebanese descent named Khaled al-Masri. Mr. Masri has since become a cause célèbre back home -- a living indictment of the Bush administration's perfidious approach to fighting terrorism.

In Sheikh Omar's case, even the Italians don't dispute the Egyptian was a dangerous actor: He is believed to have recruited terrorists and plotted an attack on the U.S. embassy in Rome. Mr. Masri, by contrast, is usually depicted as an innocent caught up in a web of CIA intrigue. But as John Rosenthal of the invaluable Transatlantic Intelligencer blog notes, it was German, not American, intelligence that first became intensely concerned about Mr. Masri's activities.

Not two weeks after 9/11, Mr. Masri was already being investigated by authorities in Baden-Württemberg as a "follower of Bin Laden." A classified report from Germany's Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations notes that Mr. Masri maintained "numerous contacts to dangerous persons and accused suspects in the domain of Islamist terrorism." He had a friendship with a militant Islamist named Reda Seyam, suspected of involvement in the 2002 Bali bombings. He frequented an Islamic Cultural Center known for distributing audiocassettes with such charming messages as "Whoever fights against the Christians, the Jews and their allies is a martyr." It was shut down by Bavarian officials in December 2005 and the organization that ran it was banned.

For all this, Mr. Masri may be guilty of nothing more than fellow-traveling. The same might be said of the German government, which at a minimum involved itself in the abduction it now means to prosecute by agreeing to keep the whole matter secret. "The German government, witness to the entire incident, pretended not to know anything," the German newsweekly Der Spiegel reported in 2005. "In a court of law, such behavior amounts to the suppression of evidence."

The German government also involved itself in another apparent CIA kidnapping in December 2001 of a German citizen and terrorist suspect named Mohammed Haydar Zammar, who was later rendered to his native Syria. Rather than demand his instant repatriation, however, the government of Gerhard Schröder arranged for investigators to interview Mr. Zammer in Syria, in exchange for which it dropped charges against two Syrian agents in Germany. Mr. Zammar remains in a Syrian prison.

None of this need shame the German government: Mr. Zammar is reported to have recruited some of the 9/11 hijackers and his fate is richly deserved. What is shameful is that the same governments that actively colluded with the U.S. to bring the worst terrorist cases to some kind of justice are now bending to the demands of activist prosecutors and the prevailing anti-American mood, and again allowing the U.S. to take the flak for what were often joint operations. For the indicted CIA officers, that flak is less deadly than what the GIs in Afghanistan can look forward to this spring. But the principle is the same.

Asked what he worried about most in wartime, Napoleon is said to have replied, "Allies." Plus ça change.

Read More...

U.S. - Iran Conflict is Existential

Amir Taheri has an excellent article analyzing the existential nature of the U.S. Iran conflict.

We are witnessing the start of what could be a long, complicated conflict - not a prelude to the sharp, short exchange that many expect. What is at stake is the future not only of Iran but also of the place of American power in the world. This showdown cannot end without a clear winner and loser.

As Taheri explains:

Fantasists such as Javier Solana, the European Union's ineffective foreign-policy czar, have tried to present the Islamic Republic's uranium-enrichment program as a technical issue. Others, like French President Jacques Chirac, have advised acceptance of what they regard as a fait accompli.

For Ahmadinejad, however, the issue is political in the grand sense of the term - with nothing less at stake than the survival of the Khomeinist regime.

The 1979 revolution had a tripartite slogan: "independence, liberty and Islamic government" - and the regime that emerged tried to build its legitimacy on that basis. Over the last quarter-century, however, it has failed to deliver.

In practical terms, Iran today is more dependent on the outside world than before the Khomeinists seized power. In 1977, Iran imported 11 percent of the food it needed; today, it imports almost half. In 1977, Iran was an overall exporter of crude oil and petroleum products; today, it imports more than 40 percent of its gasoline.

In 1977, there were no outside forces in the Gulf. Today, the United States and its allies control the waterway. Iranian ships passing through the Gulf, and aircraft flying over it, have to clear their routes with the Americans.

As for liberty, most Iranians today know that they are much less free, especially in social and cultural terms, than they were before the mullahs seized power. A recent study by the International Monetary Fund shows Iran experiencing the largest brain-drain of any country in history, largely because the educated elites are fleeing an oppressive atmosphere.

The slogan's third part, Islamic government, has also remained a chimera. Many genuinely religious Iranians, including some Shiite clerics, see Khomeinism as an "evil innovation" (bed'aah) because it violates a fundamental principle of the faith by pretending that it can create a truly Islamic government before the return of the Hidden Imam.

Ahmadinejad is conscious of the Islamic Republic's massive loss of legitimacy in the early 1990s (at least). But he knows that he can't restore it by offering greater liberty: Any loosening of the regime's tight grip on power could open a Pandora's box of political, sectarian and ethnic grievances and demands that no undemocratic regime can deal with.

That leaves the radicals with two options: thickening the Islamic coloring of the regime, and emphasizing its claim of independence.
Ahmadinejad has tried to thicken the regime's religious coloring by casting himself in the role of the proverbial Islamic ghazi (holy warrior) who will ride his white horse into Jerusalem to liberate it from the infidel.

The regime's claim of independence is best illustrated by its refusal to kowtow to the diktats of the major powers, especially the United States. The nuclear program would not have been an issue in Iran just two or three years ago - most Iranians knew nothing of the program and the controversy it had provoked. But today, largely thanks to Ahmadinejad's constant hammering of the theme during his ceaseless provincial tours, most Iranians are familiar with the issue.

And, because Ahmadinejad has presented the dispute as an attempt by the great powers to deny Iran nuclear energy, many Iranians, while suspicious of the regime's motives, nevertheless support its position.
Ahmadinejad's supporters hailed his election as the second Khomeinist revolution, in the hope that the cooling embers of Islamist passion could be fanned again into raging flames. They have promoted such ideas as a "clash of civilizations," in which Khomeinist Iran would provide the hard core of a new Islamic "superpower" to challenge the United States and offer humanity an alternative to the existing international order.

Thanks to Ahmadinejad, the nuclear issue has become a regime-change issue.

If the Khomeinist regime emerges victorious from the current confrontation, it would move to a higher degree of radicalism - thus, in effect, becoming a new regime. The radical faction would be able to purge the rich and corrupt mullahs by promoting a new generation of zealots linked with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard and the security services. It would also move onto the offensive in the region, seeking to reshape it after the Khomeinist revolution's geostrategic interests.
If, on the other hand, the regime is forced to back down on this issue, the radical moment would fade, while the many enemies of the regime regroup either to topple it or to change it beyond recognition, as Deng Xiaoping did with China's Maoist regime.


Read the whole story here.

Read More...

Pelosi's Unique Take on Ethics

Speaker Pelosi hammered home the theme of ethics in government for years, and indeed, made it a centerpiece of the Democratic '06 campaign. So where is the ethical standard set when Pelosi seeks to appoint William Jefferson, he of the ongoing "cold cash" investigation -- to a spot on the House Panel that deals directly with the important -- and often classified -- issue of Homeland Security?

House Republicans are wondering about that exact question.

[Rep.] Blunt blasted Speaker Nancy Pelosi . . . for her endorsement of Jefferson for the Homeland Security Committee, calling the selection "ludicrous."

"I won't support that - it's such a contradiction of what the Speaker said," Blunt told reporters, referring to Pelosi's promise to run the most ethical Congress in history.

The FBI found $90,000 in cash in Jefferson's freezer when they raided his home last year as part of an investigation into whether he accepted bribes related to a telecommunications deal in Africa. Although the FBI probe is ongoing and the congressman has not been indicted, the ethics cloud hanging over Jefferson's head has caused headaches for Pelosi. Pelosi stripped Jefferson of his seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee last year. That move angered members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who argued that Jefferson had not been indicted or found guilty of any crime and that ousting him from the tax-writing panel created an unfair precedent. Despite the demotion and the ongoing FBI investigation, Jefferson was reelected in November, leaving Pelosi in a quandary about how to handle his committee assignments. Before the recess, Pelosi announced that Jefferson would be placed on the Homeland Security panel.
. . . .
Jefferson's nomination to the panel likely will come to the floor as part of a slate of new committee assignments. Usually, nominations are non-controversial and are approved by unanimous consent, but Blunt indicated that Republicans plan to call for a recorded vote on Jefferson's committee assignment, a move that would force members to approve or disapprove of his selection for the panel.

Read the whole story here
.


Read More...

NYT Gets It Right, Wrong & Left on Afghanistan - & NYT Misses the Vietnam Parallel

The NYT, in their follow up article on the suicide bombing in Afghanistan allegedly targeting VP Cheney:

Get it right - the Taliban is growing in strength;

Get it wrong - Suicide bombings are not a sign of that strength

Get it left - gratuitous "anonymous" criticisms of the Bush administration with no basis in reality;

And NYT misses the parallel with Vietnam: If the enemy has a safe haven; they are almost impossible to defeat.

The NYT Gets It Right.

Al Qaeda and the Taliban appear stronger and more emboldened
in the region than at any time since the American invasion of the country five years ago, and since the Bush administration claimed to have decimated much of their middle management.

That is right. The Taliban were decimated and they fall back into Pakistan, into the radical Deobandi madrasas from which they grew. The area into which they fell was Northwestern Frontier Provinces -- an area so wild that the Pakistani government has never held sway there, even though it is nominally part of Pakistan. And we know that, over the past several years, the Taliban has reorganized, trained and recruited, probably with the support of rouge elements of Pakistan's intelligence service, the ISI.

The NYT Gets It Wrong -

The audacity of a suicide-bomb attack . . . underscores . . . a deepening . . . concern that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are resurgent.

American officials insisted that the importance of the attack, by a single suicide bomber who blew himself up a mile away from where the vice president was staying, was primarily symbolic. It was more successful at grabbing headlines and filling television screens with a scene of carnage than at getting anywhere near Mr. Cheney.

But the strike nonetheless demonstrated that Al Qaeda and the Taliban appear stronger and more emboldened in the region . . .
Resorting to suicide attacks, as a historical rule, demonstrates military weakness. Such attacks are only used when the attacker does not have the military strength to achieve a victory on the battlefield. Such attacks are not emblematic of any sort of military resurgence. The fact that such attacks are not stopped beforehand is emblematic of how difficult it is to identify such attacks in advance. That is much more of a police function then a military one.

Two, the NYT hints around it but does not seem to grasp the import of such attacks. The main goal of militant Muslim suicide attacks is to be consumed by the western electorate through the prism of the Western press, who aid the terrorism through their "if it bleeds, it leads" philosophy. Suicide attacks have been adapted by the Taliban precisely for that cause. The Taliban, though insane by our standards, are by no means stupid. And they see the cumulative effect of press reports of suicide attacks on the western electorate -- the election of a group of representatives and senators who want nothing more then to leave Iraq. Thus the Taliban would be fools not to adopt such a strategy.

The NYT gets it Left:


[C]ritics [of Bush and Cheney] . . . said the strike was another reminder of how Iraq had diverted the Bush administration from finishing the job in Afghanistan.
Oh, spare me. Who said that, the author? the editor? Please, that is just so nonsensical at this point. The Taliban were driven from Afghanistan. More troops were not needed to accomplish that. And as I recall, the cries about more troops in Afghanistan had much more to do with capturing bin Laden. That is ancient history.

Two, would another two battalions in Kabul have stopped a lone suicide bomber from infiltrating? Hardly.

The NYT Misses the Vietnam Parallel:

For all of the attempts of the left to draw parallels between Vietnam and our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, this is the one place were such a parallel would have been accurate. The Vietnam War actually began in the early 1950's, during the Eisenhower administration. The reason it dragged on twenty years was because the prime element responsible for the war, the communist North Vietnamese, had an untouchable safe haven in their own country. It was Nixon's bombing of Hanoi in December, 1972 that finally led the North Vietnamese to come seriously to the table for peace talks. One of the first rules of war is not to allow an enemy a safe haven. That is, unfortunately, what we have with the Taliban, and al Qaeda today, safe in nominally Pakistani territory. That is a real Vietnam parallel. And it is the one that needs to be addressed immediately. The NYT missed that one.

Read More...

 

View My Stats