The Italian Government's Unique Model For Addressing Crime

I admit that I do not know much about the Italian government of Romano Prodi, but I think it a fair bet that they are a left wing, permissive lot operating more then a little outside the boundaries of reality. My sole evidence for that is the rather unique approach to crime taken by the Prodi government. Faced with prison overcrowding, the government response was to throw open the doors of jails, releasing some 15,000 prisoners in a massive amnesty program of criminals with three years or less remaining on their sentences. No doubt to the amazement of the left, Italy has since found itself in the grips of a massive crime wave. One can only imagine Prodi's ministers sitting in their offices, racking their brains trying to determine what possibly could be the cause:

Armed robberies of Italian banks and building societies have soared after a controversial prisoner amnesty in the country's crowded jails.

Last year's indulto, or pardon, for prisoners with less than three years left to serve caused uproar.

More than 15,000 inmates were released. Within hours, dozens had been arrested and sent back to jail after reoffending. New crime figures have again fuelled the controversy.

The number of bank robberies has risen nationwide, official statistics say, including a staggering 102 per cent increase in Piedmont, in the north.

There have also been marked increases in Veneto (85.1 per cent) and the Marche region (86.9 per cent), where, after a three-day series of bank raids that netted more than £70,000, police arrested six people and found that all had been released under the amnesty.

In Turin, three men arrested for holding up a bank inside a hospital disguised as doctors were also found to be pardoned ex-prisoners.

One ex-convict, released after serving seven years for armed robbery, was arrested as he fled the scene of a raid in Milan and told police: "I needed the money to visit my girlfriend in Cuba."

In another case in Milan a man who was released early from a 10-year sentence for robbing 25 banks was back inside within a week after holding up several cashiers. He was arrested after one of them recognised him from an earlier hold-up.

There were 194 bank robberies nationwide in the month before the amnesty was introduced last July. After the law was passed by Romano Prodi's centre-Left coalition that figure rose steadily, peaking at 332 in October - at an average of more than 10 a day.

When the amnesty was introduced, Italy's prison population was 62,000; its jails have a capacity of 45,000. Ministry of Interior officials told The Sunday Telegraph that so far 26,000 prisoners had been released and that more than 3,000 - or 11.5 per cent - had been sent back to jail. The amnesty has come in for scathing criticism from the opposition, with the Alleanza Nazionale leader Gianfranco Fini saying: "The law is an insult to law-abiding Italian citizens." . . .

Read the entire story here.

Read More...

Summary only...

Dirty Bomb Threat High & Rising

This somber report appears in today's Telegraph (UK):

The threat of terrorists attacking Britain with a radioactive "dirty bomb" has grown rapidly in recent months, a leading defence expert has warned.

Prof Sandra Bell spoke out following the sentencing last week of seven al-Qaeda "foot soldiers" who had plotted dirty bomb attacks in Britain and the United States.

The men were jailed for a total of 136 years at Woolwich Crown Court. Their leader, Dhiren Barot, is serving life for conspiracy to murder.

Prof Bell, the director of homeland security at the Royal United Services Institute, said: "The threat from dirty bombs is now higher than it was two years ago, and has increased significantly over the last six months.

"I used to think you had more chance of winning the lottery than of being attacked with radiation weapons, but times are changing." She said that turmoil in parts of Africa and the former Soviet Union had created a black market in radioactive materials which could be used to lace a conventional bomb.

"Rather than maximise civilian casualties, the terrorists are now trying to cause as much disruption to public services as possible," she said. "Widespread radiation emitted by dirty bombs would be ideal for this."

. . . Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, the former head of MI5, warned three years ago that it was "only a matter of time" until terrorists launched a dirty bomb attack on the West.

Read the entire article here. Do you think there is anything to be concerned with if we further embolden the terrorists by leaving them to claim victory in Iraq? Sheer suicide.

Read More...

Summary only...

News From The Surge - As It Begins In Earnest

Now with all five combat brigades on the ground, General Petraues tells us that the surge will begin in earnest, moving into al Qaeda positions in Diyala and in the belts surrounding Baghdad - the areas that were either long term al Qaeda strongholds or areas that al Qaeda has retreated to escape the offensives in Baghdad and and Anbar.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said Saturday that a troop surge in Iraq is only starting to have its full impact and that it is too soon to tell whether conditions will be ripe by September for decisions on US force levels.

The US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, said that the latest troop reinforcements to arrive in theatre had enabled the military to begin major operations against Al-Qaeda rear-bases outside the capital.

"While I indicated yesterday that I think we'll see some trends and be able to point in some directions by September, the full impact of the surge is really just beginning to be felt," Gates said.

. . . Petraeus and US ambassador Ryan Crocker are supposed to report to a sceptical Congress in September on whether the surge is working or whether an alternative strategy is needed.

Gates was to meet Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki later to press for more rapid progress by his Shiite-led government in reaching out to the disenchanted Sunni former elite.

He is the third senior US official to deliver the same message over the past week, following Deputy Defence Secretary John Negroponte, the former US ambassador, and Admiral William Fallon, commander of US forces in the Middle East.

"We are pressing hard on those (reconcilation benchmarks)," said the US ambassador, who joined Gates and Petraeus at a news conference.

"The Iraqi government has been pushing itself. The progress has been frustratingly slow.

"We will see where we are by September. We will report at that time honestly as to what has been achieved and what hasn't," said Crocker.

Gates, who visited troops at a joint security post in Baghdad, said there had been successes in reducing violence in Anbar province west of the capital, although security had deteriorated in Diyala province to its north.

"In terms of the security situation, as I say we've got two months, three months to go. There are some positive trends, there are some negative trends," he said.

Petraeus said it was possible to make progress over the next few months.

"And then we'll see how long we'll sustain the surge, and how long we can sustain the surge, because those considerations enter into it as well."

. . . US troops levels in Iraq swelled to 155,000 over the past week as the last of five additional combat brigades deployed, US commanders said.

Petraeus said "fairly large coordinated offensive operations" had been launched against Al-Qaeda in areas outside Baghdad in the previous 24 hours.

"We have been doing what we might be calling shaping operations in a lot of these areas, doing intelligence gathering, putting in some special operators, going in but then coming out," he said.

"And now for the first time are we going to some key areas in the belt from which Al-Qaeda has sallied forth with car bombs and additional fighters and so forth."

Read the entire story here.

The military is reporting on the results of several raids tied to the new offensive.

Iraqi and coalition forces captured one terrorist leader and killed 16 suspected terrorists today. Ten more insurgents died in fighting yesterday.

Coalition forces in Baghdad captured five suspected terrorists, including an alleged al Qaeda in Iraq emir whose organization includes a deadly car-bomb cell in the city, during two raids today. At one targeted location, coalition forces destroyed two vehicles used to transport explosives and personnel for the terrorist network.

An operation in Mosul killed one terrorist. Outside the targeted building, a man identified as Izz al-Din, also known as Abu Ahmad, drew a weapon on the approaching ground forces. Coalition forces engaged and killed him. One suspected terrorist was detained on scene for his involvement with Abu Ahmad.

Abu Ahmad was the head of five terrorist cells in Mosul and was responsible for directing attacks against Iraqi and coalition forces, U.S. officials said.

Yesterday, Multinational Division Baghdad troops killed 10 insurgents who had launched a series of roadside-bomb and small-arms-fire ambushes in the West Rashid district of southern Baghdad.

. . . Meanwhile, a number of raids have taken place involving the discovery and seizure of enemy munitions. In one raid yesterday, nine individuals were detained on suspicion of running a bomb-making cell in the east Doura neighborhood of Baghdad’s Rashid district.

. . . In other news, troops seized several caches on June 13. Baghdad troops teamed up with a platoon of Iraqi national police to conduct a raid in the eastern Sadr City district.

The troops discovered three complete 60 mm mortar systems, complete 82 mm and 120 mm mortar systems, four 120 mm mortar rounds, 32 60 mm mortar rounds, three 107 mm rockets, a rifle scope, two AK-47 rifles, two sets of body armor, and a variety of weapon manuals.

An air and ground assault took place on two houses in Salman Pak on June 13. The raids yielded two 107 mm rockets, homemade explosives, two AK-47 assault rifles, a bolt-action rifle, several propane tanks, copper wire, ammunition, magazines, and several assault vests.

In another raid, Iraqi troops and Baghdad soldiers raided a weapons cache in the Yarmouk neighborhood. The cache contained 113 landmines, 63 grenades, three rockets, three mortars, two gas masks, five washing machine timers, more than 2,000 rounds of AK-47 ammunition, and seven boxes of various electronics and other assorted explosives.

It is the largest weapons cache discovery by U.S. or Iraqi forces to date in the Yarmouk area, U.S. officials said.

Read the entire story here.

The increased operational tempo and chasing the rats down their holes is inevitably going to lead to more U.S. casualties.

The fight for security in Baghdad is likely to “get harder over the coming months as we engage an increasingly desperate enemy,” the deputy secretary of state said in Baghdad today.

John D. Negroponte, who served as U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 2004 until assuming his current post in February, spoke with reporters after two days of meetings in Iraq with senior U.S. and Iraqi leaders.

All recognize that as the Baghdad security plan reaches full stride with the last of the surge troops arriving this month, difficult days are likely to remain ahead, he said.

Read the entire story here. For most of us, this is the unfortunate cost of succeeding in any military conflict. For Harry Reid, it is twisted into a sign of American failure.

On a far more important note then Senator Reid, here is a fascinating briefing on Mental Health in the military:

Read More...

Summary only...

Trainwreck Trent

I have posted previously that Trent Lott is the worst of a pretty motley lot of Republicans in Congress. He is the anti-Reagen - big spending, a lover of earmarks and back room deal making, and a hypocrite. He is, in short, a trainwreck, the poster boy for why Republicans got spanked in 2006 - as independents turned to the slightly more principled Harry Reid and conservatives stayed away from the ballot booth, repelled by the stench of a Republican Party that was far more akin to the Democrat Party of early 90's.

It is certainly possible to be conservative and to be pro-immigration. Indeed, one can be strongly in the conservative camp and yet, when all facts are known, disagree strongly on well reasoned principals. It is another thing entirely to be kept in the dark and be told to shut up and blindly support whatever those we have elected present to us as a fait accompli. That is the case with the immigration bill pending before congress. This immigration bill was written in back rooms without hearings that would have allowed it and other schools of thought on the issue to be thoroughly examined and vetted. As George Will said:

. . . [T]he recent immigration legislation had three handicaps. First, it was drafted in secret -- . . . the immigration bill was not the subject of hearings that could have clarified such fundamental matters as whether immigrants are net drains on, or contributors to, the fiscal health of federal, state and local governments. Second, like many comprehensive ``solutions'' to large, intricate problems that are susceptible to incremental ameliorations, the immigration bill, . . . was presented as a package so finely calibrated and exquisitely balanced that any significant change would, as Shakespeare said:

Take but degree away, untune that string,
And, hark! what discord follows.

Third, people skeptical about the legislation were, if not demonized, cast as bigots or, at best, people uninterested in doing ``the right thing for America'' (President Bush).

Enter Trent Lott, who, as reported in the NYT, now takes aim not only at Republicans voting their conscience, but also takes direct aim at conservatives on talk radio, the only medium where conservative thought is easilly accessible and, indeed, dominant:

Comments by Republican senators on Thursday suggested that they were feeling the heat from conservative critics of the bill, who object to provisions offering legal status. The Republican whip, Trent Lott of Mississippi, who supports the bill, said: “Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem.”

At some point, Mr. Lott said, Senate Republican leaders may try to rein in “younger guys who are huffing and puffing against the bill.”

This dual attack by Lott on independant thought and on the one medium that conservatives dominate is arrogant and incredibly foolish. Lott is completely out of touch with the conservative base of the Republican Party. To the Democrats, he is the best man they have in the Republican Party. To the rest of us, he is a trainwreck who needs to be challenged in his state's primaries and stripped of all leadership positions in the Senate.



Don't miss Michelle Malkin's coverage of Trent. And do visit his website at Trentlott.com.

Read More...

Summary only...

Jasser Skewers CAIR & Its Political Islamist Agenda

The Washington Times ran a story recently about the Council on American Islamic Relations, nominally a civil rights organizaton that purports to represent American Muslims. The Washington Times noted that CAIR's membership had declined by 90% since 9-11, and that they were managing to stay afloat by the good graces of 12 unnamed donors who contributed almost the entirety of CAIR's 300 million dollar operating budget. CAIR responded here, claiming with numerous adjectives the article to be incorrect, though failing contest any of the facts with contrary facts. M. Zudi Jasser, former U.S. Naval Officer and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, quite eloquently takes issue with CAIR and their response to the Washington Times article:

The Washington Times printed a report by Audrey Hudson this week, “CAIR Membership falls 90% since 9/11”, discussing CAIR’s (Council on American Islamic Relations) membership numbers as disclosed on CAIR’s own 990 Tax returns. Within hours, CAIR described the report as a ‘hit-piece’ in a hate-filled rant of a press release and action alert. A review of the Times piece reveals simple reporting of data from CAIR tax forms on their dwindling membership numbers, donor numbers, and yet increasing funds.

The piece quotes Parvez Ahmed, CAIR Chairman, on the countervailing increase in the number of CAIR chapters around the country during the same period post 9/11. It also cites the recent Department of Justice (DOJ) listing of CAIR as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) HAMAS fundraising case. The DOJ refers therein to CAIR’s leadership and origins as, “members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organization.” For all CAIR’s objections, there was no refutation of any of this.

With the elaboration of these facts and more, CAIR still ran wild describing the Times reporter as “having a vendetta against our organization and the American Muslim community since she was barred from a recent CAIR news conference because of her sloppy and agenda-driven reporting.” With a report revealing that its national membership figures reported to the IRS are less than 1700 members in 2006, they still have the audacity to say that criticism of CAIR is equivalent to criticism of over 3 million Muslims in the “American Muslim community”.

This is, clear and simple, the modus operands of “political Islam” and its Islamist operatives. This is also more than likely one of the reasons for their dwindling membership numbers. While they may occasionally be doing good work for the civil rights of certain Muslims in America on selected cases, their Islamist political agenda and their persistence in the claim that criticism of CAIR is akin to criticism of all American Muslims is dishonest, deceptive, and a hijacking of our faith community.

Rather than respond with a semblance of a valid intellectual discourse or refutation of the ideas and facts contained in the June 12 report, CAIR preferred to respond with further empty screeds of hyperbole, victimization, and false claims of religious intolerance and hate-mongering. They claim to be working toward eliminating hate. Yet, they have a wild imagination of hate and rush to claim victimization as they deflect any substantive debate. This actually makes a compelling case for the fact that their attention to perceived incidents of intolerance for Islam and Muslims is a means to an ends of the empowerment of political Islam. In fact Nihad Awad told a gathering of Muslims just that in April in a discussion on their ‘flying imam’ lawsuit in Virginia at ADAMS (All Dulles Area Muslim Society),

Reporting to an organization like CAIR is important, because it is empowering. It is empowering to the Muslims themselves who report, it is empowering to the organization, and it is important to the status of Muslims within the United States. Also it is a powerful tool and message to the government and the legislators, to those who make the laws in the country, to know that this phenomenon has to be dealt with, it has to be dealt with effectively, and results have to be seen….

CAIR scavenges for claims of civil rights abuses not necessarily just to try and humbly build bridges to the greater American community. Is their agenda, in fact, more about empowering Islamists and intimidating non-Islamists?

The rule of law and the protections of our Constitution are certainly the cornerstone of the protection of our rights of religious freedom in America. But there is a fine line between the legitimate representation of individual Muslims whose rights of religious freedom have been infringed and the blatant manipulation of a system for the advancement of a variant political ideology at the expense of some victims.

True to form in the usual Islamist fallback to public criticism, CAIR claimed that the Washington Times was ‘anti-Muslim’ and ‘anti-Islam’. They use the protection of religion when the facts are not on their side. They use the discourse of politics when they want to push forth their Islamist agenda with the presumption of speaking for all Muslims. They will delve into the political only on their own terms in both foreign and domestic policy but when they are on the receiving end of political criticism they run for cover under the guise of victimization.

Why all of the venom directed at the Washington Times or at their reporter, Audrey Hudson-- one of the few national reporters willing to peel the Islamist onion and look deeper into Islamist organizations like CAIR and their ideologies? There is absolutely nothing in the Times report anti-Islamic or anti-Muslim. It is simply critical of CAIR. To say that CAIR is synonymous with Islam or Muslims is Islamism and gives all Muslim non-members of CAIR (the vast majority of American Muslims) short shrift.

It is long overdue for America and especially for Muslims to discuss why such political discourse and reporting could ever be described by an organization like CAIR as being anti-Muslim or anti-Islamic. In fact, a more cogent argument could be made that such reports are pro-Muslim and pro-Islam since they ultimately rescue most Muslims from the grip of Islamists and Wahhabists. Such discussion of realities and ideologies will go a long way toward preserving a positive image of Islam and the inclusiveness of all Muslims under a purely spiritual Islam devoid of a political agenda.

Nothing is more clarifying than, CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper’s own quotation in their Action Alert,

“It is CAIR’s principled and effective defense of the American Muslim community and our criticism of failed foreign and domestic policies that have made us the target of these scurrilous attacks. We will not be intimidated or silenced by hate-mongers.”

Herein, CAIR claims to be defenders of the entire Muslim community. Where did I sign up for that? Herein, CAIR admits to its primary active critique of American domestic and foreign policy on behalf of the entire American Muslim community. Thus, CAIR and so many of the other American Islamist organizations are about much more than simply “defending the civil rights of Muslims”. If only they stuck to civil rights, less Muslims would have problems with them. They are about the penetration of political Islam into our foreign and domestic policy under the guise of civil rights. In fact, their constant refrain about intimidation and hate-mongering is in fact a cultivation of their own industry. The lawsuit they are sponsoring on behalf of the ‘flying imams’ in Shqeirat v. U.S. Airways, et al, is much more about intimidation than about bridge-building or religious freedom as AIFD has noted.

The next step in this assessment of constituency is to understand their ideology. So much of the substantive criticism of CAIR arises from their unwillingness to be specific in condemnations of radical Muslims, radical organizations, and despotic regimes. Perhaps their dwindling numbers are in fact an ideological problem which does not speak to the majority of American Muslims. Honest debate will have to include a discussion of CAIR’s and other American Islamist organization responses to the following questions which I have been querying for a long time.

1- Will CAIR work to dismantle and lead an organized effort against terrorist organizations and individuals by name beginning with Al Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, Jamaat al-Islamiya, and HAMAS to name just a few of the radical Islamist enemies of America? Will they name and ideologically engage the extremism of the Wahhabists of Saudi Arabia, the theocrats of Iran or the despots of Syria, Egypt or Sudan, and the litany of other dictatorships in the Muslim world? Empty generic condemnations of terrorism are of no impact.

2- Will CAIR acknowledge that political Islam (Islamism) whether militant or not, is the toxin which feeds the terrorism committed by radicalized Muslims?

3- Will CAIR acknowledge the need out of honesty for a faith-based civil rights organization to equally focus upon the civil rights abuses of Muslims by other Muslims as well as by non-Muslims whether it occurs in mosques, Muslim organizations, or so-called Muslim nations? A dismissal of Muslim abuses is hypocrisy.

4- Will CAIR acknowledge that counter-terrorism is a greater public responsibility to the organized American Muslim community than the obsession with the protection of our civil rights? Is it not the primary role of Muslim American organizations to lead the ideological war against radical Islamists? Isn’t this the number one issue on the mind of most Americans in 2007? Non-Muslims can do nothing to deconstruct this poisonous ideology. Our fellow Americans living in fear for their security are looking for us to lead this fight. The credibility of Muslims is suffering deeply as a result of the complete denial of this responsibility by groups like CAIR. In fact, there may be no better way to preserve our rights than by leading an ideological movement against political Islam and militant Islamism.

5- Will CAIR join anti-Islamist Muslims in declaring that the “Islamic state” regardless of its democratic processes is in principle significantly inferior to a “pluralistic Constitutional democracy under God” like the United States? Will CAIR declare the concept of a global Caliphate as archaic and no longer relevant to Muslims in the 21st century? Is the concept of the Muslim “ummah” or “nation” archaic?

6- Will CAIR join what was described in the Pew poll as the 49% of Muslims who felt that the mosque was not the place for the discussion of politics? Will they then help AIFD expose political sermons and their agenda around the United States? Will they moreover call upon our fellow co-religionists to fully and unequivocally separate the spiritual from the political? If they will not, will they recognize that they only represent Islamists and those who believe in political Islam—the remaining 51% according to Pew?

7- How can they honestly claim to speak for anyone beyond their membership and donors?

The Washington Times piece about CAIR was not a hit-piece nor was it anti-Muslim or anti-Islamic. It begins the long overdue debate about the agenda of organizations like CAIR and where they stand with regard to political Islam and these questions. Soon, mainstream media and government leaders are going to need finally to begin to ignore the intimidation tactics of organizations like CAIR and to engage political Islam on the questions above.

They need to do so without fear of violating political correctness or offending pious Muslims. Spiritual Islam and non-Islamist Muslims in fact still are often at the mercy of Islamists, not just in America but across the globe. This is often not only due to the passivity of the majority of non-activist Muslims but to the propping up by government and the MSM of Islamists. We saw this in the recent refusal of PBS to air ABG Films, Inc. documentary, Islam v Islamists. Many anti-Islamist Muslims yearn for the day when the personal domain of the faith of Islam is not poisoned by any national domestic and foreign policy agendas of Islamist organizations like CAIR. American political discourse by activist Muslims should be all about our common national interests and universal humanitarian principles and not about being Muslim, Islamic, or being victims. The Muslims who cannot make this distinction may as well form overt Islamic political parties and make it more obvious as to their intentions and platforms when it comes to American domestic and foreign policy.

Read the entire story here.

Read More...

Summary only...

Unbelievable Part II - The Semifinals

Paul Potts, whose initial performance in Britain's Got Talent was simply astounding, advanced through the semi-finals with an equally powerful and moving piece. As you watch the video, you can see just how much the fans - and the judges - just love this man whose talent is extraordinary. The finals will be Sunday.

Read More...

Summary only...

Military's Quarterly Report on Iraq

You can find the U.S. Military’s Quarterly Report to Congress on Iraq here. The report covers the first two and a half months of the surge through the end of April, 2007. The surge is having an effect. Some highlights:

Sectarian murders peaked in December 06 with over, 1,100 sectarian incidents resulting in 1,600 sectarian murders. In April, the number of sectarian incidents was significantly down to just over 400 incidents with just over 600 sectarian murders.

Weapons caches found in Iraq numbered just 100 in July 2006. In April 2007, they numbered just shy of 700.

One of the most important figures – cooperation by the locals – can be roughly gauged from the number of tips being fed to coalition forces. Tips increased from a low of 4000 in June, 2006 to over 12,000 during April, 2007.

The coalition is having a lot more success as regards car bombs (VBIED). Car bombs found and cleared comprised roughly 69% of all VBIED incidents.

Al Qaeda in Iraq is the single greatest cause of violence in Iraq today.

Overall, violence is the same this quarter as last. The reasons are al Qaeda has moved into belts surrounding Baghdad and into Diyala Province to escape the surge and the Sunni uprising in Anbar. Al Qaeda is using suicide attacks and suicide car bombs against soft targets in these areas to keep the level of violence high.

The final elements of the surge are just now in place and it will be several months before any judgment can be made on the likelihood of success.

This quarterly report makes no mention of any area of Iraq being close to civil war

EXCERPTS From the Report:

Executive Summary

The strategic goal of the United States in Iraq remains a united Iraq that can govern, defend and sustain itself and is an ally in the war on terror. This report measures progress toward— and setbacks from—achieving this goal during this reporting period. Although the objectives have not changed, the strategy and tactics for achieving them have been modified and will continue to adapt to an evolving situation. The United States and its Coalition partners remain committed to help the Iraqi people assume full responsibility for their country.

. . . Sectarian killings have declined, especially in Baghdad; vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs) found and cleared comprised roughly 69% of all VBIED incidents; and national confidence in the Government of Iraq’s (GoI) ability to improve the security environment reached its highest level (63%) in twelve months. In another somewhat encouraging development, Sunni tribal resistance to al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) along the Euphrates River Valley has been growing and—combined with a robust Coalition presence in Fallujah and Ramadi and increased effectiveness of Iraqi forces—is hindering AQI operations. However, local Sunni cooperation with and support to Coalition forces in Anbar Province is not uniform. As a result of this tribal resistance, violence in Anbar decreased markedly during the reporting period.

However, terrorist attacks increased in other areas as AQI and other groups attempted to spread sectarian conflict. As for the status of Iraqi security forces, the United States, its Coalition partners and the Iraqi Government continued to expand the size and capability of the Iraqi forces to meet emerging requirements. As of May 14, 2007, approximately 346,500 Iraqi personnel received training and equipment. Given the persistence of the violence by insurgents, terrorists and militias, the Iraqi forces will require continued training, development and equipping to be able to progressively assume missions from Coalition forces. Some of the main areas being addressed to increase the Iraqi forces’ capabilities include reform of the Ministry of Interior (MoI) forces, development of Ministry of Defense (MoD) and MoI logistics and administrative capabilities, development of combat enablers for the military forces and development of junior leaders.

On the political front, the United States and its Coalition partners are working with the GoI to safeguard gains and to develop strong institutions that impartially serve all Iraqis. Key legislative or reconciliation actions—such as the Hydrocarbon Law, de-Ba'athification reform, and Article 140 (Kirkuk)—were not completed during this reporting period, although progress was made. Encouraging efforts include the selection of the High Electoral Commission and the continuation of work on constitutional reform. During this period, Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT) were doubled to enhance local and provincial administrative capacity. Reconciliation remains a serious unfulfilled objective.

While significant challenges remain, several positive economic developments emerged. The most significant was the launch in Egypt on May 3, 2007 of the International Compact with Iraq to help Iraq gain assistance and debt relief contingent on political and economic reforms. Additionally, the Central Bank of Iraq made progress in reducing price inflation, and GoI statistics show a slight improvement in employment. The International Monetary Fund found satisfactory Iraqi performance to date under the Standby Arrangement. However, oil production, the principal economic driver in Iraq, is not growing and remained at about the same levels as during this period in 2006 due to poor infrastructure and inadequate security.

Additional efforts will be needed to build the capacity of Iraqi ministries and provinces to execute their capital investment budgets, particularly for the oil sector, which is the key to supporting economic development. The Department of Defense continued to help the GoI revitalize certain state-owned enterprises to increase employment and make them more attractive for privatization.

Overall, it is too early to assess the impact of the new approach. For the period covered by this report, the additional forces to support the new approach were not fully in place, and those that were had only a limited time to conduct operations. In addition, new initiatives such as enhanced PRTs and focused efforts to improve GoI budget execution and rule of law remain in their initial stages. On the political front, reconciliation is a top priority. Economically, further provision of goods and services by the GoI that benefit the Iraqi population is required. Progress will depend on Iraqi follow-through on their commitments made as part of the new approach; the actions of insurgents, militia and terrorists to disrupt reconciliation will be a key challenge to the Iraqi government’s ability to fulfill its commitments. . .


Iranian Influence

Various Shi’a and Kurdish politicians maintain longstanding relationships with Iranian officials and state organizations, and Iran maintains longstanding economic and religious ties to Iraq. The Iranians likely seek a Shi’a dominated Iraqi government that is deferential to and supportive of Iranian interests.

The Iranian regime’s primary tool for exercising clandestine influence in Iraq is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) Qods Force (QF), which provides arms, intelligence, funds, training, and propaganda support to Iraqi Shi’a militants targeting and killing Coalition and Iraqi forces, as well as Iraqi civilians. The QF seeks to increase long-term Iranian strategic influence in Iraq and the withdrawal of U.S. forces. Among the weapons it provides to Iraqi militants are improvised explosive devices (IEDs), advanced IED technologies (including explosively formed projectiles (EFPs)), and rockets and mortars used for indirect fire attacks. U.S. forces in Iraq are acting to disrupt any network—regardless of nationality—that provides weapons to Iraqi militants and insurgents. These actions are consistent with the mandate granted to the MNF-I by both the UN Security Council and the GoI to take all necessary measures to contribute to the maintenance of Iraq’s security and stability, as well as defense. The USG has urged Iran to play a more constructive role in Iraq.

Syrian Influence

Syria seeks to maintain ties with the New Ba’ath Party in Iraq and to hasten the withdrawal of Coalition forces from the region. Syria has emerged as an important organizational and coordination hub for elements of the former Iraqi regime, allowing these groups to engage in activities hostile to our efforts from within Syrian borders. Although Damascus has made some recent improvements in combating cross-border terrorist movements by arresting insurgents it considers a threat to its own internal security, terrorists and foreign fighters continue to find sanctuary, border transit opportunities, and logistical support in Syria.

Tensions on the Border with Turkey

Turkey’s primary concerns regarding Iraq continue to be terrorism executed by the Kurdistan Peoples Congress (KGK, formerly PKK) and the final status of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk. Public disagreements between Turkish and Kurdish leaders have strained relations between Turkey and Iraq and continued KGK terrorism in Turkey (along with heightened civil-military tensions in Turkey as it approaches national elections in July) are likely to increase those strains. The U.S. Special Envoy for Countering the KGK continues to engage Turkish and Iraqi counterparts to increase cooperation against the terrorist threat from the KGK. Progress has been made toward a tripartite agreement on closing down Makhmour refugee camp, which will eliminate a potential haven for KGK propaganda and influence on young Turkish Kurds.

Tensions in Kirkuk have nevertheless increased in recent months. According to Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution, a referendum must be held on the final status of Kirkuk by the end of 2007. Turkoman and Arab communities’ concern over increased Kurdish control of Kirkuk’s governing institutions has led Turkey to speak out on behalf of the Turkoman community in protest of the perceived Kurdish goal of independence. . .



Security Environment

. . . Much of the violence is attributable to sectarian friction, and each faction is driven by its own political and economic power relationships. Illegally armed groups are engaged in a cycle of sectarian and politically motivated violence, using tactics that include indiscriminate bombing, murder, executions, and indirect fire to intimidate and to provoke sectarian conflict. The United States is supporting Iraqi efforts to reduce sectarian violence in Baghdad, regain control over the capital, and defeat al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) and its supporters, ensuring that they find no safe haven in Iraq.

. . . In support of political efforts, Operation Fardh al-Qanoon (FAQ) was launched on February 14, 2007 as the main security component of the New Way Forward. FAQ is intended to provide population security, primarily in Baghdad, to contain the sectarian violence and give Iraqis an opportunity to pursue political reconciliation and to implement government reforms. FAQ involves an increase of five U.S. Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) and support forces; four of the five BCTs are now in place. The remaining BCT will be in place in June.

. . . Nonetheless, Iraqi units are generally performing up to expectations. Although the initial battalions had mixed results in deploying at desired manning levels, units deployed later had sufficient soldiers and officers to meet operational requirements, and some Iraqi commanders showed an ability to plan, command, and control relatively
sophisticated joint and/or combined operations.


. . . Prime Minister Maliki has verbally committed to a militia demobilization, disarmament, and re-integration (DDR) program. A 12 May amnesty workshop named an executive director of the program. In early April, Prime Minister Maliki approved the DDR committee structure and appointed an Executive Director for the committee. As of
this report, committee members have yet to be appointed and work has not begun on drafting a DDR plan. The 2007 Iraqi budget includes US$150 million to institute this program. Militia will remain a problem as long as the public lacks confidence in the ability of the Iraqi Army and Police to adequately perform the protective role that militia claim in many communities. Establishing an effective DDR program will probably require technical assistance from the international community as well as broad support from within Iraq. In addition, the extent of the Iraqi public’s commitment to such a program is unclear. In Baghdad, a majority of residents report that militias act in the best interest of the Iraqi people. On a positive note, only 20% of respondents held this view nationwide.

Overall Assessment of the Security Environment

The overall level of violence in Iraq this quarter remained similar to the previous reporting period but shifted location. Insurgents and extremists are unable to operate as freely in Baghdad because of FAQ and in Anbar Province because of growing tribal opposition to AQI. Accordingly, many insurgents and extremists have moved operations to Diyala, Ninewa, and the outlying areas of Baghdad Province. Outside Baghdad and Anbar, reductions in Coalition force presence and reliance upon local Iraqi security forces have resulted in a tenuous security situation. Sectarian violence and insurgent attacks still involve a very small portion of the population, but public perceptions of violence have adversely affected reconciliation and contribute to population migration. Early indications are that sectarian killings have declined (albeit possibly temporarily) in Baghdad and that some Sunni tribes in Anbar Province will no longer tolerate AQI operations. Continued operations should build upon these encouraging signs.

The conflict in Iraq remains complex and requires that the GoI and the Coalition continue to undercut the root causes throughout the country. FAQ demonstrates that some positive changes in the dynamics that perpetuate violence may be possible, but more time, and careful analysis will be required before conclusions about the effectiveness of this effort can be reached. Some preliminary results include a significant increase in the number of caches cleared (reaching a 12-month high in April) and a significant reduction in sectarian murders and executions nationwide.


Assessment of the Security Environment—

Baghdad

Baghdad is the center of gravity in the struggle for political and economic influence in Iraq for irreconcilable violent groups. Although it is still too early to assess whether a sustainable trend is emerging, attacks in Baghdad declined as Coalition and Iraqi force presence expanded while Sunni insurgent groups and Shi’a militants departed or refrained from operations. Despite the departure of large numbers of JAM fighters from Baghdad, JAM has continued to act as a de-facto government in Sadr City.

Although sectarian-motivated Iraqi-on-Iraqi violence has declined in Baghdad, violence against Coalition and Iraqi security forces remained consistent with previous levels. Despite heightened security measures and increased ISF proficiency at reducing civilian casualties from sectarian murders and executions, AQI maintained the ability to conduct infrequent, high-profile, mass-casualty attacks in Baghdad.

Assessment of the Security Environment—

Western Iraq

AQI remains the primary threat to the security environment in Anbar Province, where it continues to target local ISF through use of vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs), suicide attacks, assassinations, and hit-and-run attacks to subvert and undermine governmental institutions. There are some early signs that are encouraging as Sunni tribal resistance to AQI along the Euphrates River Valley has grown, and combined with a robust ISF and Coalition presence in Fallujah and Ramadi, has begun to hinder AQI operations. However, local Sunni cooperation with and support to Coalition forces in Anbar Province is not uniform. Moreover, the Iraqi public in Western Iraq is increasingly willing to provide intelligence and report weapons caches. As part of the increase in force levels, 4,000 additional Marines are currently deploying into Anbar Province.

These additional Marines, in conjunction with an expansion of the ISF, and aided by increasing tribal resistance to AQI, are pushing AQI out of many of the population centers, facilitating stability in large parts of the province. Although tribal resistance to AQI is a positive development in Anbar, insurgent groups continue to attack Coalition and ISF targets in other areas in western Iraq, excluding Anbar. The recent success of tribal engagement in Anbar Province is primarily driven by a concerted campaign of widespread contact with the Anbar tribes ranging from the
Syrian border to Baghdad. The Sahawa al- Iraqi (SAI), formerly known as Sahawa al- Anbar, an anti-AQI tribal movement led by 41-year-old Sheikh Abdul Sattar Bezea Fitikhan al-Rishawi, claims 24 tribes as organizational members. Primarily Ramadicentric, SAI is representative of the capabilities of tribal alliances to assist the Coalition in fighting AQI and other resistance elements. Though notable for its contributions to fighting AQI, the SAI is not alone in tribal efforts to eradicate AQI. Large and influential tribes, such as the Albu Mahal, Albu Nimr, and Albu Issa, have also actively opposed AQI.

Euphrates River Valley has grown, and combined with a robust ISF and Coalition presence in Fallujah and Ramadi, has begun to hinder AQI operations. However, local Sunni cooperation with and support to Coalition forces in Anbar Province is not uniform. Moreover, the Iraqi public in Western Iraq is increasingly willing to provide intelligence and report weapons caches. As part of the increase in force levels, 4,000 additional Marines are currently deploying into Anbar Province. These additional Marines, in conjunction with an expansion of the ISF, and aided by increasing tribal resistance to AQI, are pushing AQI out of many of the population centers, facilitating stability in large parts of the province. Although tribal resistance to AQI is a positive development in Anbar, insurgent groups continue to attack Coalition and ISF targets in other areas in western Iraq, excluding Anbar.

The recent success of tribal engagement in Anbar Province is primarily driven by a concerted campaign of widespread contact with the Anbar tribes ranging from the Syrian border to Baghdad. The Sahawa al- Iraqi (SAI), formerly known as Sahawa al- Anbar, an anti-AQI tribal movement led by 41-year-old Sheikh Abdul Sattar Bezea
Fitikhan al-Rishawi, claims 24 tribes as organizational members. . . .

SAI is representative of the capabilities of tribal alliances to assist the Coalition in fighting AQI and other resistance elements. Though notable for its contributions to fighting AQI, the SAI is not alone in tribal efforts to eradicate AQI.

Large and influential tribes, such as the Albu Mahal, Albu Nimr, and Albu Issa, have also actively opposed AQI.

Assessment of the Security Environment—

Central/Northern Iraq

Outside of Baghdad, this reporting period saw increased inter-sectarian violence in Diyala, increased high-profile attacks in northern Iraq by AQI, and Coalition and Iraqi forces confronting the JAM—the Shi’a militia associated with the radical cleric Muktada-al Sadr—in Diwaniyah. Ongoing ethnic and sectarian violence in central and northern Iraq is a reflection of AQI and JAM elements competing for political control of Diyala Province—particularly as some of the Baghdad militia fighters moved to the province. On a positive note, there are initial signs that some tribes in Diyala are discussing ways of countering AQI. Coalition forces are using lessons learned in tribal engagement in Anbar to help reconciliation efforts in areas such as Abu Ghraib, Samara and Bayji.

In Ninewa Province, Mosul is AQI’s northern strategic base and serves as a way-station for foreign fighters entering from Syria. There, insurgent and terrorist groups have increased the frequency and intensity of attacks on the local police. AQI’s efforts to reignite sectarian violence in Tal’Afar through high-profile attacks against civilians reflects its desire to undermine stability along sectarian fault lines and deepen the conflict in Iraq. Coalition forces deployed to Baqubah in mid-March and local ISF units have been unable to diminish rising sectarian violence contributingto the volatile security situation.

AQI has shifted some of its focus to the north. This is due in part to expanded Coalition and Iraqi operations in Baghdad and the rise of ethnic tensions in Kirkuk. These tensions may mount as property is reallocated to Kurds displaced under the previous regime’s Arabization programs and as the prospect of a census and referendum on Kirkuk’s status looms. Kurdish and Sunni Arab concerns about fair distribution of hydrocarbon revenues also could exacerbate tensions.

Assessment of the Security Environment—

Kurdish Region

The overall security situation is stable in Dahuk, Irbil, and Sulaymaniyah, and several foreign countries are establishing consulates and pursuing oil and energy business interests in the Kurdish region. However, the attack on May 9 against the Kurdish Ministry of Interior in Irbil demonstrates that AQI maintains its ability to strike in the Kurdish region. Violence occurs mostly in outlying areas near the border with Iran.

Traditional conflicts with Ansar al-Sunnah (AS) have ebbed and flowed in the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) region since the mid- 1990’s. The newly formed Brigades of Kurdistan announced their intent to attack the Kurdish government but the capabilities of the group is unknown. While AQI’s increased presence in northern Iraq is of growing concern, AQI largely conducts its anti-Kurdish operations in Kirkuk and Mosul, rarely venturing to more remote areas in the region in large part due to the presence of Kurdish security forces.

The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) has provided relatively good governance over the three Kurdish provinces. The existence of the Kongra Gel (KGK) and the potential for border skirmishes with Turkey or Iran, and in the case of the KGK, possible cross-border operations by the Turkish Army, are issues that could increase tensions in the Kurdish region.

Assessment of the Security Environment—

Southern Iraq

The security situation in southern Iraq is characterized by competition between various Shi’a militia, factions, tribes and organized criminals aligned with various parties positioning themselves for greater influence over local authorities and resources. Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council (formerly SCIRI) (SIIC) maintains a strong political presence in the south. Increased political competition between SIIC and the Office of Martyr Sadr (OMS), the political arm of JAM, has resulted in clashes between their respective armed wings, the Badr Organization and JAM. Some JAM members relocated to the south in response to FAQ in Baghdad, further empowering JAM in confrontations with both Badr and provincial authorities. In Basrah Province, the OMS and the governing Fadilah Party vie for dominance over local economic activity, adding to the intra-Shi’a violence. This intra- Shi’a violence has contributed to a significant increase in attacks against Coalition forces in Basrah and an observed greater hostility towards Coalition presence, as well as highlighted the failure of the Iraqi police to challenge Shi’a militants in southern Iraq. In Diwaniyah, however, a reported increase in JAM presence and aggression prompted local officials to request military action to lessen JAM’s influence and local control.

Relatively little AQI activity has been observed in southern Iraq.


Overall Attack Trends and Violence

For this report, the term “attacks” refers to specific incidents reported in the Multi-National Corps-Iraq Significant Activities Database. It includes known attacks on Coalition forces, Iraqi forces, the civilian population and infrastructure. Attacks typically involve improvised explosive devices; small arms, including sniper fire; and indirect fires. Not all civilian casualties are observed by or reported to Coalition forces; as a result, these data only provide a partial picture of the violence experienced by Iraqis.

The aggregate level of violence in Iraq remained relatively unchanged during this reporting period. Violence has decreased in the Baghdad security districts and Anbar, but has increased in most provinces, particularly in the outlying areas of Baghdad Province and Diyala and Ninewa Provinces. Since January 2007, Coalition reported murders in Baghdad proper have decreased by 51% as militia activity was disrupted by security operations. Throughout Iraq, the total number of attacks on Coalition forces, the ISF, and Iraqi civilians increased by 2% in the February through May reporting period compared with the previous quarter.

High-profile attacks, usually conducted by AQI, are now causing more casualties in Baghdad than do murders by militia, criminals, or other armed groups. Spectacular attacks on historical and significant infrastructure (such as Baghdad bridges and the Parliament building) seek to discredit FAQ, the Coalition presence, and the GoI, rather than create casualties. In Anbar province, anti-AQI sentiment is widespread, with growing tribal influence as the primary driver of decreasing violence levels. The total number of attacks in Anbar has dropped 34% since December 2006, with Ramadi—where attacks are at a two-year low—accounting for the largest decline in violence levels.

Attacks in Anbar have dropped from 35 per day in the previous reporting period to just under 26, dipping below average daily attacks in Salah ad Din Province.

Less encouraging, the number of suicide attacks across Iraq increased from 26 in January to 58 in March and remained constant at 58 in April. During the reporting period, the average number of improvised explosive devices found and cleared increased 15% from the previous quarter, and the average number of vehicleborne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs) found and cleared rose by 69%. These gains are likely due to increased civilian cooperation and interdiction of the networks conducting these attacks.

The majority of overall attacks continue to occur against Coalition forces, while the ISF and civilians continue to suffer the majority of casualties. Consistent with previous reporting periods, most attacks occurred in Baghdad, Anbar, Salah ad Din, and Diyala provinces. Explosively formed projectile attacks were at an all-time high in April.


Public Perceptions of Security

Public perception of security is shaped by the confidence the people have in the government and its security forces, as well as the perception they have of neighborhood safety. On security, Iraqis continue to feel more positive at the local level than they do at the national level. The perceptions of safety inside and outside neighborhoods correlate with their perception of local and national tensions. Within Baghdad, the Joint Security Stations contribute to this improvement by providing local tip hotlines, and local security force responsiveness to these calls provide tangible, visible proof that the security forces are responsible to and for the people. These actions may contribute to the continued support for the dissolution of militias, not only in Baghdad, but nationwide as well. . . .

Read More...

Summary only...

Spare The Rod, Spoil The Child, Stay Out of a UK Jail for 5 Years

Should a parent be allowed to swat a recalcitrant child? While society has a stake in placing clear limits on such discipline - i.e., there is a point where hitting a child goes beyond what could be considered reasonable discipline and into child abuse that could permanently injure a child - it is also true that swatting the rug rats who don't respond to verbal remonstrations is as old a tool of child raising among mammals as the family unit itself. Outside of child abuse, it would seem that the decision to swat or not to swat should be completely up to the parents. No two children are the same, and wholly nonswatting methods that may work on one child may well not work on another. So parents should be able to choose how to raise their children. Unless, of course, you live in a state fortunate enough to be run by wonderful omnipotent leftists who know better then the individual how they should run their lives, and who know better then the parents how they should raise their children. In which case, you are in the Nanny state, such as the giant social experiment that is the UK:

Ministers have revived the prospect of an outright ban on smacking children.

Under the current law – introduced only two years ago – parents can administer mild smacks as long as they do not cause bruises or grazes. They face assault charges and up to five years in jail if they strike their children hard enough to leave a mark.

Children’s Minister Beverley Hughes yesterday announced a wide-ranging review to see if the existing legislation is succeeding in protecting children. However, she insisted there were ‘no current plans to change the legislation’ which had allowed light smacking because Labour ‘didn’t want to see decent parents criminalised’.

Anti-smacking campaigners seized on the announcement last night to renew their calls for an outright ban. The UK’s four child commissioners last month demanded a total ban on any form of smacking, insisting there was was ‘no room for compromise’ on the issue. But polls of parents have shown that two-thirds support smacking as a punishment if necessary. And critics regard an outright ban as an unwarranted intrusion into family life.

The Tory spokesman on children-Tim Loughton, said: ‘Even though this issue was debated barely three ago, Labour ministers cannot resist meddling in how parents look after their children. ‘Bringing up children is a big enough challenge already without opening up this can of worms, which is all about the nanny state rather than trusting parents.’ But Rob Williams, chief executive of campaign body 11 MILLION, said: ‘Children and young people in England should have the same right to protection under the law on common assault as that afforded to adults – there is no good reason why children are the only people in the UK who can still be hit.’

Read the entire article here. That last line get's me. It shows just how out of touch the far left are with psychological realities and just how arrogant they are in their own superiority. Thomas Sowell did a good examination of this phenomenon not long ago. At any rate, here are a few of the comments to this article that reaffirm that the average Brit has his or her head screwed on much tighter then the average leftist pol across the pond:

Comments

. . . Oh for heavens' sake - it's time to lift the ban completely! We have to stop 'namby-pambying' children and get some order into their lives. If we get some discipline back into this country then maybe - just maybe - we'll be able to walk safely on our streets again.- Maggie G, West London

. . . Where will it all end? Of course we have to protect our children but a smack as opposed to a smacking certainly gains the child's attention. I despair that this PC, 'yuman rights', gutless government will move on to banning verbal chastisement as well. Discipline, respect and good manners have all but disappeared under Blair. Here is a revolutionary idea, use the review to seek out ways to persuade and educate errant parents to take responsibility for their children.- John, East Sussex, UK

What a load of rubbish, once again the nanny state goes mad. We are now breeding a generation of brats with no way to discipline them. I was smacked in my younger years, I didn't like it so I behaved. I treated my own children the same and they were well behaved and I could take them anywhere with no fear. Smacking is only one method of punishment and should be used only occasionally when other methods have failed.- Barry Faulkner, Paphos, Cyprus

Here we go again - more government interference in family life. You'd think that, given the appalling behaviour we now witness amongst the young, it would have learnt some common sense. Despite the fact that at least 80% of parents believe a smack in the right circumstances perfectly justified, the government's attitude is, once again, stuff you, you'll do what we want. When we were bringing up our son he got a damned good smack when he deserved it and, although that didn't occur very often, I know that it served its purpose and he was the better for it. Many of those who advocate banning smacking have monsters for children - I know as I had several friends in that category and I refused to have them in my house if they wanted to bring their brats with them. It's a pity that corporal punishment isn't also still available - pain when inflicted for the correct reasons like violence and wanton cruelty is an extremely effective antidote despite what the do-gooders spout.- James Danvers, London

If a child thinks that a smack is the ultimate punishment you don't have to be forceful. My dad use to put his hand over my hand and smack his instead of mine and I still wept as though he'd really hurt me! Threatening a child with a smack is more psychological than anything.- Jo, Newark-on-Trent

You are never going to stop it. Passing laws is not productive. Is education not the way forward? Educating an adult not to loose their temper but ensuring the punishment fits the ‘crime’ the child has committed.- Roger, London

Every species of sentient creature physically chastises its young to teach them what is and is not acceptable or safe behaviour, but not to do them harm. This is clearly observable in nature from your domestic cat with her kittens to the great apes and dolphins and whales in the wild. Why should human offspring be regarded a different? I understand that the lawless among us will abuse their children regardless of what the law says, so why don't the anti-smacking campaigners? No wonder crime is ever-rising, as kids with no fear of punishment are feral. Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind if we let these misguided do-gooders overturn millennia of kind and loving child-rearing practice.- Denise, Caerphilly, UK

Will ALL parents be consulted or only those that concur with the government and so called "professionals"?- Dab, Cambs England

Oh dear, something else that this joke of a government simply MUST ruin.Is there nothing they won't break in their non-stop arrogance?- Dino Fancellu, Epsom, Surrey

As a result of this softly softly approach to childrearing, children are now becoming badly behaved little brats who can do no wrong. End this big brother government now!- Isabel, Buckinghamshire

Children already believe they are untouchable and that is why we have feral gangs of them running around creating havoc. By removing the only sanction a parent has to chastise a child it can only get worse.- Lickyalips, Richmond, Surrey

The Nanny State has already told us that we can't teach children right from wrong - the complete takeover of our offspring isn't very far away now. God help the country.- Olderbird, Northants

. . . Spare the rod and spoil the child was never more true than now. Just wander through any shopping centre to see the results of undiciplined child rearing. No-one advocates the beating of children, but a certain amount of physical discipline can do nothing but good. Just look at the state of discipline in our schools since the little darlings were exempt from caning.- Kenneth, London

Just ignore anything Nu Labour and the EU comes out with. Both organisations are discredited and will soon be replaced.- Andrew Murray, London, UK

Looks like many more good parents are to become law-breakers. The PC Brigade must be outed and banned.- Exessayer, Marbella Spain

. . . So a majority of people are against the ban. That means it will become law.- Donald Merritt, Hertfordshire England

Read More...

Summary only...

The Democrats Prepare To Pay Back Far Left Enviromentalists

It is utter insanity that we do not do far more to end our dependence on foreign oil and reduce the costs of energy. In any sane world, we would be drilling for oil in Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico, and we would be fast tracking the creation of new atomic power plants. Additionally, we would be developing new refineries to lower the cost of gas even as we seek alternative fuels. Yet every attempt to do any of these things is invariably fought tooth and nail by far left radical environmentalists opposed to almost any human development. Their detrimental effect on America is very high indeed - and, at times, devastating. For example, it is quite possible that lawsuits brought by environmentalists against the Corps of Engineers in the 1970's were causitive factors in the break of New Orleans' levees in the aftermath of Katrina.

One of radical environmentalists favorite tools for opposing development has been litigation over the 1970 Endangered Species Act, an Act has created more then a fair bit of tension between government regulation and the rights of private property owners. At its best, the Act has been used to protect and repropogate several important species that were near extinction, such as wolves. At its worst, the Act has been regularly manipulated as a tool by far left environmentalists to tie up private property rights and prevent construction, logging or any of a host of other human endeavors.

Other then litigation, radical environmentalists have also done two other things very well. That would be lobbying and raising money for Democrats who will champion their special interests in Congress. And now, with the Democrats in controll of Congress, it is payback time for their support, just like it was not too long ago with big labor. Democrats showed then that they are quite willing to sacrifice the traditional rights of Americans to payback their special interest supporters. And now, in paying back the far left radical environmentalists, that means a significiant attack on private property rights as well as hindering any property use for the creation of energy. The WSJ has this story of the unholy alliance of our nation's largest environmental groups and the Democrats who have allowed the environmentalists to oversee the House's pending energy legislation:

. . . That is, if "energy" is the right word for West Virginia Rep. Nick Rahall's green-payoff of a bill. Ostensibly the legislation is a rollback of any energy production advances of recent years. But also tucked deep in its heart is an extraordinary new tool to allow environmentalists to lock up private property across the country. Bill presented; bill paid.

Like union and trial-bar groups, the extreme environmental community forked over a hefty wad of cash last year to help put Democrats in the majority, as well as to keep key environmental allies in their seats. But they also went the extra mile, singling out Republicans viewed as most ideologically hostile to liberal green goals and targeting them in campaigns. Most Wanted was former House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo.

The Californian was an environmental innovator, one reason he leapfrogged past far more senior members of the Resources Committee to take its helm in 2003. His subsequent successes lay in getting rural-state Democrats to come along with pioneering overhauls of outdated, 1970s-style environmental policy--from the Healthy Forests Act to reform of the Endangered Species Act and public-lands drilling. Those victories, and Mr. Pombo's commitment to property rights, enraged coast-state Democrats and environmental groups, who viewed him as slightly less progressive than Attila the Hun.

Their fury was unleashed in last year's campaign. By some estimates, a half-dozen environmental groups spent north of $3 million to get Mr. Pombo sacked. Defenders of Wildlife opened an office in his Stockton district, staffed with a dozen people, for that purpose. Since most of Mr. Pombo's constituents admired him for his environmental work, their tactic was character assassination. The Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund (a 527) sent out mailings with the jaw-dropping suggestion that since Mr. Pombo didn't hold a hearing about supposed abuses in the Marianas Islands (a U.S. territory) that he supported "forced abortion," "child prostitution" and "sweatshop labor." Nowhere was the word "environment" even mentioned.

The smear campaign worked. Mr. Pombo was ousted, along with other key environmentalist targets, . . . The broader Democratic victory slipped the Resources chairmanship to Mr. Rahall, who may hail from rural West Virginia, but votes like a resurrected Rachel Carson. (Last year he earned a 92% voting score from the League of Conservation Voters, which takes effort.) With his most worthy ideological opponents banished, he's been largely free to pursue a pure green agenda, handing out goodies to the environmental crew that helped get him his job.

But first, housekeeping. In a little semantic poke to their opponents, Democrats quickly changed the title of Mr. Rahall's group to the Natural Resources Committee. This was accompanied by the heave-ho of moderate Democrats who had signed on to Mr. Pombo's reform agenda. .

They were replaced with better spawn of Mother Earth, including Lois Capps (California), Patrick Kennedy (Rhode Island) and John Sarbanes (Maryland). Mr. Rahall also sprinkled staff jobs on greens, including from groups active in the 2006 campaign. Two of three senior policy advisers hail from Defenders of Wildlife and the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics; others come from the Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club.

These are the folks who helped write the "energy" bill that passed committee this week. Broadly, the bill fulfills one big ambition of environmental groups in recent years: a rollback of any smarter use of public (or even private) lands for energy use. Gone are previous gains for more drilling, more refineries, more transmission lines. But the big prize was an unprecedented new power allowing green groups to micromanage U.S. lands. That section creates "a new national policy on wildlife and global warming." It would require the Secretary of the Interior to "assist" species in adapting to global warming, as well as "protect, acquire and restore habitat" that is "vulnerable" to climate change. This is the Endangered Species Act on steroids. At least under today's (albeit dysfunctional) species act, outside groups must provide evidence a species is dwindling in order for the government to step in. This law would have no such requirements. Since green groups will argue that every species is vulnerable to climate change, the government will be obliged to manage every acre containing a bird, bee or flower.

It's a green dream come true, carte blanche to promulgate endless regulations barring tree-cutting, house-building, water-damming, snowmobile-riding, waterskiing, garden-planting, or any other human activity. The section is vague ("protect," "assist," "restore") precisely so as to leave the door open to practically anything. In theory, your friendly Fish & Wildlife representative could even command you to start applying sunblock to your resident chipmunks' noses.

The draft of Mr. Rahall's bill was greeted by a glowing letter from 13 environmental outfits--EarthJustice, Environmental Defense, American Rivers, the usual crew--voicing their "strong support" for the legislation. As they might, since it appears they wrote it. A May 29 letter from Defenders of the Wildlife Executive Vice President Jamie Rappaport Clark--President Clinton's onetime wilderness guru--crowed that her group "worked with committee and congressional staff as they developed" the new global warming wildlife program. She also extols the big bucks that will flow to federal and state wildlife agencies as a result of that global warming initiative.

Mr. Rahall's bill still has a long way to go. Other sections of an energy policy are still mired in the House; the Senate has yet to weigh in; and President Bush, with any luck, will veto any legislation that grants a freeze of every dirt clod in America--publicly or privately owned. Still, when it comes to rewarding their friends in the green community, don't blame House Democrats for not trying.

Read the entire article here. As always, I stand in amazement at what has happened to the Democratic Party since World War II - and their potential for doing mortal damage to our country.

Read More...

Summary only...

Unbelievable

Paul Potts, a salesman from Wales, was shown in this Youtube video on FoxNews tonight. Its of his performance on the Britain's Got Talent show. I had to download it and share. This man's singing is powerful and moving to a degree that I have observed in only a handful of musicians and vocalists throughout my life. Whatever else may happen, I think Paul's career as a cell phone salesman is going to come to a swift end. Do enjoy this.

Read More...

Summary only...

Give "Em Surrender Harry's War - On The Surge & General Petraeus

Could there be a more odious individual then Harry Reid, supreme Surrendocrat in the Senate. Reid and Pelosi both led their party's charge against the surge before it even began in February. On the two occaisions of notable terrorist acts since February, Harry Reid immediately tried to capitalize by declaring the surge a "failure." But Harry Reid does not end there in his effort to undermine the war. He and his fellow Surrendocrats have started a campaign to preempt anything General Petraeus might say about Iraq by claiming that General Petraeus cannot be trusted to tell the truth. And now, just as all troops are on the ground and the surge is beginning in earnest, Reid goes over the top yet again in his effort to undermine the war in Iraq by calling General Petraeus and General Pace "incompetent:"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "incompetent" during an interview Tuesday with a group of liberal bloggers, a comment that was never reported.

Reid made similar disparaging remarks about Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said several sources familiar with the interview.

This is but the latest example of how Reid, under pressure from liberal activists to do more to stop the war, is going on the attack against President Bush and his military leaders in anticipation of a September showdown to end U.S. involvement in Iraq, according to Democratic senators and aides.

Reid, who was bashed by Republicans for suggesting earlier this year that the Iraq war was "lost," is lashing out at top commanders while putting the finishing touches on a plan to force a series of votes on Iraq designed exclusively to make Republicans up for reelection in 2008 go on record in favor of continuing an unpopular war.

Reid, the senators and aides said, does not expect any of the Iraq measures to pass but hopes the effort will drive a deep enough wedge between wavering Republicans and Bush that, by September, Republican senators will break with the president and help end the war.

Read the entire story here. Make no mistake, our own far left led by Pelosi and Reid, al Qaeda and Iran, are all leading the war against the surge. Yet moderates and conservatives are all but silent. It is mindboggling in its insanity. Moderate and Conservative leaders, please find a broadcast microphone and repeat after me:

Its obvious at this point that the terrorists of al Qaeda, the terror supporting state of Iran and our own Democratic Congressional leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi all share precisely the same motivation. They all want to portray the surge as a failure and have America surrender in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq wants to destroy America. Iran wants America weakened and out of the Middle East so that they can exapand their theocracy. As to Hary Reid and Nancy Pelosi, they want the surge to fail so that they can get political power. Reid and Pelosi are quite willing to sacrifice our long term national interests for their own short term political gain.

Harry Reid has criticized President Bush, claiming that our President is asking America for a blank check to finish the war in Iraq and leave behind a stable democracy in the Middle East. But Harry Reid is also asking for a blank check - a much larger one, in fact. Harry Reid is asking America for a blank check to pay the costs that will ensue to our nation, our national security and our foreign policy if we surrender and retreat from Iraq in the face of attacks by al Qaeda and Iran. Every act has costs. But Harry Reid never addresses the costs of his surrender plan. He doesn't because the only upside is Harry Reid and the Democrats getting political power in 2008. As to the cost of the blank check for his surender plan, that cost will most assuredly make the cost of stabilizing Iraq look like chump change. Harry Reid is fine with that, just so long as no one realizes that truth until after the 2008 elections.

Read More...

Summary only...

Iraq, Successes of the Surge, Iranian Acts of War & Balanced Reporting From the USA Today

My hats off to the USA Today for providing us with a balanced picture of the situation in Iraq. And the news is that the surge is making signficant progress despite efforts to derail it by al Qaeda in Iraq, Iran, and Congressional Democrats. This reporting could not be more timely, coming as it is on the heels of the utterly craven performance yesterday by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to preemptively claim defeat and surrender, trying to capitalize on a success by terrorists in bombing of the Samarra Mosque. Their desire for surrender at all costs in order to achieve partisan political gain could not be more transparent. Nor could their message, that the surge "has failed," be further from the truth:

When Gen. David Petraeus drives through the streets of Iraq's capital, he sees "astonishing signs of normalcy" in half, perhaps two-thirds of Baghdad.

"I'm talking about professional soccer leagues with real grass field stadiums, several amusement parks — big ones, markets that are very vibrant," says Petraeus, commander of the roughly 150,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. The scenes provide a sign that the new strategy in Iraq is working, although many problems remain, he told USA TODAY in an interview Wednesday.

Five months after President Bush ordered an increase of 20,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, data suggest that sectarian violence in Baghdad has declined. Other tentative signs of progress have included a rise in Iraqi army enlistments and some quality-of-life improvements such as fewer electricity blackouts in the capital.

. . . Meanwhile, U.S. commanders have urged the American public not to pass judgment on the plan's effectiveness until after all U.S. troops are fully deployed. That is due to happen Friday. In September, Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker are to present a report on the plan's effectiveness to leaders in Washington.

Petraeus did not specifically say what subjects he might address in his evaluation. Here is a look at some of the changes in Iraq since February.

Possible signs of progress

•Iraq's army.

The Iraqi army currently has 152,500 trained and equipped soldiers, nearly 20,000 more troops than were on the rosters in January, according to the U.S. State Department. Another 20,000 soldiers will be added to the ranks this year, the U.S. military says.

The Army now has its own Iraqi-run basic training and leadership schools. "The Iraqi army has, in general, done quite well in the face of some really serious challenges," Petraeus says. "In certain areas it really is very heartening to see what it has done."

•Anbar province.

This area in the heart of the Sunni Triangle has been held up by the U.S. military as a model for Iraq. "The progress in Anbar has actually been breathtaking," Petraeus says.

Commanders credit much of the success to the U.S. military's decision to arm, train and organize Sunni provincial militias that have turned against al-Qaeda militants operating in the area.

"If you've got folks who say, 'Hey, this is my hometown, and I'm tired of the violence and if you simply train and equip me, I'll protect my hometown.' We ought to jump on that like a duck on a June bug," says Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of the 3rd Infantry Division.

Commanders elsewhere in Iraq are studying lessons that can be learned from Anbar, although Petraeus said that each area of Iraq has "unique circumstances." Anbar is mostly Sunni and does not have the volatile sectarian mix that stokes violence in other parts of the country.

•Sectarian violence.

The number of unidentified bodies found in Baghdad — an indicator of sectarian violence between Sunni and Shiite Muslims — dropped from a high of 1,782 in October to 411 in April, according to an Interior Ministry official who declined to be named because he is not authorized to speak to the media.

The body count spiked to 726 in May. So far this month, the numbers are again on a "downward trend," Petraeus says. Although the bombing Wednesday of a major Shiite shrine in Samarra raises the risk of a new outbreak of sectarian violence, he says.

Areas of concern

• U.S. casualties. As U.S. forces spread deeper into insurgent-held territories, they are paying the price in blood. At least 230 soldiers were killed in April and May, the highest two-month death toll since the war began. This month, at least 32 soldiers have been killed in Iraq.

Roadside bombs — improvised explosive devices — remain the No. 1 killer of U.S. troops. Sixty-five percent of May casualties were caused by IEDs, up from 32% in February, according to a study by the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

• Iraqi police. Iraq's 135,000-strong police force continues to be plagued with problems, U.S. commanders say. Up to 70% of Iraqi police leaders have been replaced because they had ties to sectarian violence, Petraeus says.

About 5,000 police deserted the force in the 18 months before January, Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey said at a Pentagon news conference Wednesday. Another 7,000 or 8,000 police officers are unaccounted for.

"I have great concerns about the police," Lynch says. "There are large areas in (central Iraq) where there are no police. And in areas where we do have police, we have corrupt police."

• Political unity. Al-Maliki's government has been unable to push any major initiatives through Iraq's parliament, including a law on how to share the country's oil revenues.

"I think everyone, including the government of Iraq, is impatient with the rate of progress in a variety of different areas," Petraeus says. "They are trying to do it in a reasonably democratic way … in a government that is comprised of representatives from ethno-sectarian interests."

Read the entire story here. The USA today also had a Q&A with General Petraeus addressing both daily Iranian acts of war and the situation with Sadr and his militia:

Q: What is the current influence (in Iraq) from Iran?

A: The Iranian influence has been very, very harmful to Iraq. There is absolutely no question that Iranians are funding, arming, training, and even in some cases, directing the activities of extremists and militia elements.

It's more than disappointing given that one would think Iran would want the first Arab-Shiite state to succeed rather than wanting apparently to contribute to continued instability and serious security challenges.

The people they are arming are very, very serious thugs. Among them certainly are those who kidnapped the (five) British civilians the other day.

Q: What's your assessment of the Iraqi government's role in the military "surge?" Are they a help or a hindrance?

A: If you drive around Baghdad, you'll find astonishing signs of normalcy in perhaps half to two-thirds of the city. … In fact, the car bomb numbers have come down fairly steadily as well until just a couple of days ago, and we'll see if we can get those coming down again. …

There's a real vibrancy in certain parts of Iraq, and in others obviously there is continued fighting and a sectarian cycle of violence underway. Obviously, there is damage, a need to … help them stitch back the fabric of society that was torn during the height of the sectarian violence.

Q: (Shiite cleric) Muqtada al-Sadr has been a thorn in your side. … Do you want to arrest him? Why or why not?

A: Well, actually, first of all I'd like to say that Muqtada al-Sadr issued a very constructive statement today in the wake of the Samarra attack calling for mourning for several days and calling for restraint. That continues the line of messages that he has put out since his return from Iran a couple weeks ago in which he has ordered his followers not to attack Sunnis (or) other Iraqis, not to attack mosques and shrines. …

I think it's really still early in the day after his return to see what he and his movement will do. Whether their role will be a constructive one or whether some of his followers will resume sectarian attacks, shooting rockets at the International Zone, attack our soldiers with IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and so forth. That still has happened. Although we have seen some signs that perhaps some of his followers have taken a knee.

Read the rest of the story here. And, given that this is the first balanced report from Iraq by a MSM outlet that I can recall in recent memory, may I suggest supporting the USA Tody. At least sign up for the free online membership.

(Big H/T Steve Halter)

Read More...

Summary only...

Britain Falling

American commentator Cal Thomas opines this morning that the end result of 60 years of hard left multiculturalism, social experimentation, socialist government policy and EU / British immigration policy is now culminating in the suicide of Britain. I can't say that I disagree. Britain's domestic policies and politics have become particularly indefensible as it has become more and more obvious that there is an existential threat posed to the UK by its immigration policy and its infestation by Wahhabi / Salafi Islamists. While no one is more appreciative then I of Tony Blair as a true ally of the U.S., from this side of the pond at least, looking at British domestic politics, it seems that he has done nothing to stem the suicidal tide set in motion by the UK's leaders early in the past century. To the contrary, he appears to have hastened it:

There are two ways to destroy a nation. One is from without by an invading military force. The other is from within when the people of the nation no longer embrace and promote the history, language and culture that brought it to prominence and power. Britain has chosen the second option, which is national suicide.

In addition to its indefensible immigration policy, which is rapidly diluting British culture, the nation's public schools are giving up classical teaching in history, science and English literature in favor of trendy things to make the subject matter more "popular." It isn't working. Students increasingly find the new curriculum as unpalatable as school lunches.

According to the British think tank, Civitas, no major subject area has escaped the blight of political interference. The Civitas report is called "The Corruption of the Curriculum." It says history classes teach from speeches by Osama bin Laden and what Arab media say about Sept. 11 with no balancing material from American sources. "History has become so divorced from facts and chronology that pupils might learn the new Œskills and perspectives' through a work of fiction, such as ŒLord of the Rings,'" says the report.

Science classes are dominated by debates over abortion, teaching about genetic engineering and the use of nuclear power, rather than emphasizing laboratory work. In English, the pursuit of gender and racial equality has led an exam board to produce a list of modern poems from everywhere but England and Wales, where many of the greatest writers were born. The English literature exam features 32 contemporary poems and only 16 poems written prior to 1914. Exam candidates must choose two about which to write, being careful to select one from each gender (what no gay or transgender writers?).

The Civitas report says, "The traditional subject areas have been hijacked to promote fashionable causes; teachers are expected to help to achieve the government's social goals instead of imparting a body of academic knowledge to their students."

The Daily Telegraph reports on another study which shows that attempts to make science more popular with the culturally trendy has had the opposite effect, "with pupils less interested in the subject and less keen to pursue it than they were under the previous, more fact-based lessons."

Private schools continue to teach the old subjects in the traditional manner and that is why what some are calling "educational apartheid" is becoming more obvious and a major concern. The study of science classes concludes that future scientists will be even more likely to come from these independent, or private schools, because the public school courses will leave state school students ill-equipped for further study.

A nation that lacks sufficient confidence to teach the next generation its own history, culture and even science is a nation that is unlikely to mobilize the national will to resist an invading enemy.

My own theory is that prosperity has a lot to do with this jettisoning of the past. When a nation focuses on profits, instead of prophets, and sexual pleasure instead of fidelity and virtue, it dooms itself to eventual extinction. . . .

Read the entire story here. I am an anglophile with a tremendous appreciation for the rich history of Britain and all of the good that it has done throughout the world. Britain is the mother of modern capitalism and democracy. Everywhere that Britain left its footprint the deepest during the age of empire, what the Brits left in their wake were the foundations of capitalism, a solid educational system, an equally solid legal system, and democracy. Were you find nations today that are the most free and who enjoy the highest standard of living, you will often find the footprint of Britain. The small island nation of Britain has been the great engine of historical development over the past millenium, really.

To my own thinking, it is the praetorian and avant garde left encapsulated by the BBC, that has led this charge to the cliff. But Britain's end is far from writ in stone. I still believe that, in its darkest hour, the sons and daughters of Chruchill, Nelson, Wellington, Adam Smith, William of Normandy and countless other legends of history will take back their country.

Read More...

Summary only...