I tried to read Sean Penn's whole screed. I really tried. I kept falling asleep.

Perhaps our administration did declare that weapons of mass destruction were the reason for going into Iraq. I never declared it as my reason for wanting this war. Yes, it was one reason, but not all of it.

I have not, as someone in a comment on an older post said last night, been used like a cheap hooker. Those of us still defending this war and its outcome have other things in mind. Like freedom.

Did you really expect that within a month of the war, Iraq would be some sort of carbon copy of the United States, filled with open markets and democratic elections and prospering people? Are you so naive to believe that freedom can come in a week, a month, even a year?

There are signs of a new life in Iraq. An internet cafe has opened. There are more newspapers now than there have ever been in that country. There are people walking free in the streets, admitting their loathing of the former regime. There are children who have been freed from prisons, mother reunited with their sons who they had assumed to be dead.

Uday is no longer raping young women at whim. Heads are not being chopped off in public view. People do not cower in fear in their own homes, afraid that at any moment Saddam's people will rush in and kill them for some imagined slight.

The torture chambers are dismantled. The prisons are empty. The acid baths are gone.

Is that not enough for you? Will it always be for you an argument over weapons? I question anyone who claims this war was unjust because we have yet to find definitive proof of Saddam's weapon making escapades. How can you tell a person sitting in an internet cafe in Baghdad, reading news that he had never been able to view before that he does not deserve that?

How can you tell a child that he does not deserve to be back home with his parents after being freed from a prison because there were no WoMD to be found?

The end does justify the means. It takes time for freedom to flourish. It takes time for democracy to be installed. It takes time for wrongs to be righted and reapirs to be made and for the stench of a rotten regime to dissipate.

Yes, there will always be factions that want to rule in their own way, with violence or threats or an iron fist. We have that here right in our own country. We have domestic terrorists. We have extreme minorities on both sides of politics. We have cross-burners and gay bashers and groups that condone the destruction of private property to get their way. It's the nature of man to oppose, whether that opposition is just or not. It's the nature of man to want a society to be ruled in his own way, according to his own views. Fortunately, in our country, we have a system that enables the people to speak out against those who want to use tyranny to express their views. We have a system where majority rules, where the extreme among us are kept in check, where we don't allow illegal entities to rule our people.

That will come in Iraq. The free United States was not built in a day or even a month. Freedom takes time.

Personally, I don't care if they never find a weapon of mass destruction. What I care about is the people of Iraq. I care that good things have happened because of this war and it makes me angry that there are people who refuse to see that or acknowledge it, that they are so wrapped up in their hatred for Bush that they would deny a tortured Iraqi woman her freedom just to laugh in the face of the president's supporters.

Would you be happier, Sean Penn, if we never went into Iraq? I'm sure you would be.

Would the Iraqi people be happier? I doubt that.

If we have our right to live free, why would you deny that to others? Is freedom only viable when it is attained by an administration you admire?

This is not about Iraq for Penn and his kind. It is about their selfish hatred for George Bush. It is about the craving they have to be able to say I told you so, about their need to be right, always right and to prove everyone else in the free world wrong. They care about nothing but themselves and their self-centered ideology.

I have not been used by this administration like a cheap hooker. But most of you who oppose this war on the grounds of lack of WoMD have been used by the anti-Bush movement, by Scott Ritter and Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore and Robert Fisk. Your slogan should not be "Not in My Name," it should be "No Freedom for Iraq." That's what your ideology comes down to.

Manny Howard reveals a dark secret about our prisoners at Gauntanamo: they're gaining weight and getting free blue jeans. Oh, the horror!

The Cato Institute's Doug Bandow provides some excellent analysis in his "Bring the Troops Home: Ending the Obsolete Korean Commitment." As Bandow summarizes:

The U.S. alliance with the Republic of Korea has been America's most consistently dangerous commitment since the end of World War II. Yet South Korea is beginning to look away from the United States for its defense. Newly elected President Roh Moo-hyun campaigned on a plat-form of revisiting the security relationship, and he has attempted to adopt the role of mediator between America and North Korea.

Recently attention has been focused on events in North Korea, but the North Korean nuclear controversy must be considered within the context of the U.S.-ROK security relationship. The future of America's relations with South Korea is complicated by Washington's unnatural military presence on the Korean peninsula, and no solution is likely until that unnatural presence is removed. The 37,000 U.S. troops in the South are a Cold War artifact, and the U.S.-ROK alliance— once considered valuable—must be reconsidered. It is time to restructure that relationship, and the United States and the ROK should begin planning for removal of all American forces from the Korean peninsula.

You are highly encouraged to read Mr. Bandow's analysis in full.

Central Comman issues a press release every day titled "COALITION EFFORTS AID IRAQ'S RECOVERY". They also issue one titled "COALITION AND IRAQI POLICE WORK TO MAKE IRAQ SECURE". I'm trying to blog both on a regular basis because you don't see this stuff in the news media. The second one is an old fashioned police blotter such as used to appear in the newspaper.

See for yourself at Central Command

Bob Hope, by all accounts, leads a quiet life at home with his wife of 75 years. Slower in movement, a little trouble with hearing and sight, but still Bob Hope.

I watched two separate specials about Mr. Hope in the past week. Two things stuck in my mind more than anything else. Christmas after Christmas he and his troupe were out there, entertaining the troops. He was there for literally generations for our young men and women, far from home, risking their lives to keep us, and uncounted strangers free.

Members of his troupe talked about the missed Christmases, and how their families dealt with it. The looks on their faces, the tone of their voices; there was something special about this. They looked upon it as a mission, a mitzvah, a holy work. These were true believers, in the good that is America's troops and what they do, and in Bob Hope.

I saw men and women cry as they recalled visiting hospitals. Decades later, their experiences moved them beyond words. One woman told of crying and being pulled aside by Mr. Hope and told that she needed to be stronger because they weren't there to cry for these boys but to make them laugh. Boys without limbs or faces. Boys dying, but one of their last memories would be of pretty girls and laughing with Bob Hope.

Other people have done what he did, too. But, I maintain that none have done it as well. Certainly not as long, or with as much dedication.

On this, Bob Hope's 100th birthday, let's take a moment to remember who the real man from "Hope" is and it's not a former President. Bob Hope is the man who brought "hope" to millions. We honor and thank him for that.

Further thoughts

This takes the cake. Some Ranger trainees complained to a General about having to do pushups for punishment and sleep deprivation and now the Ranger Instructors are walking on eggshells for fear of offending their trainees' delicate ears with cuss words. Give me a f*cking break.

It sounds to me like a few Ranger trainees need to switch professions. People whose job it is to go to war have no business complaining about sleep deprivation and pushups. Especially not RANGERS who, as light infantry, represent the future of our military as we are transformed from heavy and light to drones and light infantry.

Rangers are supposed to be among the best and be able to tolerate among the worst and this bunch of pussies at Fort Benning would undo that. Do you really think a competent enemy will care about your self-esteem or how much sleep you've had? No, he'll kill you at the first sign of weakness. This is not a good sign and that General should be sent for duty elsewhere rather than screwing up America's finest.

Since the Korean War, the Infantry Center at Fort Benning, Ga., has been training individual Rangers at the conventional Army’s most demanding course. Upon completion, these proud Ranger graduates have always infused the rest of the Army with the high standards of professionalism required to prepare men for battle and to make it through the horror of combat.

Ranger training has never been easy. Darby set the standard in 1942 while forging the first U.S. Ranger battalion. “We trained from early morning till late at night, seven days a week,” he wrote. Ironman physical conditioning, speed marches, difficult obstacles and exacting discipline were just part of the drill. And there was always that infamous in-your-face stress created by the Ranger Instructors (RI) and designed to weed out those who would fall apart in a firefight.

About half of Darby’s highly motivated initial volunteers didn’t make it. In the years since, this 50-percent attrition mark has continued to be the norm.

While the rest of the U.S. Army has lowered its standards to the point where seasoned war vets find today’s combat training a joke and the crusty salts who fought at Anzio, Osan and Dak To refer to what passes for most training as “an invitation to get killed,” Rangers have fought lowering the training bar and have consistently turned out hardened studs whom commanders in the field would fight to get.

That is until Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, the guy who runs Fort Benning today, was told by a few recent Ranger graduates that they were turned off by Ranger School because some of their RIs were meanies and actually yelled and cursed at them and even made them do pushups when they goofed up. Others complained in writing that they'd been sleep-deprived and that the training was too difficult.

For the record, the RIs – hardened vets who know what it takes to win and walk away alive – were merely following the battle-tested Darby practices of creating maximum stress, teaching attention to detail and passing on the proven tactics and techniques that have worked so splendidly for our Rangers in a bunch of bad scraps.

But serving Rangers say Eaton went ballistic. He assembled the RIs and gave these tough, dedicated warriors – most with 12 to 15 years of service – a tongue-lashing they’ll never forget.

About the time this general-officer temper tantrum occurred, an investigation was launched. Magnificent soldiers such as Command Sgt. Maj. Bobby Lane, a combat Ranger with 23 years of superior service, were relieved, and other equally fine soldiers’ careers went down the toilet.

Why?

Because clueless Generation Xers with a few months in the Army ratted out these heroes to a general who then overreacted.

The effect?

* RIs are now no longer allowed to swear in the presence of a student. Nor can they raise their voices or use pushups as punishment. Students wear sneakers instead of boots and are coddled as if they were at a Boy Scout Jamboree instead of preparing for a kill-or-be-killed rendezvous on a hillside in Afghanistan or a patch of desert in Iraq.

* When an RI complained to his boss that today's training environment is like “walking on eggshells,” the colonel – who caved for those potential stars flickering in the breeze along with the rest of the Ranger colonels who didn't come to their fine Ris’ defense – said, “Good, that's the way I want it.”

* When Ranger students were recently caught writing “obscene graffiti” on a Ranger vehicle, RIs asked their colonel to boot the guilty from the school. The colonel passed. Could he be afraid of the students complaining again to Eaton?

Pray our future enemies will be as weak as the Iraqis. Because down the road, we might not have real Rangers to Lead the Way as they have for the past 250 years.

If this is the future of the Rangers, yes, let's pray that all of our enemies are as weak as the Iraqis. Otherwise, these pussies and their self esteem will be coming home in body bags.

UPDATE: I'm assured by a Ranger buddy that rough men do indeed stand ready and the existing Rangers won't tolerate cheap imitations.

(Hat Tip Jeffrey Collins)

As one might expect from a military superpower, the United States hosts the most intense war games on the planet. These war games provide valuable training for the US military as well as elite allied forces. This allied participation has many benefits, including enabling closer cooperation between these allies in times of war. The best air combat war game in the world is Red Flag.

...the goal is still to provide training that is as close to combat as participants can come "without facing bullets," as one Red Flag pilot put it.

About 24 percent of all Red Flag trainees are foreign, Droz said. Exchanging "ideas about how they fly and how we fly" is one of the most important objectives of Red Flag, Droz said. ...which has been called "the crown jewel of air combat command."

Cope Thunder is a similar program, but is done on a smaller scale. Keep this in mind as you read the comments of former deputy undersecretary of defense Jed Babbin.

The French air force has traditionally been on the limited invitation lists for Red Flag and its smaller cousin, Cope Thunder (which follows Red Flag by a few months and is held in Alaska). So when Rumsfeld told the Frenchies they were disinvited to both Red Flag and Cope Thunder, their air-force guys were shocked. Being excluded from the best war games sends two unmistakable messages. First, we don't need you. Second, we don't want you. Capiche?

Earlier this week, I mentioned Condoleezza Rice's view on those who actively tried to keep Saddam in power " Punish France, ignore Germany and forgive Russia." A small part of this new policy toward France is now evident.

For some reason, the French are very proud of their military. Rumsfield has, again, struck a major blow against Gaulic pride. Surprisingly, this has come as a shock to the French. I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg. I do not think that the US is going to show their displeasure with France by actively going after this small country. But the days of treated France as a respected ally are over.

Poverty Doesn't Create Terrorists
I have two questions: 1) How did this story get past Howell Raines; and 2) why has it taken so long to get a scientific study that proves that poverty has little to do with terrorism?

This is good news for the (classical) liberals and bad news for the Left. It's been a matter of Leftist dogma for decades that poverty leads to all sorts of evils, yet here we have a scientific study -- a regression analysis -- that holds other factors equal and finds that terrorism is positively correlated to freedom and not poverty. This lends much support to the idea that we should be working to create liberal democracies in the Middle East and should use Iraq as a jumping-off point.

For our long-term security it's essential that we create liberal democracies in the Middle East and that means the neocons were right. Doesn't it hurt?

The stereotype that terrorists are driven to extremes by economic deprivation may never have held anywhere, least of all in the Middle East. New research by Claude Berrebi, a graduate student at Princeton, has found that 13 percent of Palestinian suicide bombers are from impoverished families, while about a third of the Palestinian population is in poverty. A remarkable 57 percent of suicide bombers have some education beyond high school, compared with just 15 percent of the population of comparable age.

This evidence corroborates findings for other Middle Eastern and Latin American terrorist groups. There should be little doubt that terrorists are drawn from society's elites, not the dispossessed.

Yet some stereotypes die hard. In 1958 the political scientist Daniel Lerner argued, "The data obviate the conventional assumption that the extremists are simply the `have-nots.' "

It is still possible that well-off people in poor countries with oppressive governments are drawn to terrorism. President Bush argued something along these lines in an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on the anniversary of Sept. 11. "Poverty does not transform poor people into terrorists and murderers," he acknowledged. "Yet poverty, corruption and repression are a toxic combination in many societies, leading to weak governments that are unable to enforce order or patrol their borders and are vulnerable to terrorist networks."

To investigate this possibility, I have analyzed data the State Department collects on significant international terrorist incidents. The home countries of the perpetrators of each event were identified. More terrorists do come from poor countries than rich ones, but this is because poor countries tend to lack civil liberties.

Once a country's degree of civil liberties is taken into account — measured by Freedom House, a nonprofit organization that promotes democracy, as the extent to which citizens are free to develop views, institutions and personal autonomy without interference from the state — income per capita bears no relation to involvement in terrorism. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, which have spawned relatively many terrorists, are economically well off yet lacking in civil liberties. Poor countries with a tradition of protecting civil liberties are unlikely to spawn terrorists.

Evidently, the freedom to assemble and protest peacefully without interference from the government goes a long way to providing an alternative to terrorism.

This reminds me of my Jefferson quote from the other day and its relevance now more than ever:

"I sincerely pray that all the members of the human family may, in the time prescribed by the Father of us all, find themselves securely established in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and happiness."
--Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Ellicot Thomas, et al., 1807. ME 16:290

Amen to that. Let's hope it's not too distant.

Wondering who saw this today in the New York Daily News:

Dowd famously dislikes President Bush. She often calls him names and says mean things about him. This time, she accused him of flimflamming the country. Two bombs had just gone off in Saudi Arabia and Morocco, presumably detonated by Al Qaeda. According to Dowd, this gave the lie to the President's assertion, delivered in a speech in Little Rock, Ark., that Al Qaeda was "spent."

Here's what she wrote:

"'Al Qaeda is on the run,' President Bush said last week. 'That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly but surely being decimated ... they're not a problem anymore.'"

Here's what Bush actually said:

"Al Qaeda is on the run. That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly but surely being decimated. Right now, about half of all the top Al Qaeda operatives are either jailed or dead. In either case, they're not a problem anymore."

The words in italics were replaced in Dowd's column by three little dots. Those dots say to the reader: Trust me, I'm abbreviating here, but what I'm leaving out doesn't change the meaning.

But the dots did change the meaning. In fact, they turned it upside down.

Turning the meaning upside down? Surely not Maureen Dowd. Read the rest. Oh, and here's the Dowd piece in question.

This Kaleem Omar article in Pakistan's Daily Times leads with the headline "POETIC LICENCE: The US’s reason for invading Iraq was based on a lie." It leans heavily on the recent Seymour Hersh New Yorker article about the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, a subject of this prior TCP Op/Ed post. A highlight:

According to a Pentagon adviser who worked with Special Plans, the group was created in order to find evidence of what Wolfowitz and his boss, Rumsfeld, “believed to be true — that Saddam Hussein had close ties to Al-Qaeda and that Iraq had an enormous arsenal of chemical, biological and possible even nuclear weapons that threatened the region and, potentially, the United States.”

In fact, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and other senior administration officials knew full well that this was not true. They knew Saddam Hussein’s regime had no links to Al Qaeda, just as they knew that Iraq no longer possessed any so-called weapons of mass destruction. When reporters asked Rumsfeld about this last week, he brushed the question aside as being of no “relevance.”

But wait ... then there's this:

Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany’s master of propaganda, said that if you tell a lie often enough, people will begin to believe it. Operating on the same principle, the Bush administration launched a propaganda blitz last autumn to convince the American people that Saddam Hussein’s regime did indeed have “links to Al Qaeda.”

The Americans are a gullible people, and the Bush administration’s propaganda campaign was so successful that a poll conducted in February this year showed that 72 per cent of Americans believed it was likely that Saddam Hussein was “personally involved” in the 9/11 attacks, although no evidence whatsoever of such a connection had been presented.

Read the rest here, which you'll do, because you're all mindless, gullible simpletons ... unlike Kaleem Omar, who's obviously an investigative genius given his masterful ability to parrot another journalist's work.

The power of a U.S. - Israel - democratic Muslim nations - free trade zone ... and the need for the main organization for international relations to be LIMITED to democracies.

A U.S., Palestine, Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan Free Trade Zone would be to the rest of the Muslim world as Hong Kong used to be to China. That is, these new Muslim democracies would finally be prosperous and free - and strikingly so compared to the remaining Muslim dictatorships. (Such a Free Trade Zone has been proposed by the Bush Administration).

The new Muslim democracies would leave the remaining, dictatorial Muslim countries in the dust economically - like the free west left the communist east in the dust during the Cold War. And this would most assuredly put the remaining dictatorships of the Muslim world in a very bad light (hopefully prompting reform - and eventually democracy).

This kind of persuasive power should be used in all international relations. Indeed, I think the U.S. should severely cut back its role in the U.N. - and put its weight (and money) behind an international organization of democracies. Once this new international organization became THE place for international diplomacy, that would create that much more pressure for the world's dictatorships to join the democracy club.

None of this would end Mid-East terror. But truly prosperous democracies will produce far fewer suicide bombers than currently come from dictatorships like Saudi Arabia. Few people will see the benefits of being a suicide bomber when they can actually get a good job, vote for their representatives - and raise their family in peace.

Here's USA Today's story on the proposed U.S./Middle-East free trade zone.

For Coral Sea, For Guadalcanal, For Pusan Perimeter and Operation Anaconda. For Omaha and Utah Beaches. For Okinawa. For every Leatherneck, Grunt or Swabbie who gave their lives. For those Bubbleheads on Eternal Patrol. For those lost while flying to Schweinfurt and Ploesti. For Khe Sanh, Iwo Jima and Belleau Wood. For those KIA in heroic battle or minor skirmish. For the victims of the Bataan Death March. For those who succumbed to wounds, disease or starvation. For those who died alongside others or alone. For those killed in minor accidents, or vanished in unreported Cold War incidents. For the crews of Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia.

To the Families of the US Military whose sons, daughters, husbands, wives, fathers or mothers died for us, Our Thanks.

signed: The usual suspects


photo courtesy of the US DoD

It has been a while since I last discussed German politics. Since then, Schroeder has had a bit of good news. His party actually won a regional election. However, even that victory was tarnished for Schoeder.

That success is put down to the personal popularity of the SPD's leader in Bremen and the fear of breaking up the left-right coalition running the state, rather than anything Schroeder has done. Indeed, Social Democrats in Bremen deliberately kept the chancellor out of their campaign.

Why is Schroeder being shunned by his own party?

It might be because he has led his Social Democratic Party to its lowest ratings since it was formed; recent polls suggest the Social Democrats would only get 25% of the vote if general elections were held today. While true, this just begs the question. Why is his party in such dire condition? Is it because Schroeder and his Social Democrats played the anti-American card to get elected? After all, President Bush and his administration are still holding Schroeder responsible for his actions.

Schroeder had been pushing hard for a separate meeting with Bush but this was rejected by US Secretary of State Colin Powell whose visit to Berlin last week underlined the chilly relations.

On this issue, the US administration is united. Condoleezza Rice has been advising US officials to Punish France, ignore Germany and forgive Russia. More specifically:

"We're now doing everything we can to improve relations to Germany at all levels," the unnamed German visitor quoted Rice as saying. "But we're going to work around the chancellor. It's better to leave him out."

And to enunciate the messages of Powell and Rice, President Bush went out of his way to spend time with a potential 2006 challenger to Schroeder.

When word got back to Berlin last Friday that George W. Bush had found about 15 minutes to personally welcome visiting Hesse Premier Roland Koch to the White House, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder was reported to be livid.

So it is clear to the most obtuse follower of politics that the U.S. administration is clearly not going to give Schroeder another chance. But is this enough of a reason for 75% of the German electorate to disapprove of the Social Democrats? Based upon this article, the answer is no:

A new public opinion survey shows that Germans now overwhelmingly see France as their country's most important and reliable ally, with the United States having declined significantly in importance. The survey, prepared by the Allensbach Institute of Public Opinion Research for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, found that 49 percent of Germans said France was their country's most important partner, compared to 17 percent for the United States.

Schroeder's alienation of the United States may have reduced his popularity among the minority of Germans who strongly treasure a relationship with the States, but this would not account for his low popularity. After all, Schroeder and his party were elected on an anti-American platform. So what else explains the low popularity of the Social Democrats?

Michael Mertes, a former policy advisor to Helmut Kohl, believes Germany is less relevant in both European and world politics than it was before the Iraq war. Repairing the damage will not be easy. The Social Democrats perceived mismanagement of the Iraqi War is probably partially responsible for their current low appeal. However, this alone would not completely explain Schroeder's falling ratings.

Most of the fall can probably be explained by former President Clinton's campaign motto, It's the economy, stupid. Unemployment for the working-age population is approaching 11%, the highest since 1990.

Economic growth is well below the EU average, Berlin has given up hopes of balancing the budget by 2006 and the public deficit has earned it a reprimand from Brussels.

I expect Germany's economic woes to continue for quite some time. On top of the economic problems just discussed, the euro is also hitting record highs against the dollar. While I doubt the Bush administration would deliberately pursue a weaker dollar just to punish certain European countries, I also doubt the White House will try to prop up the dollar. A weaker dollar greatly increases the competitiveness of US exports. Since many Asian countries (including China) link their currencies to the dollar, this means European goods are becoming more expensive around the world, not just in the States.

A strong euro is not all bad, the US has enjoyed many benefits from a strong currency for years. However, it is harmful for European exports. High-tech exports from the US will become more and more price competitive and low-tech exports from Asian competition will become even more attractive. Europe, which competes in both markets, will see a noticeable decline in trade.

What does all of this mean? Schroeder will not win another election. The German people deserve better than Schroeder, and they know it. When Schroeder is no longer in power, the American people will be there extending a welcoming hand to Germany so long as another anti-American leader is not elected. The choice is up to the Germans.

From Sunday's Birmingham News"

The recent al-Qaida attacks in Saudi Arabia and Morocco have demonstrated that the war on terror continues. They have also brought forth criticism of the administration, such as the following from Sen. (and presidential candidate) Bob Graham, D-Fla.: "We have let al-Qaida off the hook. We had them on the ropes, close to dismantlement, and then as we moved resources out of Afghanistan and Pakistan to fight a war in Iraq, we let them regenerate."

Link to the rest

(from Sharp Knife)

This Memorial Day, Americans find ourselves involved in the early stages of a global struggle against an ideology of hate, murder & repression.

Yet, we have been here before.

On a bright summer's day in 1943, Americans gathered to honor our dead, while in the midst of a world war against a similarly monstrous evil.
Simliar, yet different.

While these evil scum do control nations, such as Iran, this conflict is less about nation-states than a clique of madmen in many countries, including our own. Then; our enemies proclaimed racial purity; Now; religious purity...but the only pure thing about them is pure hatred.

President Bush correctly uses the term 'Battle of Iraq'. It's one battle in a long war. It's not over.
Which brings up the charge made by the critics; that we are waging 'Permanent War'. Indeed, it is harder to see the endgame of this conflict than it was that day in 1943, but to call the charge a 'half-truth' gives it too much credit--by half.

'Permanent War' is what has been declared against us...We are Americans; we wage Victory.

Here are some images to enjoy from that day, just six short decades ago. Yes, my young friends; I said 'short'; decades aren't what they used to be.

Then, as now, we rode upon the precipice of a cresting wave; unsure exactly where the future would lead, but sure of our purpose and duty, as Almighty G-d gave us the light to see it.

Take some time today to honor those who have given "the last full measure of devotion". Remember them. Some of us have forgotten. 'Memorial' means 'remember'.

And tell your children of those who fell along the way. It's the way that leads to freedom, the freedoms we enjoy on this sunny summer day, 60 years on.

Tell them the truth.

Tell them, after all these years, Freedom still isn't free.

This Memorial Day, I remeber those who fought here ...

We're here to mark that day in history when the Allied peoples joined in battle to reclaim this continent to liberty. For four long years, much of Europe had been under a terrible shadow. Free nations had fallen, Jews cried out in the camps, millions cried out for liberation. Europe was enslaved, and the world prayed for its rescue. Here in Normandy the rescue began. Here the Allies stood and fought against tyranny in a giant undertaking unparalleled in human history.

We stand on a lonely, windswept point on the northern shore of France. The air is soft, but forty years ago at this moment, the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men, and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and the roar of cannon. At dawn, on the morning of the 6th of June 1944, 225 Rangers jumped off the British landing craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs. Their mission was one of the most difficult and daring of the invasion: to climb these sheer and desolate cliffs and take out the enemy guns. The Allies had been told that some of the mightiest of these guns were here and they would be trained on the beaches to stop the Allied advance.

The Rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers -- at the edge of the cliffs shooting down at them with machine-guns and throwing grenades. And the American Rangers began to climb. They shot rope ladders over the face of these cliffs and began to pull themselves up. When one Ranger fell, another would take his place. When one rope was cut, a Ranger would grab another and begin his climb again. They climbed, shot back, and held their footing. Soon, one by one, the Rangers pulled themselves over the top, and in seizing the firm land at the top of these cliffs, they began to seize back the continent of Europe. Two hundred and twenty-five came here. After two days of fighting only ninety could still bear arms.

Behind me is a memorial that symbolizes the Ranger daggers that were thrust into the top of these cliffs. And before me are the men who put them there.

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. These are the heroes who helped end a war.

Gentlemen, I look at you and I think of the words of Stephen Spender's poem. You are men who in your 'lives fought for life...and left the vivid air signed with your honor'...

Forty summers have passed since the battle that you fought here. You were young the day you took these cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys, with the deepest joys of life before you. Yet you risked everything here. Why? Why did you do it? What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs? What inspired all the men of the armies that met here? We look at you, and somehow we know the answer. It was faith, and belief; it was loyalty and love.

The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next. It was the deep knowledge - and pray God we have not lost it - that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.

You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One's country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.

- Ronald Reagan - Pointe du Hoc, Normandy, June 6, 1984

Today is Memorial Day. We honor our war dead today for the sacrifice they made for us and for our freedoms. Today I also choose to honor Peter J. Ganci, who died in an undeclared war - a war of hatred. On September 11, 2001, Pete died making the ultimate sacrifice.

The war against the United States was engaged long before 9/11. Every act of terrorism is an act of war, so I choose to remember Pete Ganci today in the way that one remembers a war hero.

My father, quoted in the book Out of the Blue: The Story of September 11, 2001, from Jihad to Ground Zero, By Richard Bernstein and the staff of the New York Times.

"Firefighters, the good ones anyway, live to do a good job at the right places - that's all you want to do," said Angelo Catalano, a firefighter who served in the same company as Ganci when both of them were young. "And Pete hated the guys who were skaters."

"Some officers who rise in the ranks have never paid their dues," Catalano said. "You see guys running the show who really don't understand. But Pete paid his dues."

Ganci was the kind of guy that all the other guys wanted to be photographed with. His old collegues at Ladder 124, where he first made his reputation, had bragging rights because they had served with "The Chief" when he was a mere lieutenant. When Ganci went to the national fire chiefs' conclaves in other cities, he was treated like a movie star. "It was as if God himself walked in the door," Catalano said......Firemen see their ladder and engine companies and their rescue squads as their families. "You're close when you fight a fire," McCarthy said. "You'd rather see yoruself hurt than the guy next to you, honestly." And Pete, in this sense, was the perfect familly man.

Looking forward to his retirement, Ganci and [his wife] Kathleen bought a condominium in Florida and they expected to begin using it soon. Ganci planned to play a lot of golf at the nearby East Lake Woodlands Country Club. But up to September 11, Ganci, busy as always, had nevef once visited it. On [one] Sunday when he went clamming with [colleague] Dan Nickola, he was debating with himself about the future, knowing that he wanted to keep going as a firefighter a bit longer, while his family wanted him to retire. But two days later, on September 11, he was up early, as always, and off to work.

Today, weather permitting, I will attend a ceremony where the Farmingdale, Long Island Post Office will be renamed the "Peter J. Ganci, Jr., Post Office Building."

On this day, I will also remember every single soldier who died so I can live free.

Yes, most of us will have parties and barbecues today after we attend parades and ceremonies and listen to speeches. We wil bow our heads in rememberance and some of us will pray and some of us will give silent thanks.

There's nothing wrong with going home afterwards to spend the day with family and friends, having a picnic or celebrating the coming summer.

Just remember what this day is for. When you raise that first cold one to your lips, give a toast to those who this holiday is for. Remember their families, as well.

When you exercise any of your freedoms today, remember those who fought and died so you can enjoy them.

Remember every victim of terrorism against this country for they too are casualties of war.

As stated by a very compassionate person, "The best Memorial to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in our defense is the one you must construct in your heart; the one you look at each day, however briefly, on your way around the mundane chores, the necessary work, perhaps even the heroic efforts you perform.

The Saudi paper Dar Al Hayat today posts this article calling for modification of the Arab League. And while you may not expect it, the article appears to call for liberal democratic systems in Arab states:

This organization [the EU] also relies on executive, judicial and legislative authorities that are independent from one another, not to mention that the country members are all democratic, with liberal political systems. Thus, democracy plays a major role in the European unification, and is considered to be an indispensable condition for the organization. Looking back at the Arab experience, we find that it lacks in every factor that has made the European one a success.

But wait ... there's also this:

America will not stop before breaking down on all the "terrorist" organizations in the Arab world; in other words, it wishes to destroy all those who do not cooperate and submit. It shall force every regime to adopt cultural and communications policies that fit with American and Israeli standards. Some Arab elites perceive this American pressure as an opportunity for a quick political and cultural change that needed such a foreign influence. But the problem is that the change would be operated according to American and Israeli criteria, and hence contrary to Arab expectations. So there is a pressing need to introduce a change at two levels; one at the regional local level, and the second at the regional national one. This requires of course a regional leadership to manage the operations. And since no country in the region is able to shoulder such a responsibility, the only hope standing is for an Egyptian-Syrian-Saudi alliance to form, in order to face future dangers.

Read the rest ...

You can still find them. While looking through the "latest world news" pages of the ABC, that is, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, what should I see but the following:

Reports, Interviews & Analysis
The latest transcripts, audio and video from ABC News and Current Affairs.
...

Baghdad siege looming. Margot O'Neill, Lateline.

It's full of choice predictions, some quite accurate, viz.

Stalingrad, World War II - gruesome street fighting and up to one million dead.
Grozny 1999 - a savage bombardment reduced a city of 400,000 virtually to rubble.
Baghdad 2003 - precision bombing is supposed to have limited civilian casualties and the Americans have made it plain they don't want to fight for the city block by block.
Instead, they'll probably borrow from the British model at Basra.
That means, first, seal off the city while allowing for some tightly controlled exit routes for those trying to flee, then determine who are the key Baath Party loyalists defending the city and target them with lightning raids by special forces and undercover CIA operatives.

OK, so after two days of probes, the "lightning raids" went in to stay, in platoon, then company, then battalion, then brigade, then divisional, then corps force. It's called the "Rock Soup" method, and the US Army in particular have it down to a fine art, and have had since about 1944. But there are some other, less perspicacious quotes:

ALAN DUPONT, STRATEGIC & DEFENCE STUDIES CENTRE, ANU: Once they've identified these key targets, then they need to go in and get the people inside them.
That means snatch operations, quick insertions, with some force to support them, and then out again, before the defenders can react.
MARGOT O'NEILL: Snatch squads, assassination squads -- this sounds like the same irregular fighting tactics the Americans have complained are outside the Geneva Convention.

Now that's what I call Spin-n-n-n. I mean, we're talking 3000 rpm here, 25 gravities at the tips, at least 5 Goebbels or one Baghdad Bob's worth.

MARGOT O'NEILL: In the end, disease, starvation and bloody street fighting could make this siege as gruesome as many of its predecessors.

The ones she mentions before. Grozhny. Stalingrad. This isn't spinning, it's just plain wrong, as in "mistaken", and is quite excuseable. Just quite... quaint.

The Observer | Special reports | Red Cross denied access to PoWs
First, we should consider the source of these reported violations of the Geneva Conventions: The Observer, which is simply London's Guardian in disguise for the weekend. They are an overtly anti-American paper based on most of their editorial content and I've seen bias in their reporting as well.

However, if we are indeed mistreating the Iraqi POWs we should quit and give them immediate access to the Red Cross. The reason is because we don't want our POWs mistreated in some future conflict -- yeah, I know we're the only ones who play by the rules and the Vietnamese tortured American POWs routinely. Even so, future mistreatment of our POWs could be treated as a post-war war crime and the perpetrators could be punished. Besides, we are the United States and are supposed to be the good guys.

With the lecture now over, I'm still skeptical. Our soldiers are better trained than that and the Left, of which the Guardian is a member, has been looking for something to ping us on. We'll see.

The United States is illegally holding thousands of Iraqi prisoners of war and other captives without access to human rights officials at compounds close to Baghdad airport, The Observer has learnt.

There have also been reports of a mutiny last week by prisoners at an airport compound, in protest against conditions. The uprising was 'dealt with' by the Americans, according to a US military source.

The International Committee of the Red Cross so far has been denied access to what the organisation believes could be as many as 3,000 prisoners held in searing heat. All other requests to inspect conditions under which prisoners are being held have been met with silence or been turned down.

There is circumstantial evidence that prisoners are being gagged and hooded, in the manner of the Afghans and other captives held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba - treatment in itself questionable under international law.

Unlike the Afghans in Cuba, there is no doubt about the status of these captives, whether PoWs or civilians arrested for looting or other crimes under military occupation: all have the right, under the laws of war, to be visited and documented by the International Red Cross. 'There is no argument about the situation with regard to the Iraqi armed forces and even the Fedayeen Saddam,' said the ICRC's spokeswoman in Baghdad, Nada Doumani.

'They are prisoners of war because they have been captured during a clear conflict between two states. If they served in the armed forces or in a militia with distinctive clothing which came under the chain of command of one of the warring states, they are protected under article 143 of the Geneva Convention.'

One correction: there's no question as to the status of the detainees at Gitmo. They're illegal combatants who don't wear uniforms and are not protected by the Geneva Conventions, though they are naturally entitled to humane treatment.

The Ayn Rand Institute features an excellent Memorial Day editorial by Andrew Bernstein, Honoring Virtue. Excerpt: "The meaning of Memorial Day is particularly pressing today when the United States is engaged in a war against fanatics who represent the extreme of intellectual, religious and political suppression. Freedom is unknown and utterly alien in the countries that support terrorists. They feel threatened by our most cherished principles and institutions, and so they seek to destroy us. Our soldiers who fought so courageously and so effectively against the Taliban and Saddam Hussein helped to overthrow both of those brutal dictatorships while defending the lives and freedom of American civilians. ... What protects us is our moral courage and our military might."

Azure is the journal of the Shalem Center (where Michael Oren is a senior fellow). This extensively footnoted article by Yagil Henkin is from the most recent issue. Henkin discusses lessons learned about urban warfare from the IDF operation in Jenin (while meticulously refuting the accusations of "massacre"), and gives additional examples from Chechnya, Serbia, and Somalia. If you find military strategy interesting, or if the problem of civilian casualties in war is of concern to you, this is a must read.

[Note: Originally posted here in my weblog.]

Somewhat lost in the din of the major local news networks' handling of the recent terror attacks in Mindanao and the on-going shelling and pursuit operations the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) is conducting against the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) is the angle that the outlaw Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing the New People's Army (NPA) is openly assisting the Islamic radicals.

This is not the first time that the Filipino people have heard of such a partnership between the two strange bedfellows. But I am a bit surprised that the local networks have not highlighted the alliance much further.

The Manila Times in less than a week released at least two articles detailing such an arrangement between the two insurgent groups with diametrically contrasting ideologies. The reports merely confirmed the rumored-in-the-past coalition between the communists and the Islamic extremists.

In the report entitled "NPA teaching guerilla tactics to Moro group":

The New People's Army is training Moro Islamic Liberation Front rebels in guerrilla warfare, a source in the movement told The Manila Times on Sunday.

The source, who is in the legal affairs department of the movement, said the training is part of an agreement reached by the NPA and the MILF five years ago.

"The training is being conducted in NPA camps in Davao and Surigao and MILF camps in Cotabato, Lanao and Maguindanao," he said.

He said an alliance between the communists and the separatists was forged sometime in 1998 to combat "the growing threat of US domination" in Mindanao.

"The Central Committee of the MILF approached the Central Command of the NPA in Mindanao for a truce to help each other fight the US influence in the area," the source said.

From the article "Elite assassins to help MILF":

FORTIFYING its tactical alliance with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, the New People's Army has mobilized its hit squads in Mindanao to attack government forces pounding the separatist rebels, a source in the NPA said on Thursday.

The NPA has activated a hit squad, the National Partisan Unit, to conduct special operations and "work independently of the military cadre units of the NPA," the source said.

On Wednesday leaders of both groups said they were considering launching joint military operations against US troops involved in the Balikatan war games.

The Philippines-US exercise is scheduled this year in the Liguasan Marsh in Central Mindanao, site of the continuing punitive strikes by government troops against the secessionist guerrillas.

And in a related story, CPP ordered the NPA to "disrupt the R.P.-U.S. military exercises":

The Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Philippines has issued a directive to its armed wing, the New People's Army, to launch tactical offensives against American and Filipino troops participating in the Balikatan exercises.

Sources from the NPA told The Manila Times that NPA field commanders have been told "to disrupt the RP-US military exercises."

"The CPP is bent on frustrating US intervention in the country. The US wants to destroy the revolutionary movement," the source said.

A portion of the war games is scheduled to be held in the Liguasan Marsh in Central Mindanao.

Of course, throughout human history, groups with contrasting beliefs are known to temporarily set aside their differences in order to solidify their efforts against a so-called "common" enemy. But I'm still wondering how the CPP-NPA (classified as a "terrorist organization" by Washington) and the MILF (and Abu Sayyaf?) partnership can actually work out. What is this really all about? Training? Mere demarcation of operating areas? Joint extortion activities? Share of ransom loot for kidnapping sorties?

Other than giving each other chest bumps and high-fives for the mutual satisfaction they get in destroying government infrastructures, killing innocent civilians, and murdering Filipino and American soldiers participating in R.P.-U.S. war games, I really don't see any logic in such an arrangement. In fact, methinks such a collusion merely cheapens further the "purity" of what the two insurgent groups are supposedly fighting for.

Doctors say Hussein, not UN sanctions, caused children's deaths

Throughout the 13 years of UN sanctions on Iraq that were ended yesterday, Iraqi doctors told the world that the sanctions were the sole cause for the rocketing mortality rate among Iraqi children.

"It is one of the results of the embargo," Dr. Ghassam Rashid Al-Baya told Newsday on May 9, 2001, at Baghdad's Ibn Al-Baladi hospital, just after a dehydrated baby named Ali Hussein died on his treatment table. "This is a crime on Iraq."

It was a scene repeated in hundreds of newspaper articles by reporters required to be escorted by minders from Saddam Hussein's Ministry of Information.

Now free to speak, the doctors at two Baghdad hospitals, including Ibn Al-Baladi, tell a very different story. Along with parents of dead children, they said in interviews this week that Hussein turned the children's deaths into propaganda, notably by forcing hospitals to save babies' corpses to have them publicly paraded.

The fighting words of the left, pre-dating the war, were sanctions killed all those Iraqis, not Saddam.

The U.S. starved the babies. The U.S. was killing the children and poor people of Iraq.

Under the sanctions regime, "We had the ability to get all the drugs we needed," said Ibn Al-Baladi's chief resident, Dr. Hussein Shihab. "Instead of that, Saddam Hussein spent all the money on his military force and put all the fault on the USA. Yes, of course the sanctions hurt - but not too much, because we are a rich country and we have the ability to get everything we can by money. But instead, he spent it on his palaces."

How is the left going to spin this? Are they going to call it a lie? Propaganda? Another conspiracy by "BushCo?"

This is what many of us have been saying all along. Saddam killed his own people. Saddam starved them, kept medicines from them. But the left laughed in our faces and scolded us for believing in filthy lies.

Turns out they aren't lies after all. And we were right.

Just as with the teary-eyed people who decried the massive looting of the Iraq museum that turned out not to be a massive looting, the left will react to this news one of two ways; they will either be disturbingly quiet or they will drum up some fantasy laden web of distorted facts and claim that this story is fake.

"Saddam Hussein, he's the murderer, not the UN," said Dr. Azhar Abdul Khadem, a resident at the Al-Alwiya maternity hospital in Baghdad.

Doctors said they were forced to refrigerate dead babies in hospital morgues until authorities were ready to gather the little corpses for monthly parades in coffins on the roofs of taxis for the benefit of Iraqi state television and visiting journalists. The parents were ordered to wail with grief - no matter how many weeks had passed since their babies had died - and to shout to the cameras that the sanctions had killed their children, the doctors said. Afterward, the parents would be rewarded with food or money.

Read the rest, as they say. It's quite telling.

An open letter to Brock Meeks, correspondent on MSNBC's Homeland Security Beat re: Janet Reno's alleged refusal to permit a plan to go forward in 1998 to capture Osama Bin Laden in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

This letter was emailed to Mr. Meeks earlier today.

* * *

Dear Mr. Meeks:

I heard (& saw) a story on Washington's radio station WMAL (AM 630) (on the Charlie Warren Show at about 6 p.m. last night) - and again last night on MSNBC with Keith Oberman - regarding a 1998 plan by the FBI and CIA to capture Osama Bin Laden. The story was that FBI Agent Cogen (phonetic) now indicates that the FBI/CIA had a plan in 1998 to go into Kandahar, Afghanistan, to capture Bin Laden in a safe house where he was staying. The FBI/CIA had strong intelligence that he was in this particular safe house. Agents trained outside of San Diego in preparation for the actual capture. The agents had previously obtained a criminal arrest warrant for Bin Laden in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

When the plan was presented to then Attorney General Janet Reno, however, she refused to permit the arrest/capture plan to go forward. (Also, both of the reports from yesterday indicated that, when contacted regarding this story, Ms. Reno refused to comment).

Despite the above coverage I heard and saw yesterday, and the important nature of this story, I have been unable to find any links to this story on the MSNBC website (or elsewhere) today. Can you direct me to a link for the Keith Oberman report on this story - or to any other link on this story?

Thank you.

* * *

Update:

See the story discussed at World Net Daily.

My boss received an email from his good friend, who is the Executive Officer of the U.S.S. Teddy Roosevelt.

I'm happy to say this will be my last installment for this deployment. We passed the Straits of Gibraltar yesterday (headed westbound), and we'll fly off our 8 jets off Theodore Roosevelt and back into Jacksonville next Wednesday. The ship will pull into Norfolk on the 29th. We've got quite a few anxious sailors ready to get home and take some well deserved time off.

It ain't over till the paperwork's done, so we're putting the finishing touches on all our end-of-deployment reports and briefs due upon our return. As you can imagine, wars can be expensive. I've attached a picture that one of our industrious computer experts put together. It's a combination of NASCAR meets Navy Air, not sure it's enough to pay the bills, but something worth considering.

[click for larger image]

From the Washington Times:

"Walk the halls of the State Department's main offices in Washington these days, and you'll encounter an abundance of political cartoons — something you could not have found even three years ago. It's not that the diplomats at Foggy Bottom have suddenly developed a sense of humor, but rather a newfound contempt for the leader of the free world. The cartoons overwhelmingly lampoon President Bush as a simpleton who doesn't understand the "complexities" of the foreign policy."

That's insubordination. Not to mention tacky. But hardly the worst of it:

"On March 31, representatives of the North Korean government told State Department officials, for the first time, that they were reprocessing plutonium, a key step in developing nuclear weapons. The Pentagon and the White House did not learn of this stunning announcement until Pyongyang told them during previously scheduled talks with North Korea in China on April 18. The State Department intentionally withheld this vital piece of information, fearing that, if the White House knew, officials there might call off the meeting."

For two and a half weeks, State felt it had the right to deny information vital to this nation's security to the Commander-in-Chief, in order to promote it's own policy preference. That's criminally seditious. And meglomaniacal. It smacks of a coup.

These are the people who let the 9-11 terrorists write their own visas in crayon.

They've had their noses planted up Arafat's posterior for years, despite his having murdered Americans...including State Dept. employees!

They're just back from a tour of Nevada's brothels.

Someone needs to tell them they do not work for themselves... they work for the President. The President of the United States...not France.

If Gen. Powell's officers had pulled a stunt like that when he was in command, their asses would still be in Leavenworth.

A damned outrage.

Just when I thought things were starting to go well in Iraq, I hear that Iraqis are going to be subject to dictatorial-style gun grabs by U.S. and Allied forces. The New York Times reports that Allies will begin seizing guns from Iraqis, and those that refuse to comply will risk being arrested.

"We are in the final stages of formulating a weapons policy to put rules on who can and cannot possess a weapon," Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan, the chief allied land commander said in an interview. "We want to get explosives and AK's out of the wrong hands."

So much for the God given right to self defense. I agree that criminals shouldn't be permitted to run around with guns, but the Allies aren't targeting the criminals. They are targeting anyone and everyone who is not a member of the police force or military. The mass of Iraqi civilians are being treated like criminals for the misdeeds of a few miscreants and looters.

The sad fact is that criminals will undoubtedly evade having their firearms confiscated, leaving the average law-abiding Iraqi at their mercy. Not too mention that any government that is set up in Iraq will have an easy time oppressing the populace, given that the U.S. has already disarmed them. As soon as our troops leave, they are a lot more likely to return to being an Islamic Fundamentalist dictatorship.

When I think back to the founding of our own nation, I don't recall reading anywhere in the history books that guns were rounded up for the safety of our fledgling government. In fact, firearms ownership was encouraged, and protected with the drafting of the Second Amendment. Where is George Mason when you need him?

The Daily Star of Lebanon has posted a summary of op-ed pieces from papers throughout the Middle-East. Written under the headline Terrorism is a ‘cancer’ spreading through Muslim world, it's a collection well worth reading. You can find it here, and here's a selection:

Arab News (Riyadh): The pro-government daily says the real victim behind the attacks in the region is Islam and the Arabs, not the Americans or other foreigners. “The biggest victim of all is Islam. The actions of the fanatics feed Islamophobia. They send the warped message that Islam is a religion drenched in blood. They must stop.

But it is not enough to say that this is the work of a minuscule minority, that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are sickened by these attacks. It is not enough to condemn. It is not even enough to hunt them down and punish them. The world has to see that the cancer threatening the Muslim world is being cut out ­ vigorously. Unless something is done, it will create a backlash of its own ­ against Muslims, against Islam.”

Al-Ahram (Cairo): Columnist Salama Ahmed Salama slams US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in the government-owned daily saying that he is as “brutal” and “unfair” as Saddam Hussein for the way Arab prisoners are treated in Guantanamo Bay.

“It has become difficult to differentiate between Rumsfeld and Saddam as well as between (British Premier Tony) Blair and (former Iraqi Deputy Premier) Tareq Aziz.”

“Those who speak today of the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein’s regime and the absence of justice under the Baath authority will realize that what the Bush administration is committing through Rumsfeld is not less brutal nor less unfair than what Saddam Hussein did.” American practices are “stirring up feelings of injustice and rage, which encourages hatred of the United States.”

I Think We Killed All the Smart Ones

Originally posted at Little Tiny Lies. Please be aware that the author is not suggesting that suicide bombing is funny.

In the wake of last week's suicide bombings in Riyadh and Casablanca, intelligence agencies the world over are scrambling to gather information on the new, reconstituted Al Qaeda terrorist network. Al Qaeda's security measures have made it impossible for the West to pinpoint the hiding place of mastermind Osama bin Laden, but using an electronic eavesdropping device of my own design, the Fict-U-Lizer (patent pending), I have managed to record and transcribe a recent meeting between bin Laden and two of his henchmen.

SCENE: a damp, dark cave in Afghanistan. In a corner of the room stands a hospital bed containing the crumpled, bandaged form of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden. His head is in a partial cast which makes it impossible for him to speak.

ENTER Mahmoud and Naseem, two lower-level Al Qaeda operatives.

NASEEM: Is the great one awake? I am eager to tell him the wonderful news!

MAHMOUD: Silence, son of a dung beetle. We will wait until he rouses.

NASEEM: Your mother is a dung beetle.

MAHMOUD: Your father is a shabbos goy.

NASEEM: Perhaps he is your father, too. Ask your mother, the dung beetle.

MAHMOUD: I have your dung beetle right here. Lower your voice; Osama sleeps.

NASEEM: Osama will be so pleased! Knowing he inspires such devotion will help him forget he lives on diluted hummus pumped in through what once was his nose!

MAHMOUD: Naseem...

NASEEM: He will not mind the sacrifices. The eyepatch, the skin grafts, the missing buttock, the adult diapers...

MAHMOUD: Naseem!

NASEEM: The news will make him forget! Just as his head injuries made him forget how to make chraa on his own, in a proper squat-toilet instead of wherever he happens to be at the time.

MAHMOUD: Do not make me strike you.

NASEEM: [Standing by Osama's nightstand, he fingers an Arabic translation of Mein Kampf. He gives it a sudden push, sending it to the floor, where it lands with a bang.] OOPS!

OSAMA: [He wakes.] MMFF! MMFF! [Looking around wildly with his remaining eye, he uses his good arm to claw at the bed's rails. Believing the B-52's are back, he is determined to hide under the bed.]

NASEEM: Look, Mahmoud! He cannot wait to rise and fight the infidels! [He sniffs.] Say, Mahmoud, do you smell chraa?

MAHMOUD: [Draws back his hand and smacks Naseem on the back of the head.] See how you startled him?

NASEEM: Ow!

MAHMOUD: Blessed one, we bring good news! I know you were worried when the bombers came and killed every one of your lieutenants who could read, and you were forced to promote those of us who had been recruited to dig latrines and throw ourselves on stray cluster bombs. But we have risen to the occasion! Al Qaeda is reborn! We have resumed our campaign of holy hatred! Once again, the intestines and mangled torsos of the faithful are raining down among our enemies! Our suicide bombers are back at work! Praise Allah!

OSAMA: [He is dressed in a hospital gown and adult diapers made by duct-taping together Huggies decorated with smiling ducks and bunnies.] MMF! NNNG! NNNG! [He waves his good hand back and forth in a gesture clearly meaning "no."]

NASEEM: Look, Mahmoud! He says, "No! No! No more good news! I cannot bear it!" I know, o seed of the Prophet! Your joy is so great, it cannot be contained!

OSAMA: [Flops back onto his pillow.]

MAHMOUD: Great imam, the news is even better than you think! Before, we sent our bombers to Israel and America, to kill the Jews and Christians. Now, we send them into the hearts of Islam's great cities, to slaughter those who have not helped us enough!

OSAMA: [Turns his head and stares at Mahmoud in horror.]

NASEEM: Yes, great leader! This week we bombed the treacherous Saudis and Moroccans! Wise is Allah, and terrible is his hand, Al Qaeda!

OSAMA: [Raises his hand and slaps the plaster covering his forehead.]

MAHMOUD: Yes, imam, the Saudis and Moroccans helped us, but not enough. They sent us money. They armed our men. But they lined their pockets with dollars and paid lip service to the Western pigs. We rewarded them for their treachery by blowing their body parts as high as the minarets of a mosque.

NASEEM: I guess we showed THEM, eh, imam?

MAHMOUD: We would like to bomb the appeasing, boot-licking Syrians as well, but for some reason, we are now having a cash-flow problem.

NASEEM: This morning when I opened the mail bag from our chief fundraiser in Saudi Arabia, I was surprised to find that it contained his severed head.

MAHMOUD: We suspect some sort of woodworking accident.

NASEEM: But we fixed the problem. Prince Abdullah called this morning.

MAHMOUD: I know, I know. You are afraid your unworthy servants have claimed the credit for themselves. Naseem and I would never betray you so! We would sooner be bar mitzvah'd and vacation in the Catskills!

NASEEM: We told him the bombings were the work of our great master, Osama!

MAHMOUD: And he said he wanted to come in person and give you "what you have coming."

NASEEM: Some sort of prize, we think. Perhaps a hot tub.

MAHMOUD: Or a cruise!

NASEEM: And we wanted to make sure you would get your reward.

MAHMOUD: So we told him where you were staying.

OSAMA: [Whimpering noises.]

NASEEM: Look, Mahmoud. Tears of joy.

MAHMOUD: We should really spruce up the cave for his visit. Perhaps some balloons. What do you think, Naseem?

NASEEM: Can we have ice cream?

MAHMOUD: Perhaps an ice cream cake in the shape of a Q'uran.

OSAMA: [Gestures to Mahmoud.]

MAHMOUD: What do you wish, o lion of the desert? You wish me to come to your side? [He walks to the bedside.]

OSAMA: [Yanks Mahmoud's revolver from its holster, presses it to his temple, and pulls the trigger repeatedly, only to hear a series of clicks.]

NASEEM: Look, Mahmoud! He wants to be a martyr, too!

MAHMOUD: My master, your guards made me leave my ammunition with them at the door.

NASEEM: You can't be too careful.

MAHMOUD: But be of good cheer! Soon your turn will come.

OSAMA: [Nods morosely.]

NASEEM: Do not worry, your seventy-two virgins await, and they are taking excellent care of your ears and missing buttock, which have preceded you to Paradise.

MAHMOUD: O, lucky, lucky buttock.

NASEEM: And ears.

MAHMOUD: Indeed, the ears are lucky as well.

NASEEM: And the eye.

MAHMOUD: Yes, Naseem, and the eye.

NASEEM: And the nipple which was torn off by shrapnel.

MAHMOUD: Clearly, Naseem has forgotten his pills today.

OSAMA: [Sobs quietly.]

MAHMOUD: He weeps for the fallen.

NASEEM: Perhaps he weeps for the nipple.

MAHMOUD: Truly, Naseem, the midwife should have thrown you to the jackals and kept the placenta.

At that point, the batteries for the Fict-u-lizer went dead, and I was forced to cannibalize a pair from my motorized, talking Donald Rumsfeld bobble-head. But it was too late; the meeting had ended.

This correspondent promises to stay abreast of related developments. Encouraged by Al Qaeda's clever new strategy of bombing nations whose citizens have given them financial support, State Department officials have reportedly offered Al Qaeda money to cut out the middleman and simply bomb themselves.

Reliable sources say Al Qaeda's leaders are stalling while they try to figure out the catch.

The bit about Americans using heavy metal and Barney the Dinosaur music on auto-repeat in order to break Hussein's henchmen has triggered a lot of commentary in the blogosphere.

Charles of Little Green Footballs threw out the challenge, and asked "what else should they use?" The pitiless Green Horde wasted no time in coming up with answers, proving once again that Allah's justice works in strange and mysterious ways. Command Post readers have offered their own suggestions, but there was no focused effort and so LGF's Green Horde is ahead at the moment.

For a listing of some of the top eeevil music entries so far, and an opportunity to submit your own Music from Hell, come visit Winds of Change.NET. Think of it as your personal contribution to the war effort!