The Muslims That Don't Make the News....

Gates of Vienna has a profile of a Muslim member of the Danish parliament, one Naser Khader.

The term "moderate Muslim" tends to earn at the least an askance glance from many because when it is used it seems to be applied to people who either aren't Muslim or aren't really moderate. PM Khader is both, and is not a windsock meekly keeping quiet out of fear of reprisals from his radicalized fellows.....

We’ve seen a lot of discussion about the “moderate Muslim” in this space, with some contributors and commenters arguing that such a creature does not really exist. But Naser Khader is most definitely a Muslim, and most definitely a moderate.

According to the Danes I talked to, the man is sincere and dedicated. He has put his life on the line by urging Danish Muslims to stand with their infidel countrymen and support freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and constitutional democracy in their adopted homeland.

.....and therein lies the rub. If they're not blowing stuff up, the press ignores them, if they are not denouncing the US the press is averse to their message, if they are quietly getting about their lives like most people...there IS NO NEWS THERE!

Thus the image of Muslims as irredeemable lunatics is perpetuated, along with the notion that any attempt to help them cast off the maniacs in their midst is doomed to failure.

I do not mean to minimize the issues that Islam currently has with human rights in many parts of the world including Europe. It is important to remember however, that one of the Presidents more important positions is that he doesn't want this to be a religious war. We should be discretely embracing and supporting these people, rather than ignoring them because they're not blowing people up.

The lack of coverage of these sorts of people perverts the dialog on both the right and left.

The Left views the lack of news of moderates as meaning "The genuine Muslims all hate America and have no interest in our imposing our views of human rights upon their pristine gaia friendly ancient and noble no-nwestern culture....the radicals are speaking and acting in frustration as they fight the good fight against American imperialism and there is no support for those few false consciousness cases who oppose the will of the majority...(who are represented by the Muslims who do get press)"

The Right looks at the coverage and concludes" Wow! They're all a bunch of feral murderous lunatics!"

This long war requires competent information warfare as much or more than bullets. it requires knowing who or potential allies are and what obsticals they face. It is an intricate, and prescice art for which a broad brush is singularly unsuited.

A 10/0 needlepoint is needed.

On a related note, it should be mentioned that PM Khader is featured in the recently finished, but unlikely to be aired PBS documentary ISLAM VERSUS the ISLAMISTS which, if it ever gets aired, points out the dangers that genuine moderates face in standing up to the violent Muslims. More on this here, here and here.

Anyway, go over to Gates of Vienna and read the whole thing.

From Sensitivity To Pandering to Surrender

Two terrifying tales of political correctness from the mother country might act as warning signposts...if they got much play.

Via the Volokh Conspiracy comes a report that teachers in the UK are refraining from teaching about "controversial" subjects including the Holocaust....lest they offend their Muslim students.

....."Staff may wish to avoid causing offence or appearing insensitive to individuals or groups in their classes.

"In particular settings, teachers of history are unwilling to challenge highly contentious or charged versions of history in which pupils are steeped at home, in their community or in a place of worship."

The researchers gave the example of one history department in a secondary school in a northern city which decided not to teach the Holocaust as a topic for GCSE coursework....

The implications are nothing short of horrific, not only are the educators submitting to browbeating from their students but they now take away any competition of ideas. The term "dhimmitude" gets carelessly bandied about a lot these days and is occasionally carelessly invoked in response to what is simply tolerance. This story however, is most certainly a good and proper use of the word.
In today's partisan environment, a few things are still agreed upon, that the Holocaust must never be forgotten or repeated is certainly one, but when that history is never taught, acceptance of the hate of the holocaust deniers and NAZI-apologists is but a generation or 2 away, especially when their lies are actively pushed in the very communities these spineless educators are pandering to.
More on this from the Times.

In a related story, the BBC has refused to air a show on the youngest surviving recipient of the Victoria Cross....lest it alienate the hate-the-west-left. The story is too positive you see.

Wretchard the Cat has thoughts and points to the recent Moonbat protests against a memorial honoring a fallen soldier in this country....this time ostensibly on anti-gun grounds.


Both stories reflect and astounding combination of myopia, cowardice and ethical turpitude. Sadly both stories are completely unsurprising and have US antecedents, in particular the New York Times decision to not publish an account from one of their imbeds because the story was "too heroic"

A disturbing anecdote from Col. McMaster illustrates why. His 3rd ACR broke the insurgents' hold of the city of Tal Afar last September in an operation which generated these effusive words of praise from the town's mayor:

"To the lion hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets...(you are) not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism."

Time magazine had a reporter and a photographer embedded with the 3rd ACR. When the battle was over, they filed a lengthy story and nearly 100 photographs.

"When the issue came out, the guts had been edited out of the reporter's story and none of the photographs he submitted were used," said the admiral, quoting Col. McMaster. "When the reporter questioned why his story was eviscerated, his editors...responded that the story and pictures were 'too heroic.'"

As Michael Yon points out we are losing the info war, which is the critical point of this long war, and while he is certainly right about the cluelessness of the military's PR liaisons, the trepidation about dealing with the press stems not only from clumsiness, but from a realization that many if not most in the press are not merely hostile to our troops, but actively rooting for the other side.

It is no wonder that so many people have given up...there seems to be no good news at all, for it is all too often suppressed.

Update: Thanks to Gates of Vienna for the first macro :)

A Few Quick Links on This Long War

Day 12 of the Iranian hostage situation and there is some decidedly mixed news regards the efforts to gain release of the sailors.

Also regards Iran comes this ABC News article via Instapundit involving secret US efforts in Iran....Well, if true, it's not a secret any more. (Umm...thanks for that guys... )
In a related vein is this Asia Times article that, while rather boosterish, makes for quite interesting reading regards the sort of grand game the US may be using to contain Iran until its Mullahs fall.It dovetails with an older WSJ piece linked to ( with the ABC article) by Instapundit . It is also boosterish but with significant realpolitik implications....

Note that I rather disagree about Iran being the long term Islamic threat. I think the Whabbis in Arabia are more likely to cause problems, and Iran may well self-solve in the next few years given enough pressure. The Iranian people are pretty forward thinking and generally literate and competent. They do not like their terrorist financing, oppressive government and desperately want to be a modern country. If the opportunity presents itself they will be, and this seems to be one of the Wests objectives. Timing is important though, the current regime in Iran with nukes is a terribly bad and dangerous thing. If the Iranians overthrow the mullahs there is a good chance they will be no more worrisome than India or France and quite possibly a decent and uplifting example for the Muslim world.

Primarily due to the malignant influence of Saud, I'm more worried about Sunnis than Shias.
(Of course, the Sufis aren't in play at all....much like the Libertarian's here....more's the pity...but I digress)

Regards Sunni, and particularly Saudi assistance to terrorists....The obviousness of Saudi duplicity in their dealings and complicity with our enemies has led a great many people to wonder why we didn't just bomb and invade Saudi Arabia instead of Iraq. Well, the answer there is pretty simple if given even a bit of thought....but as some individuals have their tin-foil on too tight and are convinced that nothing the current admin does is in good faith, here it is in small words.

Saudi Arabia is the guardian of Mecca and Medina, the two holiest places in Islam. The Bush administration was fully aware that an assault on Saudi Arabia would spark exactly the world wide religious war that Bin Laden wanted. Muslims, even moderate ones, would see their religion as under direct attack. Given the frequent use of Mosques in Iraq as terrorist staging areas, it is not hard to see Islamist Extremist holding up in Mecca and Medina an indeed using the Kabba as a headquarters. A few JDAMS would solve any immediate tactical problem but the strategic implications and resulting worldwide bloodbath would be unimaginable.

So...As tempting and cathartic as it might be to give the murderous and evil house of Saud a well deserved dose of extinction, it would likely have been the worse possible course of action. This does not mean that Saudi Arabia is off the table completely as a target....just that is quite likely very near to being the last resort.

Regards the situation on the ground in Iraq, Much is being made of General Mc Caffery's very comprehensive and professional report which pulls no punches regards the challenges faced by our people in Iraq. Note though that it has been the subject of much cherry picking. Here he provides a shorter version with small words. The situation is extremely serious, but there is cause for considerable hope and the results of failure are truly horrid. In that vein, via Defense Tech comes this illuminating OpFor interview with General Petreaus. A very good piece, read the whole thing.

Murdoc Hits one Out of the Park

Read the whole thing.

Well This is Dumb

The Armenian Genocide was a terrible thing...but it was perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire...which was OVERTHROWN by the Turks.

So naturally...Congress is thinking about condemning Turkey for it and thereby fanning ethnic tensions in one of the more stable and forward looking Muslim nations.

The whole mess explained at Captains Quarters....where Ed Morrisey's wife has just undergone transplant surgery...please drop them some kind words.

Trust in America....Ye Gullible Fools

Murdoc posts on his tipping point.

This unspeakable sleaze is repulsive to be sure, but it should not really be in any way surprising. Given that the Dems pretty much told everyone they were going to do this, this should not be at all shocking, but in fairness to Murdoc, it still stings.

That many of us (including myself) strongly advocated (and still do) things like Porkbusters , which fed the Dems "culture of corruption" slogans, makes it all the more painful. Pointing out the failings of our own who failed to live up to their promises and ideals is one of the things that I actually like about the Republicans...we are much better at policing our own assholes. We do have standards beyond blind lust for power and given that the Republicans were elected in '94 specifically to deal with pork, sleaze and corruption, the shenanigans of a pork happy Republican Congress bloating the budget with their pet projects and nepotism quite rightly pissed off a lot of us and disillusioned the base.

We demanded that those that carry our standard live up to our standards regards smaller and cleaner government.
We did not stand in lock step with Cunningham, Abramoff, and on a far less sinister noteTubemeister Ted, the Seller of Bridges, we said " this must not stand...this is what the Dems do and we are not them and will not be represented by those who have only power as their goal".

Now, despite what my friend Bob says, this is not perfidy, this is good and proper. It is honest debate and open governance. It is what many of us on the right aspire to. It is also necessary to keep our team relatively clean and relevant...to the extent that is possible in politics. I think that keeping our own teams feat to the fire is an important thing for our side to do and if we cease to do it, then there really won't be much difference between us and the Democrats.

But, there is no doubt we got played this time.

Many of us, even those like me who gave little more than lip service and the occasional signature to the Porkbusters cause, were filled with pride when the media noticed us and began to rail against this. NZ Bear and the rest made a difference! Yay!

Of course it was a ploy.

Thanks to quite justified disgust with a Republican led congress that was presiding over discretionary spending that was swelling like a dead pig in the August sun, the base stayed home. Just enough....the '06 elections were a close run thing...just enough to tip the scales.

Actually, the sheer cynicism and arrogance of the Democrats and their media gophers is astonishing.

In 2006 the NYT was all about the evils of Republican Pork. Now of course, with a majority of congress-critters having "D" behind their name...what was pork is just "pet projects", part of the way good government works.
...earmarks, when dispensed fairly and openly, are an important way of addressing local needs...

Well...that's nice to know....

Porkbusters was able to track pork and embarrass people in part because of the Congressional research office, which for 12 years has been tracking congressional spending and making it available to the public. 12 years...yeah, that sounds like one of those Republican contract with America thingies....well, anyway, they are discontinuing the service now...no need to...the Dems are in charge.

The Democrats have bought congressional bills that are intended to undermine our troops and bring about our defeat. They've done so with with bribes that, as a result of their fiat, are now much harder to track. Of course, like wars and nation building the difference between good and bad or newsworthieness is the presence of a "D" or "R" behind ones name. Yes, Feinstein is in as deep or deeper than Cunningham was....yet hardly a peep about the culture of corruption.

So what the hell does the title of this post have to do with this rant?

Well it's not griping about being held to higher standards than the Dems, for that is as it always is and frankly is as it should be.

It's about the repercussions of what they want to do...this time in the north, where we made and broke promises before and through that realpolitick meddling and fecklessness caused terrible death and suffering.

Wretchard explains.....
If the U.S. leaves early and does not protect the Kurds, it will be the third time in a little more than three decades the ethnic group will have been betrayed by the United States, Qubad Jalal Talabany said during an afternoon sit-down interview with the Herald/Review. Earlier Thursday morning, Talabany spoke to nearly 350 people during the last day of a three-day Training and Doctrine Command Cultural Awareness Summit.

Not much to add to his pithiness...

...except these pictures from another part of the world that we broke promises to left to the tender mercies of our enemies the last time people like this got their way.



Keep in mind that for a lefty of a certain social strata and age....the protests and activism that led both directly and indirectly to the above pictures are hands down their proudest moments. Perhaps because of self image preservation they can make no connection between cause and effect...

Damned harsh, but true.

UK SAILORS TO BE TRIED AS SPIES

This is serious.

It is obvious now that this is no longer a trumped up border incident like happened in '04.

This is an act of war against the United Kingdom.

(Note that there are USN and USCG assets in the area doing exactly the same things the British were. Whether we were simply lucky or they specifically chose the UK forces is unknown)

Which begs the question, WTF is Iran thinking?

Some possibilities.

1:They are trying to take advantage of Blair's unpopularity to negotiate with a weak opponent, perhaps on power-sharing in Iraq or a security council vote regards their nuke program.

This strikes me as possible but unwise, I don't pretend to understand the Brits but they tend to rally around provocations like this act of piracy. Thatcher IIRC was not exactly at the top of the polls in 1982 when the Argentinians made a similar assessment of UK will. The Brits are known a stiff upper lip, but their upper cut is far worse.

2:This is actually an initiative by overzealous lower level officers.
This strikes me as unlikely but even if it is true this does not mean that this situation can be easily resolved...The Marco Polo Bridge incident of 1937 was instigated by several low level Japanese officers.....it rather escalated.

3:The Iranians are going for a straight swap for some of their terrorists our guys captured in Iraq.

4: The Iranians are trying to set themselves up at the leaders of the Muslim world. They don't feel the UK or its allies can do permanent harm to Iran given its defenses and geography, thus even if they are hit, they come out saving face and boosting themselves in the eyes of other radical Muslims.

5:They are inviting an attack on their own people. The Iranian people are actually quite pro-western but also very patriotic. The Mullahs may think that they can temper the first item if their people suffer a hail of JDAMs , Storm Shadows and Tomahawks.

Obviously, I have no idea....

Iran is a tough nut, they've gotten huge infusions of air defense missiles from Russia. An air raid on Iran would face far tougher air defenses that the USAF did over Hanoi (the last time a western air force was severely tested).

Iran has a large stock of anti-ship missiles and several very quiet submarines. Between that and mines, if they want to close the straits of Hormuz...the straits are closed, at least for a few weeks. Iran may have a rational goal in mind, but it is playing a game of brinkmanship with the worlds energy supplies and its economy that could easily set up a chain of events reminiscent of 1914.

If this isn't resolved in a week or so, I fear this could get very very bad.

Other views:

Pajamas Media has a lengthy roundup.

Capt Ed asks questions of certain people that will not get answered.

Belmont Club has some thoughts.

UPDATE: Iran wants a swap.

Michal Yon's Latest...

Michael Yon posts a long dispatch for his new readers relating how he came to be in Iraq, the mistakes he's seen, as well as the successes. If you haven't read him before start now, he is one of the absolute best reporters over there. if you have read his stuff be SURE to read this one. It is a very important post and very edifying.

Excerpting can do it no justice and only detract from the many faceted picture he paints. It also links to many of his most important articles.

Read the whole thing.

Update: Huntress reports that he's not just getting picked up by FOX news online, but by NBC as well.
Neither is paying him, he's still quite independent.

Another Long Post On Iraq

Jerry Pournelle posts on the situation in Iraq in response to an E-mail that, amongst other things brings up the silly "Bush Lied" meme...

To deal with the last paragraph first, don't be silly. Everyone thought Saddam had WMD. Even his own generals thought it. The French thought so. The Russians thought so. The CIA thought so. MI 6 thought so. Of course they could all have been that wrong. Saddam wanted them to believe it; he needed to be seen to have WMD for his own purposes.

As to why we are in Iraq, the President is a Jacobin as are most of the intellectuals in the United States. He truly believes that democracy is the only legitimate form of government, and that all people truly long for democracy and freedom. Most of the intellectuals DO NOT beleive that but they PRETEND TO BELIEVE IT and about half the time they have convinced themselves they believe it; but for the most part the neo-con chicken hawks wanted the war for a whole bunch of reasons unrelated to US interests.

Understand: if Iraq could have been converted into a reasonable democracy, or even into a simile of Jordan, it would have been good for the United States, and very good for the Middle East. A multi-cultural democracy in Mesopotamia would be a wonderful thing. That was the goal, and had we achieved that goal the President and the neo-con chicken hawks would -- rightly -- be exalted as public benefactors.

No doubt there were people in the neo-con advisory circle who had ulterior motives; but most of them, and certainly the President, really believed that we have the military power to bring about democracy in Iraq. There really were people who believed the "End of History" nonsense that floated around in academia around the time of the Gulf War. Certainly the President wanted to put right the ghastly mistake of his father: encouraging revolts against Saddam then leaving the rebels hung out to dry. Wouldn't you? And certainly our military success in the Gulf War made many think it would be a cakewalk to Baghdad -- after all, it was -- and since few intellectuals study any history why would they not believe that conquest works, and pacification works? Saddam pacified Iraq. If he could do that, why can't we?

I think you do not appreciate the ability for self-deception among the neo-con chicken hawks.

General Colin Powell tried to warn them. He believe the intelligence reports of WMD -- Saddam was damned good at that deception -- but even then he had misgivings about regime change. He understood how brutal one must be to govern without the consent of the governed, and as an American of African origin he understood better than most just how difficult multi-cultural democracies are to establish. Powell, I am sure, went along with the invasion somewhat reluctantly because he feared Saddam with WMD. He had his misgivings about it, but he was on the team.

I understand his dilemma. Like Powell I was opposed to the invasion of Iraq for reasons I gave at the time, and those included my conviction that we could win the war but not the peace: but once we sent in the troops, what could we do but stay out of the way? It was the wrong war for the wrong objectives begun on the wrong theory and in disregard of history. But if it failed, Powell was damned if the failure would be his fault. So was I. What other course could an honorable man take?....snip

Emphasis mine:
Unlike Dr. Pournelle, I did not oppose the war and still think that an good ethical and strategic argument can certainly be made for it, both on humanitarian grounds as well as the realpolitick reasons I chose to embolden in the quote. Given what was known at the time the argument IMHO was stronger still.

Dr. Pournelle's warnings were, however, certainly prescient as were those of Secretary Powell and many other conservatives (and let us be quite clear, despite the Orwellian rantings of David Frum Pournelle IS a conservative....and hell of a lot more credentialed one than Frum himself ).

In fact the only people who were right about the aftermath were conservatives...the left opposed the war for reasons mainly revolving around the "R" behind the Presidents name and was quite inconsistent with their worldview as their enthusiasm for getting us involved in a petrodollar financed race war in the Sudan shows.

That the warnings of Pournelle and others were not heeded and acted upon because of faulty intelligence or poor preparation is a tragedy, but it is also water under the bridge. We cannot change the past but must deal with it's consequences...the current mess in the middle east is largely a result of the machinations of France and Britain after World War One, with the complicity of witless Wilson.

We did not start this fire but it will likely burn us if we don't take steps to put it out. In Iraq we are trying to fight fire with fire.

I don't think that the aftermath of war is yet lost, though the perception of its hopelessness may yet prove self fulfilling and that would be a great tragedy, for if we can make Iraq in to any sort of bulwark against the retrograde pathologies that are currently such a strong force in the Muslim world we will have done not only a useful and strategically sound thing, but a damned good thing.

The troops who continue to re-enlist there certainly think we can and must pursue this, for one of the results of this situation is that we have befriended and made promises to people...people who are fighting some of the most malignant evils on the planet and people who will come to a VERY bad end should we abandon them.

...and despite their fitful and infuriating starts in trying to get things going, despite the setbacks and the calls by many to just let them sink or swim as they are so "obviously" not trying and not worth our time....They are taking steps that many of their detractors here would balk at.

In this country there are people who take umbrage at being asked to show ID to prove they are not voting twice.
Over there, despite the fact that the jihadists target those who move beyond the 8th century, people went out and dipped their fingers in ink to identify themselves as having voted. This made then targets . Women voted to stave off the 8th century forces that would reduce them to chattle. Those on the Left who crow loudest for us to abandon these people like to sneer at any in this country that are lockstep with their world view. They look down on those of us in flyover country with the utter disdain of those who smugly consider themselves to be the true humanist progressives and friends of women's rights. If they cannot bring themselves draw a line here, against this they are neither, just cynical opportunists, or perhaps Chambelainesque cowards.
These are people we have made a promise to, people who we pulled the rug out from under once. This war is neither lost nor won. It is in the balance and it is going to be a close run thing for a very long time. There were many principled reasons to avoid this war. As we are there, those reasons are moot. The Libertarian right were right about the cost in blood and treasure, but to cut our losses now and abandon these brave people to this wicked evil after we propped them up and gave them hope is one of the cruelest and most vile pranks imaginable, almost sociopathic in its callousness, and would seem to affirm the worst, over the top, stereoptypes of the Randian Libertarian smugly looking down his nose at the flood victim who didn't have the good sense to put his house on stilts or be somewhere else. If this Libertarians have done anything it has been to convince me I'm not a Libertarian....( Hamilton was more my cup of tea anyway) . As long as the men and women on the ground believe there is a chance to win this fight we are morally and ethically obligated to try. To leave now would be well and truly wrong.
Here Via Defense Tech is an interesting interview with Pamela Hess on what she saw. No water carrier for the administration she gives 9 minutes of perspective on what we are fighting.



Greyhawk says it well here.

I do not suggest we fight all the worlds demons. If blood and treasure do not, the world wide "gratitude" we have reaped from our efforts in Mesapotamia should remind us of that folly, which in the long term is likely a healthy lesson to learn.

However, promises must be kept.

This long war is being fought on many fronts. Iraq is the most visible of them. To stop the spreading malignancy so entrenched in that part of the world requires our being seen as a strong horse and not a bug light. If we can make Iraq safe from becoming another Afghanistan, we will have done ourselves and the world a tremendous service...and dealt the forces of 8th century jihad a severe blow. We will also have kept our promises and saved many people we swore to protect from hell on earth.

To walk away now would be the a great crime in and of itself..

More Protests in Iran

Via Dr. Reynolds comes this Gateway Pundit post covering the recent demonstrations in Iran.






Let's wish them well.

Line in the Sand

Over at Gates of Vienna, Baron Bodissey reports that there will be no leniency for the family responsible for the honor killing of one of their daughters in Denmark.

Good...

Not All War News is Wretched or Stupid

After the last post I need a shower, but I'm too busy, so here are several good to middling stories that, being good to middling will likely not get enough coverage.....

So let us now delude ourselves and assume that one z-list blog can tip the scales of public opinion...and commence tilting!! :)

Captain Ed reports that the Kurds have signed on to the oil sharing idea advocated by so many of us! This is HUGE and a very good sort of huge to boot! :) This gives the Sunnis vestment in the country....they now have something to lose if it falls apart. It also indicates a willingness on the part of the Kurds to move forward and away from the memory of Saddam.

Winning hearts and minds is actually going well in some places.


Patrick Ruffinni's overview has gotten wide circulation the past week but it is heartening. Aside from just rattling off a bit of good news he points out that the lack of coverage certainly indicates that there is a lower number of the sort of stories the defeatophillic press likes to cover....so instead we get dead Anna 24/7. Iraq is a place where no news is good news as the good news is so rarely reported.

Tony Blair's decision (made quite a while ago BTW) to draw down more troops has been sen by many (not altogether unreasonably) as giving up, is actually not quite that. The BBC reports that he will send troops in again if the situation deteriorates. The troops in question are being pulled out because the areas in question are being turned over to the Iraqis....that would in fact be progress...but "progressives" might not recognize it.

Sayeth Blair

The UK is to withdraw 1,600 troops from Iraq but Mr Blair said numbers could increase again "if we're needed".

He told MPs on Wednesday that the remaining 5,500 troops would stay until 2008.

There are other fronts in the war and Miserable Donuts has some good and therefore underreported news from Afganistan

It also looks like the idea of hijacking planes is, as suspected, rather less likely to succeed now.

Damn Them To Hell....

A US soldier has been dishonorably discharged and sentenced to a century in a military prison for war crimes.


Michelle Malkin posts on the waste of skin who just plea bargained himself out of the gallows.

Others may yet get the death penalty, one can hope.

Regards this case, I typed some quite unkind things to The Major, whom I disagree with on a number of issues, and who I'm convinced is utterly wrong about a few things.

I'm sorry Major.

It should also be pointed out that Malkin is correct, this is in NO way normal for any of our services. We all are humiliated by these actions. And they do not reflect on the reality of our military.

Perceptions, however, are a big part of how this war is fought.

The actions of these four evil men have badly hurt us.
The town in question turned to the terrorists because they promised to hand out justice to those who had committed this abominable act. They did so, brutally killing thee members of the squad these men belonged to....Barker then confessed during a debriefing.
These men have handed the terrorists an actual moral victory.
This reinforces the view too many have of our troops, it elevates AlQuaeda in the eyes of a very honor conscious society.

All of which seem to fade in importance in contrast to the unspeakable horrors that little girl felt in her last moments.

I feel ill....

One Reason I Got my Back All Bowed up....

....over the NAZI chic thing in the update to this post is that there are still people out there who are upset Hitler didn't finish the job... and not just loons in the closet either.


Witness this bizarre talk by an Iranian scholar regards the subtle Jewish propoganda that is Tom and Jerry...

Laugh at the fact that Tom and Jerry was not made by Walt Disney. Chuckle over the weird notion that the predatory cat is the true victim of the cruel mouse...(yes Tom can be sympathetic I suppose but COME ON).

And just scratch your head over the fact that this asshat is using Schindler's List as a reference for this holocaust denying, Tom and Jerry maligning, lecture.

But while you smirk at this idiot, remember, this guy is quite representative of people who run several countries and in this particular country those people want to get and are close to getting nukes to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. And remember that periodically their Hezbollah proxies are trying to(and all too often often succeeding to) kill Jews via rocket, bomb or gun.

Anyway, I stand by the devil-worship comment, no matter how ironically cute the fanart may be.

HT: Instapundit

A Worthy Effort...

Ali Eteraz is trying to make a difference.

“Today, the translation of the Quran most commonly found in Muslim institutions in the US is ‘The Noble Quran’, a Saudi-sponsored text that interprets the Quran according to a very conservative doctrine. That’s problematic,” says Eteraz.org founder Ali Eteraz. “We want to provide Muslims with a more modernist translation so that people can make up their own minds about controversial verses. The Saudi interpretation shouldn’t be the only interpretation available to modern Muslims. That interpretation inserts hateful references to Jews and Christians and does nothing to clarify Quranic verses regarding women's rights.”

He may be punching against the pounding surf, but it is a good cause, and history has seen longer odds overcome.

This effort deserves more support than it's getting.

Bias? Ignorance? or Biased Ignorance?

Meryl Yourish has a long series of posts on how anti-Israel bias reflects upon the Temple Mount controversy, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

We Love The Aussies....

...but on this they do need to shut up.

Captain Ed offers up a frank response to Australian PM John Howard's dissing of US presidential candidate Barak Obama. Among other things the PM said that...

.....I think that will just encourage those who want to completely destabilize and destroy Iraq, and create chaos and a victory for the terrorists to hang on and hope for an Obama victory," Howard said on Nine Network television.

While his assessment is not without merit, the comments from any non US observers on who we should elect are most unwelcome. The fact that the Jihadists have in fact, invested a lot of hope in a Dem electoral victory, on the assumption that it will facilitate our pulling out from Iraq, is a worriesome point that puts a huge monkeywrench in the electoral process here. It tends to stifle honest debate and criticism.

Obama seems to be a decent fellow who, despite his unfortunate C&R take on Iraq, is dedicated to doing what he genuinely thinks is right for the USA. Although he did not cover himself in glory with his impolitic response to PM Howard's unfortunate remarks, this seems borne of ignorance of the proportionality of Australia's contribution....and it is ultimately irrelevant to the main point to boot...

Americans, through the Electoral College, will decide who our next leader is. Like any nation, we have a whole slew of issues that mean something in our cultural and local context that pass foreigners by, just as elections in other countries frequently cause us to scratch our heads.

A leader of the caliber of Hugo Chavez, would certainly be cause for concern to other countries, but despite the hysterical frothings of the BDS Brigade we are not there and haven't had a such a worrisome executive in a VERY long time.

I agree with Captain Ed that we in America, and especially those of us on the right, need to join hands and denounce this unfortunate turn of phrase despite the high regard we have for PM Howard's and Australians in general.
**************************************************************
It should be noted that the Aussies have been at the forefront of this long war in places like East Timor even before we were forced off our asses by the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Many of us deeply respect them for that, especially given the somewhat limited resources their thinly populated nation has. They are always punching above their weight and doing it well.

On Blackwater

Some years ago,I came in contact with a few of the employees of Blackwater, the controversial private security company about a hundred miles from here in NC. They did some training in association with my old unit and we got some LE equipment from them as well. They struck me as decent and hardworking soldiers. Unlike most security consultants this company requires its people be former US military (preferably special forces types), I have also heard (but never had it verified) that several employees return to Military service after a stint at Blackwater in order to convey lessons learned.

Blackwater has become quite the boogieman for the left as they are a synthesis of much of what they hate most, a meritocracy, gun users, people who turn a profit and macho. The infamous screw 'em post by Kos was in reference to a group of Blackwater employees who died fighting a delaying action against terrorists to give a civillian food convoy a chance to escape. The civillians did in fact escape, but the boys from Blackwater, hopelessly outnumbered and surrounded were overwhelmed brutally killed, burned and had their bodies hung from a bridge. By any rational measure those men died heroes, but to the left they are simply double plus ungood.

I bring up this old story because I blundered into this post by RJ Hillhouse via Armchair Generalist.

It's a nice piece concerning the recent deaths of yet more Blackwater employees. She references a piece that was the on front page our local paper the other day. The article contained this telling passage.

Blackwater has said in the past that while plenty of its own men have been killed, it has never lost anyone it was hired to guard.
Last week did not change that. The deaths brought Blackwater's toll to 30 dead in Iraq and Afghanistan. No one in the convoy was killed.

The increased use of contract labor to do military tasks is a cause for concern and we should be having more of a debate on it than we are. It may be that in nation-building excersizes they can have a very important place complementing our military doing police type things we don't want our military to make a habit of. This is a discussion we need to be having, but maligning good people for political expediency is just foul...especially when they died protecting others and so can't defend themselves.

A Message for Mr. Arkin....

Background here, here, here and here...

...and Murdoc notes that Arkin is the same weasel that released a book with over 3,000 military and intel codewords. A rather telling bit of info that is getting virtually no play anywhere else.

Note: Despite my disgust with Arkin's reprehensible comments, I am in complete agreement with Don Subers "update 2" linked in the "ping-pong post" above.

A few “conservatives” apparently want Arkin fired for expressing an opinion they do not agree with. AJ Strata is organizing a boycott of the Post’s advertisers until Arkin is fired.

Fired for what? That is one of the dumbest things I have heard of in years. I put this on par with the liberal “hate speech” crapola.

You do not win a debate by closing it off — by chasing those who disagree with you away.

I like AJ but he is plain wrongheaded on this. Believe it or not, other people are entitled to their beliefs. Free speech and freedom of the press go well beyond our constitution.

Here, here...

UPDATE: The image has vanished just like all the images in the below post....will be fixed tomorrow or the next day..

Enlightened Self Interest

Rand Simberg links to this Strategy Page post on how the Saudi Arabia has, quietly chosen a side....that through sheer strategic necessity, happens to be ours for the moment.

An excerpt:

The Saudis are even, secretly, cooperating with the Israelis. Iran has always been seen as a greater danger to Israel than the surrounding Sunni Arab nations. Hizbollah, which is a Lebanese Shia organization, made a name for itself during its disastrous attack on Israel last Summer. Although Hizbollah lost by every measure, they won in the arena of public opinion. Both the Israelis and Saudi Arabs (and Sunni Arabs in general) hated that.

...and so the Saudis are allying with the powers that aren't actually a trancendental threat to their existence.

UPDATE: Fixed the links...which had somehow vanished upon posting.