Squiggler

Saturday Reading Recommendations

Some weekend recommended reading:

How Bad Is the Senate Intelligence Report? by Stephen Hayes

Yes it is pretty darn bad.

Saddam's Man in Niger 
What was the Iraqi regime's nuclear expert doing in Africa? by Christopher Hitchens in the Weekly Standard.

They Liked It When It Was McCain's Idea by Powerline

 

For Plameholics:

The Case of the Missing Crime by Clarice Feldman in the Weekly Standard

and this piece that first appeared as a comment and then moved to be a stand-alone post:

Plame Review by Elendil via Strata-Sphere.

I found this article to be especially interesting with some eye-openers contained within.

Quote of the Day!

OK, I think I have this right...

By Jay Tea on War On Terror

With the recent furor over Pope Benedict XVI's statements about Islam, coupled with the reactions to President Bush's use of the term "Islamic Fascists" and the hysteria over the Danish newspaper's Mohammed cartoons, just to cite three examples, I think I have the fundamental message of Islam figured out:

"Islam is a peaceful, accepting, tolerant, loving religion, and we will kill anyone who says differently."

That about sum it up?

A little something for everyone's tastes, the following list comes from an article in the Washington Post:

Think Tank Town

FROM THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: U.S. Trade Dilemma: Free or Fair?

U.S. trade policy is at a crossroads between pursuing freer trade or fairer trade.

FROM THE RAND CORPORATION: 'No Child' Leaves Too Much Behind (By Brian Stecher, September 13, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Evaluating Our Partners and Allies Five Years Later (By Julianne Smith and Thomas Sanderson, September 11, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: End Open-Ended Litigation (By Ted Frank, September 7, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE URBAN INSTITUTE: Provide Protections From Retirement's Pitfalls (By Richard W. Johnson, September 5, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: Mixed Messages Inhibit Escape From Welfare (By Rourke O'Brien, August 31, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: U.S. Patent Imperialism Hurts American Interests (By Ben Klemens, August 25, 2006; 12:00 PM)

Bill Clinton Was Right (By Robert Rector, August 23, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE CATO INSTITUTE: Bankruptcy Reform Gave Creditors Too Much (By Michelle J. White, August 21, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Open Markets Start at Home (Douglas Holtz-Eakin, August 17, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE RAND CORPORATION: Regulatory Reform on Both Sides of the Atlantic (By John Graham, August 15, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: Creating Equitable Public Education in the U.S. (By Elena Rocha, August 11, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Make Federal Spending Transparent (By Roger Bate, August 9, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE URBAN INSTITUTE: The Right Way to Sell Off Public Assets (By Olga Kaganova and Marilee A. Utter, August 7, 2006; 11:46 AM)

FROM THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Monumental Hope and Grinding Despair (By Jon B. Alterman, August 3, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: Will Your Vote Count in 2006? (By Steven Hill, August 1, 2006; 11:56 AM)

FROM THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: U.S. Shares Blame for Trade Talk Collapse (By Lael Brainard, July 28, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE HERITAGE INSTITUTE: Missing the Real Missile Threat (By James Jay Carafano, July 26, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE CATO INSTITUTE: An Elixir for the Military's Health Care Woes (By Cindy Williams, July 23, 2006; 6:13 PM)

FROM THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Cliffhanger: Mexican Elections and Their Aftermath (Julia E. Sweig, July 20, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE RAND CORPORATION: Protecting U.S. Interests In the Middle East (By Robert E. Hunter, July 19, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: Today's Activism: The Art of the Possible (By Adam Jentleson and Elana Berkowitz , July 14, 2006; 12:25 PM)

FROM THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Summer Vacation of Our Discontent (By Frederick M. Hess, July 12, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE URBAN INSTITUTE: It's a Crime What We Don't Know About Crime (By John Roman, July 10, 2006; 12:00 AM)

FROM THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Deterrence is Not a Dirty Word (By Jon B. Wolfsthal, July 7, 2006; 12:41 PM)

Democrat Hypocrisy

Captain Ed is on it:

Phase II Report: Saddam Retained Banned Missiles, Biological Stocks

Phase II 'Accuracy' Report Proves Joe Wilson A Liar

The Phase II Reports

And an excellent piece at Weekly Standard:

Rules of Evidence

A new Senate report on Iraq and al Qaeda ignores everything which gets in the way of its conclusions.
by Thomas Joscelyn

But beyond the obvious political gamesmanship, there is little merit to this posturing because there is little serious analysis in the Senate report: Far from providing the definitive word on Saddam's ties to al Qaeda, the report is almost worthless.

(Read it all here)

The White House responds ....

The White House responds to the idiotic letter the dems sent with their demands:

Hat tip: Curiouser and Curiouser (letter available on the White House site) 

Dear Senator Reid:

Thank you for your September 4 letter to the President. I am responding on his behalf.

A useful discussion of what we need to do in Iraq requires an accurate and fair-minded description of our current policy: As the President has explained, our goal is an Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself, and sustain itself. In order to achieve this goal, we are pursuing a strategy along three main tracks -- political, economic, and security. Along each of these tracks, we are constantly adjusting our tactics to meet conditions on the ground. We have witnessed both successes and setbacks along the way, which is the story of every war that has been waged and won.

Your letter recites four elements of a proposed “new direction” in Iraq. Three of those elements reflect well-established Administration policy; the fourth is dangerously misguided.

First, you propose "transitioning the U.S. mission in Iraq to counter-terrorism, training, logistics and force protection." That is what we are now doing, and have been doing for several years. Our efforts to train the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) have evolved and accelerated over the past three years. Our military has had substantial success in building the Iraqi Army -- and increasingly we have seen the Iraqi Army take the lead in fighting the enemies of a free Iraq. The Iraqi Security Forces still must rely on U.S. support, both in direct combat and especially in key combat support functions. But any fair-minded reading of the current situation must recognize that the ISF are unquestionably more capable and shouldering a greater portion of the burden than a year ago -- and because of the extraordinary efforts of the United States military, we expect they will become increasingly capable with each passing month. Your recommendation that we focus on counter-terrorism training and operations -- which is the most demanding task facing our troops -- tracks not only with our policy but also our understanding, as well as the understanding of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations, that Iraq is a central front in the war against terror.

Second, your letter proposes "working with Iraqi leaders to disarm the militias and to develop a broad-based and sustainable political settlement, including amending the Constitution to achieve a fair sharing of power and resources." You are once again urging that the Bush Administration adopt an approach that has not only been embraced, but is now being executed. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is pursuing a national reconciliation project. It is an undertaking that (a) was devised by the Iraqis; (b) has the support of the United States, our coalition partners and the United Nations; and (c) is now being implemented. Further, in Iraq's political evolution, the Sunnis, who boycotted the first Iraq election, are now much more involved in the political process. Prime Minister Maliki is head of a free government that represents all communities in Iraq for the first time in that nation's history. It is in the context of this broad-based, unity government, and the lasting national compact that government is pursuing, that the Iraqis will consider what amendments might be required to the constitution that the Iraqi people adopted last year. On the matter of disarming militias: that is precisely what Prime Minister al-Maliki is working to do. Indeed, Coalition leaders are working with him and his ministers to devise and implement a program to disarm, demobilize, and reintegrate members of militias and other illegal armed groups.

Third, your letter calls for "convening an international conference and contact group to support a political settlement in Iraq, to preserve Iraq's sovereignty, and to revitalize the stalled economic reconstruction and rebuilding effort." The International Compact for Iraq, launched recently by the sovereign Iraqi government and the United Nations, is the best way to work with regional and international partners to make substantial economic progress in Iraq, help revitalize the economic reconstruction and rebuilding of that nation, and support a fair and just political settlement in Iraq -- all while preserving Iraqi sovereignty. This effort is well under way, it has momentum, and I urge you to support it.

Three of the key proposals found in your letter, then, are already reflected in current U.S. and Iraqi policy in the region.

On the fourth element of your proposed “new direction,” however, we do disagree strongly. Our strategy calls for redeploying troops from Iraq as conditions on the ground allow, when the Iraqi Security Forces are capable of defending their nation, and when our military commanders believe the time is right. Your proposal is driven by none of these factors; instead, it would have U.S. forces begin withdrawing from Iraq by the end of the year, without regard to the conditions on the ground. Because your letter lacks specifics, it is difficult to determine exactly what is contemplated by the “phased redeployment” you propose. (One such proposal, advanced by Representative Murtha, a signatory to your letter, suggested that U.S. forces should be redeployed as a “quick reaction force” to Okinawa, which is nearly 5,000 miles from Baghdad).

Regardless of the specifics you envision by “phased redeployment,” any premature withdrawal of U.S forces would have disastrous consequences for America’s security. Such a policy would embolden our terrorist enemies; betray the hopes of the Iraqi people; lead to a terrorist state in control of huge oil reserves; shatter the confidence our regional allies have in America; undermine the spread of democracy in the Middle East; and mean the sacrifices of American troops would have been in vain. This “new direction” would lead to a crippling defeat for America and a staggering victory for Islamic extremists. That is not a direction this President will follow. The President is being guided by a commitment to victory -- and that plan, in turn, is being driven by the counsel and recommendations of our military commanders in the region.

Finally, your letter calls for replacing Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. We strongly disagree.

Secretary Rumsfeld is an honorable and able public servant. Under his leadership, the United States Armed Forces and our allies have overthrown two brutal tyrannies and liberated more than 50 million people. Al Qaeda has suffered tremendous blows. Secretary Rumsfeld has pursued vigorously the President’s vision for a transformed U.S. military. And he has played a lead role in forging and implementing many of the policies you now recommend in Iraq. Secretary Rumsfeld retains the full confidence of the President.

We appreciate your stated interest in working with the Administration on policies that honor the sacrifice of our troops and promote our national security, which we believe can be accomplished only through victory in this central front in the War on Terror.

Sincerely,

Joshua B. Bolten
Chief of Staff

I am still at a loss as to who would be dumb enough to take any suggestion about the War on Terror or on who should head the Defense Department from a group of moonbat Members of Congress whose only motive for the U.S. is "get Bush" and the country be damned. They want us to lose, so why would we want to take their recomendations on anything. And as Bolten points out, they are a day late and a dollar short on the good suggestions and only repeating what they know the Bush Administration is already doing. The rest is garbage in, garbage out.

Holy Jihad Brigades claims to have Fox News Crew - UPDATE - Video

Hat Tip: Photo - Flopping Aces

BREAKING NEWS: There is no news on Steve Centanni's or Olaf Wiig's condition, but a previously unkown group is claiming to be the ones holding them. They are demanding a prisoner exchange.

From the AP:

A previously unheard of Palestinian group, the Holy Jihad Brigades, claimed responsibility on Wednesday for kidnapping a Fox News cameraman and correspondent, Al-Jazeera satellite TV reported.

American correspondent Steve Centanni, 60, and cameraman Olaf Wiig, 36, of New Zealand were kidnapped Aug. 14 from their TV van near the Palestinian security services headquarters in Gaza City. Although Palestinian militant groups have often seized foreigners, including members of the media, this is the longest any have been held.

And more from Reuters:

A previously unknown militant group in Gaza claimed responsibility on Wednesday for the kidnapping nine days ago of two Fox journalists and demanded the United States release "Muslim prisoners" within 72 hours.

"Release what you have, and we will release what we have," the "Holy Jihad Brigades" said in a statement obtained by Reuters.

Fox News Channel correspondent Steve Centanni and cameraman Olaf Wiig were abducted by masked gunmen in Gaza City on Aug 14 as they were working on a story.

The group did not say what would happen to the two journalists if the United States did not meet their demand to release Muslims in American prisons by the time the deadline expires on Saturday.

"If you implement our conditions we will implement our promise, otherwise you will have to wait," the statement said.

Michelle Malkin is encouraging a blogburst to bring more publicity to the plight of the newsman and his cameraman. I'm with Michelle in her disgust for the way other news media are treating this story. They don't like Fox, so to hell with Steve and Olaf. It is sickening and so very petty.

Related:

It Shines for All

Ace of Spades

Mary Katharine

The Political Pit Bull

Allah has a super round up.

Wizbang

Macsmind

H/T Media Blog for video link.

Riehl World View

Hot Air - Video

Sister Toldjah

Bomb making equipment found

A suitcase full of bomb-making equipment found by police investigating the airplane bombing plot. (Hat tip: LGF)

A SUITCASE filled with bomb-making material has been found by police teams investigating the alleged plot to blow up aircraft over the Atlantic.

The suitcase, containing chemicals and other equipment for a home-made bomb, was found in woods in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, close to addresses at which suspects were arrested last week.

A police source said that the suitcase contained everything that would be needed to make an explosive device. This could include materials for creating an explosive, methods of concealment and a simple way of detonating the bomb. After police made arrests last week, Whitehall sources said it was feared that the explosives were to have been hidden in plastic drinks bottles and ignited using the current from an MP3 player. Details of the find have been kept secret by Scotland Yard and the suitcase is now being examined by forensic scientists and explosives experts.

A news blackout has surrounded the aftermath of the arrests last week while detectives question 23 suspects at two London police stations. The discovery was made by specialist search units, which have been scouring King’s Wood for nearly a week in search of evidence of the conspiracy. The searches are expected to continue for up to six weeks.

Police sources told The Times that the plot by Islamic extremists would have involved a version of triacetone triperoxide (TATP), which was used for the 7/7 bombings that killed 52 passengers on the London transport system last year. The plot is thought to have involved taking several liquids or a gel form of explosive on board flights with other material and then assembling a bomb in the aircraft lavatories.

Past is Prologue

This statue, depicting "What is Past is Prologue," sits on Pennsylvania Avenue at the National Archives Building.

An Anti-War Leftist Almost Stumbles Onto War On Terror Truth

In International Scene

I found this post at the far-left, anti-war Daily Kos to be interesting. The author spends most of his time hyperventilating about Tony Snow's indication that policies under the Reagan/Bush Sr. administrations (along with Clinton, Carter and other previous presidents) are party to blame for the terrorism problem we have today.

Knee-jerk partisan reactions aside, Tony Snow is exactly right in his assessment of the situation. Policies under past Presidents - from our failure to show jihadist forces around the globe that they cannot push us around to our use of fanatical Muslims in our cold war against the Russians - are to blame for the rise in power of Islamic extremists.

Are any of these past Presidents culpable for the present terror problem? I don't think so (not even Clinton), mostly because none of them could have predicted that Islamic terrorism would become the problem it is today. (more)

Disarmed?

Cox and Forkum

From Wikipedia: (a summary)

Hezbollah was formed to combat the Israeli occupation following the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and opposes the Israeli state.^[5] It was officially founded on the 16th of February, 1985 when Sheik Ibrahim al-Amin declared the group's manifesto. It follows a distinct version of Islamic Shia ideology developed by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.^[8] Hezbollah is one of the two main organizations representing the Shia community, Lebanon's largest religious bloc, but the only militant one.^[9] It is also a recognised political party in Lebanon, where it participates in government.^[10] Hezbollah's civilian wing participates in the Parliament of Lebanon, taking just over 10% of the seats (14 out of 128) and the bloc it forms with others, the Resistance and Development Bloc, 27.3% (see Lebanese general election, 2005). Hezbollah organises an extensive social development programme. This civilian wing runs hospitals, news services, and educational facilities. Its Reconstruction Campaign ('Jihad al-Bina') is responsible for numerous economic and infrastructure development projects in Lebanon.^[11]

Russia, the European Union, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia among others do not consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization. The United States, Canada, and Israel consider Hezbollah a full terrorist organization while the Australians and Dutch only view Hezbollah's external Security Organization as a terrorist Group
____________________________________

Main article: History of Hezbollah

Hezbollah was formed to combat the Israeli occupation following the 1982 invasion of Lebanon^{[citation needed]}. Initially, it aimed to transform Lebanon into an Islamic republic, though it has since abandoned this goal in favor of a more inclusive platform.^[5] It was officially founded on February 16, 1985 when Sheik Ibrahim al-Amin declared the group's manifesto. The publication of the manifesto was timed to coincide with the anniversary of Ragheb Harb's death.^[14]

Scholars differ as to when Hezbollah came to be a distinct entity. Some organizations list the official formation of the group as early as 1982 ^[15] whereas Diaz and Newman maintain that Hezbollah remained an amalgamation of various violent Shi’a extremists until as late as 1985^[16]. Regardless of when the name came into official use, a number of Shi’a groups were slowly assimilated into the organization, such as Islamic Jihad, Organization of the Oppressed on Earth and the Revolutionary Justice Organization.^{[citation needed]} These designations are considered to be synonymous with Hezbollah by the US,^[17] Israel^[18] and Canada.^[19]

Hezbollah's strength was enhanced by the dispatching of one thousand^[20] to fifteen hundred^[21] members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the financial backing of Iran. It became the main politico-military force among the Shi'a community in Lebanon and the main arm of what became known later as the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon.^[20] Hezbollah follows a Shiite Islamist ideology shared by the leader of the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini^[5].

Media operations

Hezbollah operates a satellite television station from Lebanon, Al-Manar TV ("the Lighthouse") as well as a radio station, al-Nour ("the Light"). Kabdat Alla ("The Fist of God") is the monthly magazine of Hezbollah's paramilitary wing.

Al Manar broadcasts news in Arabic, English, French and Hebrew and is widely watched both in Lebanon and in other Arab countries. Its transmission in France (even via satellite, not by any station based on French territory) is controversial. It has been accused of promoting religious and racial hatred (against Jews), which is a criminal offense in France. On December 13, 2004, the French Conseil d'État, acting on the request of the French TV authorities, issued an injunction to Eutelsat to cease the broadcasting of Al Manar in France.^[51]

The Hezbollah Central Internet Bureau in 2003 released a Video Game^[52] titled Special Force, intended to simulate Arab-Israeli conflicts from an Arab perspective.

The web of terrorism

Knowing that this web of terrorists is hard to put into words, I figured a diagram would work best. The name in Red in the center is our suspect named by ABC news in the Sky Bombing plot. Now maybe it is a little easier to see how he fits in.

Thanks to a link from Flopping Aces and a post detailing Ray Robinson's informative posts, we can see a graphical depiction of the web of terrorism and terrorists.

In case you missed it, one of those arrested in the British plane bombing plot is Pakistani Matiur Rehman. ABC's blog says:

According to Alexis Debat, a Senior Fellow at the Nixon Center and ABC News Consultant, who is in Pakistan, "Matiur Rehman is crucial because he is the interface between al Qaeda's leadership and thousands, if not tens of thousands, of Pakistani militants."

Ray Robinson then goes into considerable detail to show the various connections between Matiur Rehman's group, known as HUJI and the other terror groups, especially al-Qaeda concluding with:

If you read the IIS agent notebook, you know Saddam was playing footsies with the Maulana Fazlur Rahman and Fazlur Rahman Khalil, a known al Qaeda terrorist. In other words, he was supporting the JUI which provided support to HUJI and would have lead to support for this most recent terrorist attempt if Saddam was still in power. So this is a premier example of why the Saddam regime was part of the war on terror. If they still had Saddam's support, and there is probably a case to be made that the explosive making expertise originally came from Iraq (apparently it was RDX which is mentioned in Iraqi commando training memos) it might have been a little easier for them to pull it off.

Go read it all.

John Bolton tells all - a must listen!

If you care about Israel, if you want to really understand what just happened at the United Nations with the Cease Fire resolution, if you want to understand about North Koriea and Iran, and if you want to understand period, then you must, repeat MUST, listen to this interview. Get yourself a soda or a cup of coffee, get comfortable and sit back and listen. It's long, but it will play in the background. Pamela at Atlas Shrugs writes:

ATLAS INTERVIEWS JOHN BOLTON

By Pamela on World War IV

I had the enormous priviledge to sit down with John Bolton today and discuss at length the UNSC ceasefire, Israel, Hezb'Allah, the War on Islamofascism, Iran, August 22nd, the puppet government of Lebanon, Olmert .............listen to it all, it's a real eye opener. No holds barred

, I ask the tough questions and got the hard answers.

Here is the download;

Download BoltonCeasefireAtlasInterview810.wav

NBC joins the looney left

In surfing around today and reading lots of posts and comments about the foiled terror plot, I've seen some incredibly stupid remarks. I have never seen such lunacy as is rampant on the far left. I didn't think it could get any more insane, until I came to the Newsbusters story. Jeff Goldstein has a suggestion. I take only one exception: to do what Jeff suggests presumes the loonies admit terrorists exist. They don't. In their childish worlds, it is all a Rovian/Cheney plot.

Progressive delusional paranoia goes national:  NBC News “questions the timing”

Via Newsbusters, here’s NBC’s Kevin Corke:

“Yeah well said because a lot of people here are going to be asking the question, not only today but in the days to come, if, if the administration has known about this potential plot what was the hold up in getting the word out, especially domestically? Now right now they’re saying, Ann, that there’s no expectation that there will be domestic arrests related to this particular terror plot but still it does beg the question how long ago did they know of this and why are we just hearing about it right now?”

As Ace notes:

I can’t think of any obvious answers to that. Nothing like, “He didn’t leak it because he didn’t want to compromise the British investigation, which was a painstaking, massive one conducted over a period of months.”

Must be something else, I’m sure.

And of course, here’s the question that an objective journalist would have directed back to Corke—and those many many many concerned people so concerned and curious about “the timing”:  If not today, when?  And the corollary (which goes to motive), why NOT today?

Because here’s the thing:  had Bush leaked the story for political purposes days ago—say, in the run-up to the Lieberman primary—we’d hear braying from the left about the timing of that. That he didn’t do any such thing—that he let British intelligence and law enforcement do its job and make the call about when to make arrests and how to break the story—is now (ironically! amazingly!  incredibly!) being framed as, well, what, exactly?  A coverup?  Who knows.  We’re never told.

And the reason is simple: by framing the question open-endedly—which has the effect of insinuating a dark conspiracy being carried out by cynical men for secret purposes—Corke and those like him have achieved their purpose of creating doubt where thre need not be any.  It is a smear couched as intellectual curiosity.

So in order to avoid this kind of unsavory journalism in the future, I have a suggestion:  perhaps Mr Corke and the rest of the “concerned” and “curious” can make this easy on all of us and just draft a list of dates when it would be convenient for them to have facts reported.  For my part, that the story broke on the day the arrests were made is something I’m comfortable with, answering to my satisfaction, as it does, the fraught question posed by Mr Corke: “why today?”
That answering being that today is the day of the arrests.  Which is the story.  QED.

Remember they are aimed to kill the most civilians ...

From a Powerline article today this article assessing Israel progress sounds depressing. To think, however, that Israel can stop until they've wiped these terrorists out, take a look at the chart.

Every day, we are told how many rockets the terrorists fired into Israel, but it is hard to put the numbers into perspective. Blog of the Week Vital Perspective supplies this very helpful chart ...