Saturday, June 25, 2005
Power Line: Where Will It End?
Power Line: Where Will It End?: "The hate, that is. Victor Davis Hanson recapitulates the liberals' hate campaign against President Bush, ranging from Charlie Rangel ('This is just as bad as the 6 million Jews being killed') to John Glenn ('It's the old Hitler business') to Amnesty International. Like us, Hanson worries about where all this will lead:
As a result, the bar is lowering. In today's climate, Alfred Knopf has already published a novel about killing the president. Charlie Brooker writing in the Guardian in London prayed for another Lee Harvey Oswald to take out George W. Bush. Comedians, New York plays and art exhibits also bandy about assassination.
Each time a public official evokes Hitler to demonize the president, the American effort in Iraq or its conservative supporters, cheap rhetorical fantasy becomes only that much closer to a nightmarish reality where the unstable, here and abroad, act on the belief America really is Hitler's Germany.
We will all soon reap what the ignorant are now sowing.
Let's hope that somber prophecy doesn't prove true. Michelle Malkin notes more evidence of the same phenomenon. She links to the Huffington Post, where, in response to a rumor that Vice-President Cheney was hospitalized in Colorado, Democratic commenters openly wish for Chency's death, much as some (to be fair, not all) liberals recently cheered for conservative commentator Laura Ingraham to die of breast cancer.
It's not a pretty picture. Meanwhile, to put all of this in perspective, Gateway Pundit has a good roundup of developments in the trial, in Jordan, of 13 al Qaeda terrorists for plotting to perpetrate the worst chemical weapons attack in history. (We most recently commented on the Jordan trial in 'Pay No Attention to the Terrorists Behind the Curtain'.)
The Jordan trial is significant in part because it shows what an important base for al Qaeda-directed terrorism Saddam's Iraq was. But this is of little interest to the left; as best I can tell from a site search, readers of the New York Times don't even know the Jordan trial is going on. Liberals are convinced they know who their enemies are, and they're not talking about the al Qaeda terrorists who, directed from Iraq, schemed to kill tens of thousands of Jordanians and Americans."
Here!
As a result, the bar is lowering. In today's climate, Alfred Knopf has already published a novel about killing the president. Charlie Brooker writing in the Guardian in London prayed for another Lee Harvey Oswald to take out George W. Bush. Comedians, New York plays and art exhibits also bandy about assassination.
Each time a public official evokes Hitler to demonize the president, the American effort in Iraq or its conservative supporters, cheap rhetorical fantasy becomes only that much closer to a nightmarish reality where the unstable, here and abroad, act on the belief America really is Hitler's Germany.
We will all soon reap what the ignorant are now sowing.
Let's hope that somber prophecy doesn't prove true. Michelle Malkin notes more evidence of the same phenomenon. She links to the Huffington Post, where, in response to a rumor that Vice-President Cheney was hospitalized in Colorado, Democratic commenters openly wish for Chency's death, much as some (to be fair, not all) liberals recently cheered for conservative commentator Laura Ingraham to die of breast cancer.
It's not a pretty picture. Meanwhile, to put all of this in perspective, Gateway Pundit has a good roundup of developments in the trial, in Jordan, of 13 al Qaeda terrorists for plotting to perpetrate the worst chemical weapons attack in history. (We most recently commented on the Jordan trial in 'Pay No Attention to the Terrorists Behind the Curtain'.)
The Jordan trial is significant in part because it shows what an important base for al Qaeda-directed terrorism Saddam's Iraq was. But this is of little interest to the left; as best I can tell from a site search, readers of the New York Times don't even know the Jordan trial is going on. Liberals are convinced they know who their enemies are, and they're not talking about the al Qaeda terrorists who, directed from Iraq, schemed to kill tens of thousands of Jordanians and Americans."
Here!
Friday, June 24, 2005
Los Angeles Times: Why the Rebels Will Lose
Los Angeles Times: Why the Rebels Will Lose: "June 23, 2005
No wonder public support for the war is plummeting and finger-to-the-wind politicians are heading for the exits: All the headlines out of Iraq recently have been about the rebels' reign of terror. But, lest we build up the enemy into 10-foot-tall supermen, it's important to realize how weak they actually are. Most of the conditions that existed in previous wars won by guerrillas, from Algeria in the 1950s to Afghanistan in the 1980s, aren't present in Iraq.
The rebels lack a unifying organization, ideology and leader. There is no Iraqi Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro or Mao Tse-tung. The top militant is Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian who has alienated most of the Iraqi population, even many Sunnis, with his indiscriminate attacks on civilians. Read More
Support for the insurgency is confined to a minority within a minority —"
No wonder public support for the war is plummeting and finger-to-the-wind politicians are heading for the exits: All the headlines out of Iraq recently have been about the rebels' reign of terror. But, lest we build up the enemy into 10-foot-tall supermen, it's important to realize how weak they actually are. Most of the conditions that existed in previous wars won by guerrillas, from Algeria in the 1950s to Afghanistan in the 1980s, aren't present in Iraq.
The rebels lack a unifying organization, ideology and leader. There is no Iraqi Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro or Mao Tse-tung. The top militant is Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian who has alienated most of the Iraqi population, even many Sunnis, with his indiscriminate attacks on civilians. Read More
Support for the insurgency is confined to a minority within a minority —"
Thursday, June 23, 2005
The American Enterprise: The War is Over, and We Won
The American Enterprise: The War is Over, and We Won: "
The War is Over, and We Won
By Karl Zinsmeister
Your editor returned to Iraq in April and May of 2005 for another embedded period of reporting. I could immediately see improvements compared to my earlier extended tours during 2003 and 2004. The Iraqi security forces, for example, are vastly more competent, and in some cases quite inspiring. Baghdad is now choked with traffic. Cell phones have spread like wildfire. And satellite TV dishes sprout from even the most humble mud hovels in the countryside." Fullpage
The War is Over, and We Won
By Karl Zinsmeister
Your editor returned to Iraq in April and May of 2005 for another embedded period of reporting. I could immediately see improvements compared to my earlier extended tours during 2003 and 2004. The Iraqi security forces, for example, are vastly more competent, and in some cases quite inspiring. Baghdad is now choked with traffic. Cell phones have spread like wildfire. And satellite TV dishes sprout from even the most humble mud hovels in the countryside." Fullpage
The American Enterprise: The War is Over, and We Won
The American Enterprise: The War is Over, and We Won: "Your editor returned to Iraq in April and May of 2005 for another embedded period of reporting. I could immediately see improvements compared to my earlier extended tours during 2003 and 2004. The Iraqi security forces, for example, are vastly more competent, and in some cases quite inspiring. Baghdad is now choked with traffic. Cell phones have spread like wildfire. And satellite TV dishes sprout from even the most humble mud hovels in the countryside." See here!
Terrorists or Insurgencists
A Western Heart: "I know the media doesn't use the word 'terrorists', and instead prefers 'insurgency', but here's a NYT piece on the terrorists with some interesting news:
U.S. marines watching the skyline from their second-story perch in an abandoned house here saw a curious thing: In the distance, mortar rounds and gunfire popped, but the volleys did not seem to be aimed at them.
In the dark, one marine spoke in hushed code words on a radio, and after a minute found the answer. 'Red on red,' he said late Sunday night, using a military term for enemy-on-enemy fire."
Read it here
U.S. marines watching the skyline from their second-story perch in an abandoned house here saw a curious thing: In the distance, mortar rounds and gunfire popped, but the volleys did not seem to be aimed at them.
In the dark, one marine spoke in hushed code words on a radio, and after a minute found the answer. 'Red on red,' he said late Sunday night, using a military term for enemy-on-enemy fire."
Read it here
The American Thinker
The American Thinker: "Will the Republicans we elected please stand up
June 21st, 2005
I voted for our current president twice for one fundamental reason: he exhibited the unique, personal leadership characteristics, I believed our country needed the first time he ran and continues to need today. He looked at a situation, sized it up, made a decision, told you what he was going to do and then…he did it.
His propensity to deliver on promises made some inside the beltway very uncomfortable, I am sure.
As I look at where we are as a country today, I see some alarming parallels between the behavior of some elected officials during the Vietnam War and some elected officials now. Perhaps you do as well. " . . .Read here
June 21st, 2005
I voted for our current president twice for one fundamental reason: he exhibited the unique, personal leadership characteristics, I believed our country needed the first time he ran and continues to need today. He looked at a situation, sized it up, made a decision, told you what he was going to do and then…he did it.
His propensity to deliver on promises made some inside the beltway very uncomfortable, I am sure.
As I look at where we are as a country today, I see some alarming parallels between the behavior of some elected officials during the Vietnam War and some elected officials now. Perhaps you do as well. " . . .Read here
Monday, June 20, 2005
Power Line: The Real Thing
Power Line: The Real Thing: "The Real Thing
Marines in western Iraq made a sobering discovery yesterday that highlights the folly of those who decry 'torture' at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay:
Marines on an operation to eliminate insurgents that began Friday broke through the outside wall of a building in this small rural village to find a torture center equipped with electric wires, a noose, handcuffs, a 574-page jihad manual - and four beaten and shackled Iraqis.
One way you can distinguish a real torture center from an American detention facility is that in the real thing, people keep dying:
'They kill somebody every day,' said Mr. Fathil, whose hands were so swollen he could not open a can of Coke offered to him by a marine. 'They've killed a lot of people.'
***
His town has always been a good place, he said, but the militants have made it hell.
'These few are destroying it,' he said, his face streaked with tears. 'Everybody they take, they kill. It's on a daily basis pretty much.'
What do you think; do you suppose we need a lot more news stories about how a guard at Gitmo accidentally touched a Koran?
The liberals' public relations campaign against the American military and the Bush administration, based on the overblown Abu Ghraib story and the bogus Guantanamo Bay story, is a disgrace.
UPDATE: A reader pointed out that I forgot to include the link, which I've added."
Marines in western Iraq made a sobering discovery yesterday that highlights the folly of those who decry 'torture' at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay:
Marines on an operation to eliminate insurgents that began Friday broke through the outside wall of a building in this small rural village to find a torture center equipped with electric wires, a noose, handcuffs, a 574-page jihad manual - and four beaten and shackled Iraqis.
One way you can distinguish a real torture center from an American detention facility is that in the real thing, people keep dying:
'They kill somebody every day,' said Mr. Fathil, whose hands were so swollen he could not open a can of Coke offered to him by a marine. 'They've killed a lot of people.'
***
His town has always been a good place, he said, but the militants have made it hell.
'These few are destroying it,' he said, his face streaked with tears. 'Everybody they take, they kill. It's on a daily basis pretty much.'
What do you think; do you suppose we need a lot more news stories about how a guard at Gitmo accidentally touched a Koran?
The liberals' public relations campaign against the American military and the Bush administration, based on the overblown Abu Ghraib story and the bogus Guantanamo Bay story, is a disgrace.
UPDATE: A reader pointed out that I forgot to include the link, which I've added."
Truck drivers find Iraq comfortable, rewarding
Truck drivers find Iraq comfortable, rewardingTruck drivers find Iraq comfortable, rewarding
Associated Press
LYONS - When he signed on for a one-year tour of duty as a truck driver in Iraq, Dean Battershell was looking at the paycheck.
He thought he might be living with heat, scorpions, and sleeping in a tent with a dirt floor. But that hasn't been the case.
Besides the money being "good," Battershell said he's sold on the job, and making plans for extending his time. He has been in Iraq four months. He came home for a visit recently.
"Five years ago, I would have never dreamed of anything like this," he said. "But when it's over we'll have a little money in the bank, and I can say for myself, 'We did our part.' "
Kathy Lines, whose husband, Randy Lines, is working with Battershell in Iraq, agreed.
The two men, good friends and fishing buddies, signed up together. Lines has driven trucks for 19 years and Battershell for 3 ½.
They headed for Iraq in early February. Battershell is returning for a second four-month tour in June. Lines is slated to be home for a visit in early July.
"He'll stay for the full year. He's not afraid," Kathy Lines said. "The food's good. He likes the people, and he's made tons of friends from a lot of nations."
Dressed in blue jeans and a plaid shirt, Battershell sat beside Lines in the back room of his dad's business, Earl's Upholstery, on the north side of the Rice County Courthouse square.
In addition to the "good chow," he's assigned to an air-conditioned 9-by-12 room outfitted with a single bed. Other amenities include a private bathroom and a PX shopping area with a movie theater, a weight room and a library. He doesn't need money, except for gifts or pocket change. His checks are direct-deposited in the United States.
Battershell spends his days behind the wheel of a cab-over truck pulling a flatbed trailer. It's loaded mostly with shipping cartons and headed for different bases. Hauling time depends on the load, from 2 ½ hours up. Lines is driving "reefers," refrigerated semis loaded with perishables.
"We go all the way south to Kuwait and north of Baghdad, east and west, close to the Iranian border," he said.
The trucks travel in convoys of 10 to 13 rigs.
While "things happen," Battershell said, he's not afraid.
"We get hit every once in a while, but it's a rarity anymore, not an everyday occurrence," he said. "I go outside the wire not expecting any problems."
As he rocked back and forth in a well-worn office chair, Battershell talked about what he's seen and the opinions he's formed about the politics of war.
The body count's the big news. Losing even one military life is bad. But what people aren't hearing is of the thousands of people on the street whose lives have been saved and turned around, he said. Life's better.
There are long lines of Iraqis joining the military and police, and kids are back in school, he said. The primary coalition goal is to see the infrastructure up and going, bridges fixed and oil back online, he said.
"Even before the war, the infrastructure was shot," Battershell said.
Holding a photo album of snapshots, Lines joined in describing the life. She and her husband talk daily by telephone.
"It's 113 degrees there right now," she said.
Morale is good, with the coalition forces, truckers and laborers from around the world getting along great with one another. There are times he's lonely, Battershell said. But when he was stateside sometimes he was away from home for as long as two weeks.
While both men have been in the line of fire and day-to-day it's dangerous, they're not afraid, Battershell said, noting he's felt danger in other places, too, like going down the highway in Chicago or southern Los Angeles.
On his return this week, Battershell's ride from the airport to the company base will be in a "hard car" -- an armored SUV with 2 ½-inch glass -- or riding in the back of a truck.
He's become aware of culture differences between Iraqis and Westerners, with worshippers stopping five times daily for prayer and some farmers hauling sheep and goats in the back seat of their pickup truck while their wives ride in the truck bed.
"I was never pro-war, but I am pro what we're doing," he said. "It's not what you see on TV. We've saved a lot of lives by going in and getting that guy, Saddam. When we first took over, the people didn't understand what freedom is."
Associated Press
LYONS - When he signed on for a one-year tour of duty as a truck driver in Iraq, Dean Battershell was looking at the paycheck.
He thought he might be living with heat, scorpions, and sleeping in a tent with a dirt floor. But that hasn't been the case.
Besides the money being "good," Battershell said he's sold on the job, and making plans for extending his time. He has been in Iraq four months. He came home for a visit recently.
"Five years ago, I would have never dreamed of anything like this," he said. "But when it's over we'll have a little money in the bank, and I can say for myself, 'We did our part.' "
Kathy Lines, whose husband, Randy Lines, is working with Battershell in Iraq, agreed.
The two men, good friends and fishing buddies, signed up together. Lines has driven trucks for 19 years and Battershell for 3 ½.
They headed for Iraq in early February. Battershell is returning for a second four-month tour in June. Lines is slated to be home for a visit in early July.
"He'll stay for the full year. He's not afraid," Kathy Lines said. "The food's good. He likes the people, and he's made tons of friends from a lot of nations."
Dressed in blue jeans and a plaid shirt, Battershell sat beside Lines in the back room of his dad's business, Earl's Upholstery, on the north side of the Rice County Courthouse square.
In addition to the "good chow," he's assigned to an air-conditioned 9-by-12 room outfitted with a single bed. Other amenities include a private bathroom and a PX shopping area with a movie theater, a weight room and a library. He doesn't need money, except for gifts or pocket change. His checks are direct-deposited in the United States.
Battershell spends his days behind the wheel of a cab-over truck pulling a flatbed trailer. It's loaded mostly with shipping cartons and headed for different bases. Hauling time depends on the load, from 2 ½ hours up. Lines is driving "reefers," refrigerated semis loaded with perishables.
"We go all the way south to Kuwait and north of Baghdad, east and west, close to the Iranian border," he said.
The trucks travel in convoys of 10 to 13 rigs.
While "things happen," Battershell said, he's not afraid.
"We get hit every once in a while, but it's a rarity anymore, not an everyday occurrence," he said. "I go outside the wire not expecting any problems."
As he rocked back and forth in a well-worn office chair, Battershell talked about what he's seen and the opinions he's formed about the politics of war.
The body count's the big news. Losing even one military life is bad. But what people aren't hearing is of the thousands of people on the street whose lives have been saved and turned around, he said. Life's better.
There are long lines of Iraqis joining the military and police, and kids are back in school, he said. The primary coalition goal is to see the infrastructure up and going, bridges fixed and oil back online, he said.
"Even before the war, the infrastructure was shot," Battershell said.
Holding a photo album of snapshots, Lines joined in describing the life. She and her husband talk daily by telephone.
"It's 113 degrees there right now," she said.
Morale is good, with the coalition forces, truckers and laborers from around the world getting along great with one another. There are times he's lonely, Battershell said. But when he was stateside sometimes he was away from home for as long as two weeks.
While both men have been in the line of fire and day-to-day it's dangerous, they're not afraid, Battershell said, noting he's felt danger in other places, too, like going down the highway in Chicago or southern Los Angeles.
On his return this week, Battershell's ride from the airport to the company base will be in a "hard car" -- an armored SUV with 2 ½-inch glass -- or riding in the back of a truck.
He's become aware of culture differences between Iraqis and Westerners, with worshippers stopping five times daily for prayer and some farmers hauling sheep and goats in the back seat of their pickup truck while their wives ride in the truck bed.
"I was never pro-war, but I am pro what we're doing," he said. "It's not what you see on TV. We've saved a lot of lives by going in and getting that guy, Saddam. When we first took over, the people didn't understand what freedom is."
Saturday, June 18, 2005
New Rules of engagement
Confessions of a Dangerous Mind
Plus, Amnesty's amnesia.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, June 13, 2005, at 3:30 PM PT
A favorite slice of reality TV in today's Iraq is the melodramatically named program Terrorism in the Grip of Justice. Aired on state-run Al Iraqiya, which doesn't require a satellite dish, it shows the confessions of captured "insurgents," mainly foreign fighters. When possible, it also shows the videos that these people have made, so that, for example, a man can be viewed as he slices a victim's throat and then viewed, looking much less brave, as he explains where he comes from, how he was taught to rehearse beheadings and throat-slittings on animals, and other insights into the trade. On occasion, these characters are confronted with the families of their victims. At other times, they have been able to tell the families of the missing what happened to their loved ones. The aim is to demystify the holy warriors and also to encourage civilians to call in with further tips.
Some of the confessions, such as one from an alleged Syrian intelligence officer who said that the insurgency was run by Syria, are a little too convenient. And the possibility exists that other confessions are either staged or coerced. Nonetheless, the program, which originated in the northern city of Mosul, has been very influential in exposing the origins and character of the forces that are bent on wrecking Iraqi society.
Terrorism in the Grip of Justice could only be shown once the transfer of sovereignty to an Iraqi government had been made. The United States could not have put any of these people on television, because the Geneva Conventions forbid the exhibiting of prisoners. (I don't know what the law would say about showing the program on U.S. television, and in any case the video-beheadings recorded by the captured perpetrators would be too hideous for mass consumption.) In my opinion, at any rate, the elected Iraqi authorities are well within their rights in using this means of propaganda. Indeed, they are entitled to all the presumptions of a war of self-defense.
The position of the United States is different, because not only is it a signatory to the Geneva protocols, it is also the power that has pressed other nations to both sign and observe them. (It was also the United States that pressed all member states of the United Nations to sign Eleanor Roosevelt's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia at first declined to do.) Any wavering on the part of Washington thus has consequences far beyond itself.
The forces of al-Qaida and its surrogate organizations are not signatory to the conventions and naturally express contempt for them. They have no battle order or uniform and are represented by no authority with which terms can be negotiated. Nor can they claim, as actual guerrilla movements like the Algerian FLN have done in the past, to be the future representatives of their countries or peoples. In Afghanistan and Iraq, they sought to destroy the electoral process that alone can confer true legitimacy, and they are in many, if not most, cases not even citizens of the countries concerned. Their announced aim is the destruction of all nonbelievers, and their avowed method is indiscriminate and random murder. They are more like pirates, hijackers, or torturers—three categories of people who have in the past been declared outside the protection of any law.
The administration therefore deserves at least some sympathy in its confrontation with an enemy of a new type. I should very much like to know how a Gore administration would have dealt with the hundreds of foreign sadists taken in arms in Afghanistan. I should also like to know how other Western governments, which are privately relieved that the United States assumed responsibility for the last wave, expect to handle the next wave of fundamentalist violence in their own societies. No word on this as yet.
An axiom of the law states that justice is more offended by one innocent person punished than by any number of guilty persons unapprehended. I say frankly that I am not certain of the applicability of this in the present case. Mullah Omar's convoy in Afghanistan was allowed to escape because there was insufficient certainty to justify bombing it. Several detainees released from Guantanamo have reappeared in the Taliban ranks, once again burning and killing and sabotaging. The man whose story of rough interrogation has just been published in Time had planned to board a United Airlines flight and crash it into a skyscraper. I want to know who his friends and contacts were, and so do you, hypocrite lecteur.
You may desire this while also reserving the right to demand that he has a lawyer present at all times. But please observe where we stand now. Alberto Gonzales was excoriated even for asking, or being asked, about the applicability of Geneva rules. Apparently, Guantanamo won't do as a holding pen until we decide how to handle and classify these people. But meanwhile, neither will it do to "render" any suspects to their countries of origin. How many alternatives does this leave? Is al-Qaida itself to be considered a "ticking bomb" or not? How many of those who express concern about Guantanamo have also been denouncing the administration for being too lenient about ignoring warnings and missing opportunities for a pre-atrocity roundup? I merely ask. I also express the wish that more detainees be brought, like the wretched American John Walker Lindh, before a court.
About Amnesty International's disgraceful performance, however, I can tell as well as ask. I was at one point quite close to its London headquarters, and I used to both carry and return messages for the organization when I went as a reporter to screwed-up countries. The founding statutes were quite clear: An Amnesty local was to adopt three "prisoners of conscience," one from either side of the Cold War and one from a "neutral" state. Letters were to be written to the relevant governments and to newspapers in free countries. Though physical torture and capital punishment were opposed in all cases, no overt political position was to be taken. (I remember there was quite a row when an Amnesty "country report" on Argentina went so far as to describe a guerrilla raid as "daring.") By adhering to these rules, AI became a credible worldwide group to which even the most repressive governments sometimes had to pay attention. All honor to its founder Peter Benenson, who died earlier this year.
And now look. I think it is fairly safe to say that not one detainee in Guantanamo is there because of an expression of opinion. (And those whose "opinion" is that all infidels must die are not exactly prisoners of conscience.) Morally neutral on this point, apparently, Amnesty nonetheless finds its voice by describing the prison itself as "the gulag of our times." No need to waste words here: Not everyone in the gulag was a "prisoner of conscience," either. But if an organization that ostensibly protects the rights of prisoners is unaware of the nature of a colossal system of forced labor and arbitrary detention—replete with physical torture, starvation, and brutal execution—then the moral compass has become disordered beyond repair. This is not even neutrality between the fireman and the fire. It surely expresses a covert sympathy with the aims and objectives of jihad and an overt, if witless and sinister, hatred of the United States. If only this were the only symptom of that tendency.
Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair. His most recent book is Thomas Jefferson: Author of America.
Plus, Amnesty's amnesia.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, June 13, 2005, at 3:30 PM PT
A favorite slice of reality TV in today's Iraq is the melodramatically named program Terrorism in the Grip of Justice. Aired on state-run Al Iraqiya, which doesn't require a satellite dish, it shows the confessions of captured "insurgents," mainly foreign fighters. When possible, it also shows the videos that these people have made, so that, for example, a man can be viewed as he slices a victim's throat and then viewed, looking much less brave, as he explains where he comes from, how he was taught to rehearse beheadings and throat-slittings on animals, and other insights into the trade. On occasion, these characters are confronted with the families of their victims. At other times, they have been able to tell the families of the missing what happened to their loved ones. The aim is to demystify the holy warriors and also to encourage civilians to call in with further tips.
Some of the confessions, such as one from an alleged Syrian intelligence officer who said that the insurgency was run by Syria, are a little too convenient. And the possibility exists that other confessions are either staged or coerced. Nonetheless, the program, which originated in the northern city of Mosul, has been very influential in exposing the origins and character of the forces that are bent on wrecking Iraqi society.
Terrorism in the Grip of Justice could only be shown once the transfer of sovereignty to an Iraqi government had been made. The United States could not have put any of these people on television, because the Geneva Conventions forbid the exhibiting of prisoners. (I don't know what the law would say about showing the program on U.S. television, and in any case the video-beheadings recorded by the captured perpetrators would be too hideous for mass consumption.) In my opinion, at any rate, the elected Iraqi authorities are well within their rights in using this means of propaganda. Indeed, they are entitled to all the presumptions of a war of self-defense.
The position of the United States is different, because not only is it a signatory to the Geneva protocols, it is also the power that has pressed other nations to both sign and observe them. (It was also the United States that pressed all member states of the United Nations to sign Eleanor Roosevelt's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia at first declined to do.) Any wavering on the part of Washington thus has consequences far beyond itself.
The forces of al-Qaida and its surrogate organizations are not signatory to the conventions and naturally express contempt for them. They have no battle order or uniform and are represented by no authority with which terms can be negotiated. Nor can they claim, as actual guerrilla movements like the Algerian FLN have done in the past, to be the future representatives of their countries or peoples. In Afghanistan and Iraq, they sought to destroy the electoral process that alone can confer true legitimacy, and they are in many, if not most, cases not even citizens of the countries concerned. Their announced aim is the destruction of all nonbelievers, and their avowed method is indiscriminate and random murder. They are more like pirates, hijackers, or torturers—three categories of people who have in the past been declared outside the protection of any law.
The administration therefore deserves at least some sympathy in its confrontation with an enemy of a new type. I should very much like to know how a Gore administration would have dealt with the hundreds of foreign sadists taken in arms in Afghanistan. I should also like to know how other Western governments, which are privately relieved that the United States assumed responsibility for the last wave, expect to handle the next wave of fundamentalist violence in their own societies. No word on this as yet.
An axiom of the law states that justice is more offended by one innocent person punished than by any number of guilty persons unapprehended. I say frankly that I am not certain of the applicability of this in the present case. Mullah Omar's convoy in Afghanistan was allowed to escape because there was insufficient certainty to justify bombing it. Several detainees released from Guantanamo have reappeared in the Taliban ranks, once again burning and killing and sabotaging. The man whose story of rough interrogation has just been published in Time had planned to board a United Airlines flight and crash it into a skyscraper. I want to know who his friends and contacts were, and so do you, hypocrite lecteur.
You may desire this while also reserving the right to demand that he has a lawyer present at all times. But please observe where we stand now. Alberto Gonzales was excoriated even for asking, or being asked, about the applicability of Geneva rules. Apparently, Guantanamo won't do as a holding pen until we decide how to handle and classify these people. But meanwhile, neither will it do to "render" any suspects to their countries of origin. How many alternatives does this leave? Is al-Qaida itself to be considered a "ticking bomb" or not? How many of those who express concern about Guantanamo have also been denouncing the administration for being too lenient about ignoring warnings and missing opportunities for a pre-atrocity roundup? I merely ask. I also express the wish that more detainees be brought, like the wretched American John Walker Lindh, before a court.
About Amnesty International's disgraceful performance, however, I can tell as well as ask. I was at one point quite close to its London headquarters, and I used to both carry and return messages for the organization when I went as a reporter to screwed-up countries. The founding statutes were quite clear: An Amnesty local was to adopt three "prisoners of conscience," one from either side of the Cold War and one from a "neutral" state. Letters were to be written to the relevant governments and to newspapers in free countries. Though physical torture and capital punishment were opposed in all cases, no overt political position was to be taken. (I remember there was quite a row when an Amnesty "country report" on Argentina went so far as to describe a guerrilla raid as "daring.") By adhering to these rules, AI became a credible worldwide group to which even the most repressive governments sometimes had to pay attention. All honor to its founder Peter Benenson, who died earlier this year.
And now look. I think it is fairly safe to say that not one detainee in Guantanamo is there because of an expression of opinion. (And those whose "opinion" is that all infidels must die are not exactly prisoners of conscience.) Morally neutral on this point, apparently, Amnesty nonetheless finds its voice by describing the prison itself as "the gulag of our times." No need to waste words here: Not everyone in the gulag was a "prisoner of conscience," either. But if an organization that ostensibly protects the rights of prisoners is unaware of the nature of a colossal system of forced labor and arbitrary detention—replete with physical torture, starvation, and brutal execution—then the moral compass has become disordered beyond repair. This is not even neutrality between the fireman and the fire. It surely expresses a covert sympathy with the aims and objectives of jihad and an overt, if witless and sinister, hatred of the United States. If only this were the only symptom of that tendency.
Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair. His most recent book is Thomas Jefferson: Author of America.
Friday, June 17, 2005
VDH's Private Papers::The Sorry Bunch
VDH's Private Papers::The Sorry Bunch Article about Islam/goals/actions with editorial info.
Sunday, June 12, 2005
Iraq's leadership says militants seeking talks - Boston.com - Middle East - News
Iraq's leadership says militants seeking talks - Boston.com - Middle East - News: "Iraq's leadership says militants seeking talks
June 12, 2005
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The Iraqi government said on Sunday that some rebels had approached it looking for peace terms and repeated its willingness to negotiate with groups which renounced violence and which had not killed Iraqis.
Government spokesman Laith Kubba, speaking at a regular news conference, gave no details of who had made contact.
While many nationalist guerrillas concentrate their attacks on U.S. occupying forces, high-profile groups like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq would appear to be excluded from any dealings with the government because they have mounted bloody assaults on Iraqi civilians and security forces.
'Many have been trying to open channels to talk in recent weeks,' Kubba said. 'Some were calling directly, saying 'We did not kill any Iraqis but took up arms to resist the occupation and want to participate in the political process.'
'To those who have not carried out any killings of Iraqis and who are willing to give up violence and intend to take part in the political process, the door is open.'
The Shi'ite-led government of Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari has often said it is willing to talk to rebels who stop fighting. Most insurgents, who have killed more than 850 people in the couple of months since the government was formed, are drawn from Saddam Hussein's once-dominant Sunni minority.
Some, like Zarqawi himself, come from other Arab countries. "
June 12, 2005
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The Iraqi government said on Sunday that some rebels had approached it looking for peace terms and repeated its willingness to negotiate with groups which renounced violence and which had not killed Iraqis.
Government spokesman Laith Kubba, speaking at a regular news conference, gave no details of who had made contact.
While many nationalist guerrillas concentrate their attacks on U.S. occupying forces, high-profile groups like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq would appear to be excluded from any dealings with the government because they have mounted bloody assaults on Iraqi civilians and security forces.
'Many have been trying to open channels to talk in recent weeks,' Kubba said. 'Some were calling directly, saying 'We did not kill any Iraqis but took up arms to resist the occupation and want to participate in the political process.'
'To those who have not carried out any killings of Iraqis and who are willing to give up violence and intend to take part in the political process, the door is open.'
The Shi'ite-led government of Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari has often said it is willing to talk to rebels who stop fighting. Most insurgents, who have killed more than 850 people in the couple of months since the government was formed, are drawn from Saddam Hussein's once-dominant Sunni minority.
Some, like Zarqawi himself, come from other Arab countries. "
Winds of Change.NET: The Arab/Islamic World's Cultural Gaps
Winds of Change.NET: The Arab/Islamic World's Cultural Gaps: "The Arab/Islamic World's Cultural Gaps
by Guest Author at June 10, 2005 08:46 AM
Look here
JK: U.N. Reports capture part of the issue, but not all of it. Winds of Change.NET's Cairo correspondent Tarek Heggy (see his article archive) looks at the cultural deficits that are the root cause of the Arab/Islamic world's current backwardness and status as non-competitive states, with links to past Winds articles. This article was originally featured on To The Point News.
The Arab Mind
by Tarek Heggy in Cairo, Egypt
I have written many books and articles over the last ten years about the defects in the Arab mind-set, all of which are cultural defects stemming from three main sources. The first is the repressive climate that prevails throughout Arab societies, the second a backward educational system that lags far behind modern educational systems and the third a mass-media apparatus operated by those responsible for the climate of political repression to serve their interests.
The following are the most obvious defects from which the contemporary Arab mind-set suffers:
1. A lack of intellectual hospitality;
2. It is steeped in a culture that encourages conformity and discourages diversity;
3. Limited tolerance for the Other;
4. Limited tolerance for criticism and the virtual absence of self-criticism;
5. The adoption of stands not on the basis of their coherence, validity or intrinsic value but on the basis of tribal or religious affiliations;
6. Deep feelings of inequality with others in terms of results and achievements makes for a sense of inadequacy that is sublimated into an exaggerated and unfounded pride;
7. A tendency to indulge in excessive self-praise and to glorify past achievements as a way of escaping our dismal reality;
8. The prevalence of what I call the ‘big-talk culture’, in which overblown rhetoric is used to compensate for the appalling lack of concrete achievements;
9. A lack of objectivity and the growth of individualism;
10. An unhealthy nostalgia for and escape into the past;
11. An aversion to the notion of compromise, which is deemed to be a form of capitulation and defeat;
12. Lack of respect for women;
13. A tendency to unquestioningly accept stereotypes at face value;
14. Setting great store by the conspiracy theory and believing that the Arabs are always the victims of heinous plots hatched against them by their enemies;
15. An ill-defined sense of national identity: is it Arab, Muslim, Asian, African or Mediterranean?
16. The spread of the personality cult phenomenon in Arab societies, where the relationship with the ruler is based not on mutual respect and accountability but on the excessive adulation, not to say deification, of the ruler;
17. The prevalence of an insular culture that knows next to nothing about the outside world and the real balance of power by which it is governed, let alone the science or culture of others;
18. A lack of appreciation for the value of the bond that links the human species together, which is their common humanity. For most people in the region, the only bonds that count are either tribal, sectarian or nationalistic, although humanity is the most exalted common denominator of all;
19. The spread of a mentality of fanaticism due to a number of factors, the most important being the tribalism that dominates the Arab mind-set to varying degrees;
20. Finally, the Arab mind-set is not overly concerned with the notion of freedom for the simple reason that the Arabs have enjoyed only limited doses of political rights and civil liberties.
The twenty defects listed above are by no means exhaustive; I have no doubt that any Middle East expert can come up with many more. However, all these defects are acquired, which means they are amenable to reform. Moreover, they can all be found, albeit to different degrees, in other societies. As I mentioned, they stem from the prevailing climate of political despotism and outdated educational and information systems designed and operated to serve the interests of a power structure intent on maintaining its iron grip.
These defects will continue to grow unless radical changes are introduced to all three areas. The political system must be overhauled with a view to providing a wider margin of freedom and allowing people a greater say in determining the shape of their present and future. The educational systems in force must be reorganized from the ground up, their philosophy, curricula and methods brought into line with the requirements of the age.
Last but not least, the media must be removed from under the thumb of government and allowed to function in complete political and economic freedom as a credible forum for the dissemination of culture, ideas and information.
For more of Tarek Heggy's writtings in English, please visit"
by Guest Author at June 10, 2005 08:46 AM
Look here
JK: U.N. Reports capture part of the issue, but not all of it. Winds of Change.NET's Cairo correspondent Tarek Heggy (see his article archive) looks at the cultural deficits that are the root cause of the Arab/Islamic world's current backwardness and status as non-competitive states, with links to past Winds articles. This article was originally featured on To The Point News.
The Arab Mind
by Tarek Heggy in Cairo, Egypt
I have written many books and articles over the last ten years about the defects in the Arab mind-set, all of which are cultural defects stemming from three main sources. The first is the repressive climate that prevails throughout Arab societies, the second a backward educational system that lags far behind modern educational systems and the third a mass-media apparatus operated by those responsible for the climate of political repression to serve their interests.
The following are the most obvious defects from which the contemporary Arab mind-set suffers:
1. A lack of intellectual hospitality;
2. It is steeped in a culture that encourages conformity and discourages diversity;
3. Limited tolerance for the Other;
4. Limited tolerance for criticism and the virtual absence of self-criticism;
5. The adoption of stands not on the basis of their coherence, validity or intrinsic value but on the basis of tribal or religious affiliations;
6. Deep feelings of inequality with others in terms of results and achievements makes for a sense of inadequacy that is sublimated into an exaggerated and unfounded pride;
7. A tendency to indulge in excessive self-praise and to glorify past achievements as a way of escaping our dismal reality;
8. The prevalence of what I call the ‘big-talk culture’, in which overblown rhetoric is used to compensate for the appalling lack of concrete achievements;
9. A lack of objectivity and the growth of individualism;
10. An unhealthy nostalgia for and escape into the past;
11. An aversion to the notion of compromise, which is deemed to be a form of capitulation and defeat;
12. Lack of respect for women;
13. A tendency to unquestioningly accept stereotypes at face value;
14. Setting great store by the conspiracy theory and believing that the Arabs are always the victims of heinous plots hatched against them by their enemies;
15. An ill-defined sense of national identity: is it Arab, Muslim, Asian, African or Mediterranean?
16. The spread of the personality cult phenomenon in Arab societies, where the relationship with the ruler is based not on mutual respect and accountability but on the excessive adulation, not to say deification, of the ruler;
17. The prevalence of an insular culture that knows next to nothing about the outside world and the real balance of power by which it is governed, let alone the science or culture of others;
18. A lack of appreciation for the value of the bond that links the human species together, which is their common humanity. For most people in the region, the only bonds that count are either tribal, sectarian or nationalistic, although humanity is the most exalted common denominator of all;
19. The spread of a mentality of fanaticism due to a number of factors, the most important being the tribalism that dominates the Arab mind-set to varying degrees;
20. Finally, the Arab mind-set is not overly concerned with the notion of freedom for the simple reason that the Arabs have enjoyed only limited doses of political rights and civil liberties.
The twenty defects listed above are by no means exhaustive; I have no doubt that any Middle East expert can come up with many more. However, all these defects are acquired, which means they are amenable to reform. Moreover, they can all be found, albeit to different degrees, in other societies. As I mentioned, they stem from the prevailing climate of political despotism and outdated educational and information systems designed and operated to serve the interests of a power structure intent on maintaining its iron grip.
These defects will continue to grow unless radical changes are introduced to all three areas. The political system must be overhauled with a view to providing a wider margin of freedom and allowing people a greater say in determining the shape of their present and future. The educational systems in force must be reorganized from the ground up, their philosophy, curricula and methods brought into line with the requirements of the age.
Last but not least, the media must be removed from under the thumb of government and allowed to function in complete political and economic freedom as a credible forum for the dissemination of culture, ideas and information.
For more of Tarek Heggy's writtings in English, please visit"
One Hand Clapping � Blog Archive � Universal right to bear arms?
One Hand Clapping � Blog Archive � Universal right to bear arms?: "Canadian Joe Katzman writes, here
We have a pretty different attitude to guns up here, and I must say that American gun culture has always kind of puzzled me. To me, one no more had a right to a gun than one did to a car. Well, my mind has changed. Changed to the point where I see gun ownership as being a slightly qualified but universal global human right.
What changed my mind? This simple conclusion:
The Right to Bear Arms is the only reliable way to prevent genocide in the modern world.
His tag line is direct: “The Right to Bear Arms. It’s not just for Americans any more.”
I wrote an essay in 2002 entitled, “Civilization, Violence, Sovereignty and the Second Amendment: Why the right to keep and bear arms is the fundamental right of a sovereign people.” I claimed then, and now, that civilization is founded and maintained on violence or the threat of violence, not an original thought of mine but one well developed by Christian philosopher Jacques Ellul in his book, Violence: Reflections from a Christian Perspective (go to the bottom of the linked page where there are links to the complete text in PDF and RTF, and an incomplete HTML version.)
Hence, if the ultimate authority of the state is to be found in the people of the state (as a condition of nature, as America’s Founders understood), then the people must also have the ultimate power to protect their sovereignty. That means, bluntly, the power of coercion. And coercion necessarily includes the use of violence.
What does this mean elsewhere in the world? Joe quotes a speech by Tendai Biti, an MDC member of parliament, referring to the mass starvation of Zimbabweans by dictator Robert Mugabe.
“I can’t tell you - and the hundreds of Central Intelligence Organisation officers who I know are listening to me right now - about who is going to provide the leadership, who is going to do what, and so forth - but what I can guarantee you is that the anger is overflowing in the veins of the average Zimbabweans. They will defend themselves. The time for smiling at fascism is over.”
Let’s hope so."
We have a pretty different attitude to guns up here, and I must say that American gun culture has always kind of puzzled me. To me, one no more had a right to a gun than one did to a car. Well, my mind has changed. Changed to the point where I see gun ownership as being a slightly qualified but universal global human right.
What changed my mind? This simple conclusion:
The Right to Bear Arms is the only reliable way to prevent genocide in the modern world.
His tag line is direct: “The Right to Bear Arms. It’s not just for Americans any more.”
I wrote an essay in 2002 entitled, “Civilization, Violence, Sovereignty and the Second Amendment: Why the right to keep and bear arms is the fundamental right of a sovereign people.” I claimed then, and now, that civilization is founded and maintained on violence or the threat of violence, not an original thought of mine but one well developed by Christian philosopher Jacques Ellul in his book, Violence: Reflections from a Christian Perspective (go to the bottom of the linked page where there are links to the complete text in PDF and RTF, and an incomplete HTML version.)
Hence, if the ultimate authority of the state is to be found in the people of the state (as a condition of nature, as America’s Founders understood), then the people must also have the ultimate power to protect their sovereignty. That means, bluntly, the power of coercion. And coercion necessarily includes the use of violence.
What does this mean elsewhere in the world? Joe quotes a speech by Tendai Biti, an MDC member of parliament, referring to the mass starvation of Zimbabweans by dictator Robert Mugabe.
“I can’t tell you - and the hundreds of Central Intelligence Organisation officers who I know are listening to me right now - about who is going to provide the leadership, who is going to do what, and so forth - but what I can guarantee you is that the anger is overflowing in the veins of the average Zimbabweans. They will defend themselves. The time for smiling at fascism is over.”
Let’s hope so."
Saturday, June 11, 2005
Friday, June 10, 2005
VDH's Private Papers::The Global Shift
VDH's Private Papers::The Global Shift: "As nations come to know the Chinese, and as a ripe Europe increasingly cannot or will not defend itself, the old maligned United States will begin to look pretty good again. More important, America will not be the world’s easily caricatured sole power, but more likely the sole democratic superpower that factors in morality in addition to national interest in its treatment of others.
China is strong without morality; Europe is impotent in its ethical smugness. The buffer United States, in contrast, believes morality is not mere good intentions but the willingness and ability to translate easy idealism into hard and messy practice.
Most critics will find such sentiments laughable or na�ve; but just watch China in the years to come. Those who now malign the imperfections of the United States may well in shock whimper back, asking for our friendship. Then the boutique practice of anti-Americanism among the global elite will come to an end."
China is strong without morality; Europe is impotent in its ethical smugness. The buffer United States, in contrast, believes morality is not mere good intentions but the willingness and ability to translate easy idealism into hard and messy practice.
Most critics will find such sentiments laughable or na�ve; but just watch China in the years to come. Those who now malign the imperfections of the United States may well in shock whimper back, asking for our friendship. Then the boutique practice of anti-Americanism among the global elite will come to an end."
Monday, June 06, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
