If Kronicaly Bad Speling and excessive use of italiks bothers you, prepare to be bothered.

Friday, October 14, 2005

Al Reuters with their usual 'coverage' of vote

This is a historic weekend. Iraqis are going to the polls to decide on their new constitution, and with the recent deal cut with a major Sunni group it seems destined for passage. For the first time in history, an Arab nation is about to have an actual constitution that doesnt 'constitute' a sick joke. Our friends at Al Reuters are all over it (via, for the world to see):

Western Iraq polling sites said hard to find

Thanks Reuters! We needed that perspective. 25 million Iraqis are heading for the ballot box, but you guys managed to find the real story, the durst of polling centers in sparsely populated, but viscously violent Western Iraq. Thank you for alerting us to the important news of the day. Jerkoffs.

Thursday, July 28, 2005

Bad ideas in the Terror War

One of the problems with war is that you are usually obliged to form ranks with nations or idealogies that are incompatible with your own. We fought WW2 allied to a butcher every bit as heinous as Hitler who was actively sowing our government and society with spies and propagandists. We spent the next 50 years trying to correct the repurcussions.

Many serious thinkers have come to the conclusion that unless moderate Islam comes out full tilt against violence and extremism, the war cannot be won no matter what we do. That may be true. The problem is that 'moderate' Arabs tend to two groups: fascists such as the Sauds and Mubareks, and communist trans-nationalists.

This article (via Andrew Sullivan guest blogger Judith Apter Klinghoffer) gives us an insight into the price the 'moderates' are essentially demanding.

For example, in February 2005, a group of reformists submitted to the U.N. a request that it establish an international court to judge Muslim clerics who incite to violence and bloodshed. The request was examined by the U.N. legal counsel and distributed to the U.N. Security Council.

Cloaked in the veil of reasonableness is a pretty scary precident. This is a suggestion, currently under consideration, to establish a supernational court whos soul purpose is to monitor (and assumedly punish) speech. Now Muslim hate speech is certainly something we need to address, but to anyone who knows anything about the UN its pretty obvious that the real violence inciting hate will be the last thing they concentrate on. There is zero doubt in my mind that just like the International Criminal Court, this court will quickly morph into typical 'get America' mode.

First of all there is no way this court will be confined to Muslim hate speech. That simply runs counter to every politically correct leaning of the transnationalists that infest the UN. They would elect Saddam Hussein the next UN Secretary before encoding (or even recognizing) the fact one cultures extremism is more deadly than another. No. This will be an open ended pervue that will ecompass anything the unelected court considers Hate Speech.

At the end of the day, what does this mean? There is not a shred of doubt in my mind that such a Court would look to circumvent our American 1st Amendment rights (doubtlessly aided by extremist American judges looking to conform to International Law over the Constitutional protections they are sworn to uphold) and try to bring down those they really consider threats: Evangelical Christians, Jews and other Israel supporters, and certainly neocons and other hawks.

Congressman Tancredo would be a perfect target for a court like this. Undoubtedly while claiming to be 'even handed', the transnationalists will spend the resources of this court to silence those who are actually fighting the War on Terror politically. Have no doubt about it, this is a trojan horse.

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Bombs in London Again

Reports are sketchy, but apparently only the detonaters have gone off. A bus and 3 metro stops again. The question is, were these real bombs badly designed, or dummy bombs as is being floated at the moment. If the latter, why? In military parlance, the word that comes to mind is Demonstration. I hope the emergency crews have their eyes open. I suppose its possible that the bomb maker was either inept or had a change of heart. Very strange, whatever the case.
It is often said that God favors fools, drunks, and Americans. I hope some of that luck has rubbed off on our cousins, the Londoners, today.

Thursday, July 14, 2005

The Candy Wars II

One of the inevitable aspects of war is action and reaction. As one side innovates the other side innovates in response, less they collapse altogether. Nothing focuses the mind quite like the imminent prospect of death and defeat. Last month I wrote of the powerful impact individual acts of kindness and generosity by American soldiers was having on the Iraqi people, particularly the children. Tens of thousands of next generation Iraqis will have the fuzzy memory of a giant smiling American handing them candy bars, shoes, or coloring books. That good will is a deadly danger for the long term viability of the jihadi movement.

True to form, Al Qaeda has adapted to the Candy War in the most horrifying way possible. Yesterday, jihadis in a poor neighborhood in Baghdad set off a carbomb to attract an American patrol, and more importantly to attract the children that flock to bomb scenes looking for treats. A suicide bomber driving an SUV packed with explosives waited until several dozen children were gathered around, pressed on the accelerator, and detonating his lethal cargo in the midst of the Iraqi children.

At least two dozen were killed instantly. Many more maimed. One American soldier was killed. There are no words in elvish, entish, or the tongues of men to describe such infamy.

The intent is clear. The terrorists seek to divide the coalition forces from the Iraqi people. Americans are making inroads to Iraqi adults through kindness to their children, and the way to stop that is to make Iraqis fear for their childrens lives. There is a definite sick logic to it.

There is a famous scene in Apocalypse Now where Kurtz recalls the following:

We went into a camp to inoculate the children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for Polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms...

And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God... the genius of that. The genius. The will to do that. Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they were stronger.

Some have proported that this is a true story, passed on from military advisors to Copola. Whatever the case may be, Kurtz was wrong. True soldiers risk death for causes, and therein lies their strength. A warrior who begins to prey on the innocent while avoiding the strong is quickly unmanned. Aside from the literal sadists, Nazis manning concentration camps took to alcoholism and suicide almost to a man. A warrior reduced to atrocity will lose his ability to act, which is precisely why insurgents attempt to goad occupiers into brutality.

In this, Al Qaeda has failed miserably, and in so doing completely lost their path. Instead of provoking Americans, AQ has succeeding in provoking Iraqis against them, while causing Americans to pity Iraqis, the opposite of their intent. Drugging up some Morrocan and having him drive into a preschool is not a sign of moral clarity and mental strength. It is a sign of impotence and confusion of purpose.

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

The White House Press Corp Loses it

What liberal media? This one. The press basically flipped out and ambushed Scott McClellan yesterday. Michael Goodwin makes the case that they have openly taken sides. I'd say he's right. In a week where London has been bombed and a critical Supreme Court decision looms, the press spends basically an entire press conference grilling the spokesman about what is probably not even a crime, and quite possibly not even ethically wrong in any way. Sickening. There is a strong chance that everyone in that room knew that Valarie Plame worked for the CIA before the Novak story broke, it was the worst kept secret in Washington. The press corp has abandoned even the semblance of objectivity and openly declared war on the White House.

So what should Bush do? Give press credentials to bloggers. The White House is under no obligation to keep being harrassed by the same dinosaur relics of an age gone by. Believe me, no-one (even in Manhattan) is waiting to see what brilliant query the shrill and senile Helen Thomas is about to produce. Lets get some new blood in there that is going to start asking the important questions. How about Mickey Kaus or Andrew Sullivan? Austin Bay? David Corn? Drudge? All of those guys have (or should have) the credentials and the respect to do the job. We need some fresh blood in the press room, and to hell with the snobs who would rail against it. The press has a serious job and an important responsibility during war, and this fundamentally silly and biased corp is not cutting it.

Monday, July 11, 2005

This is too rich

The ever mercurial Andrew Sullivan writes on the virtues of stoicism. Soon to follow: Bill O'Reilly on the importance of humility, Chris Matthews on civil discourse, and Ann Coulter on the evils of hyperbole.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

A Bad Qaeda Mistake

Bombing London was a disasterously stupid move for our Al Qaeda enemies. The Brits are now in this up to their ears, and for their own reasons.

Andrew Sullivan posts this email from a British reader:

Londoners (Brits) will fight back. That is obvious. Always have always will. One thing I've got to disagree with you on is that there will be a push for policy change but not for the reason Galloway and others suggest. Brits will demand that we hand over the calm south to Iraqis and move troops (in particular SAS) to Afghanistan. There are some people in the mountains that we need to settle a score with.

This may well be true. It will cause us some problems in Iraq, but it will cause some major Al Qaeda problems everywhere else on the globe. The Brits dont play around. Its been grimly humerous to hear all the criticism of American tactics in places like Guantanimo, when such tactics are a joke compared to what the British and French intelligence agencies resort to when necessary.
I think the main thing that is going to happen is that the Brits are going to step out of the second fiddle role and start running things their way. That is bad news for AQ in Afghanistand and Pakistan, the SAS is the best special forces formation in the world and the English are liable to have all kinds of historic ties and connections in the region. If the Americans are worried about Pakistani soveriegnty, I doubt the British will have such compunction at this point. American objections arent going to slow down the SAS if and when they are let off the leash.

Things are a bit shaky in Afghanistan right now. The Taliban seem to have gotten used to American doctrine and may be resurgent. Several thousand angry Brits rolling in country is not going to help their outlook. We have very different ways of doing things, and a change of pace is a good way of keeping the enemy off balance, perhaps toppling him once and for all.
London Bombing

My heart and prayers are with the British people. As things develop i will have something to add, but for now that is all there is to say.