NYT Guest Opinion: We're Winning
— Ace

Suprising.

And... A letter from Al-Zarqawi to Al-Zarahiri makes it clear that, despite Cindy Sheehan's talk of "freedom fighters," the goal of the terrorists is nothing short of unending conquest and totalitarian dominion:

So we must think for a long time about our next steps and how we want to attain it, and it is my humble opinion that the Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals:

The first stage: expel the Americans from Iraq.

The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or amirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq, i.e., in Sunni areas, is in order to fill the void stemming from the departure of the Americans, immediately upon their exit and before un-Islamic forces attempt to fill this void, whether those whom the Americans will leave behind them, or those among the un-Islamic forces who will ... jump at taking power.

There is no doubt that this amirate will enter into a fierce struggle with the foreign infidel forces, and those supporting them among the local forces, to put it in a state of constant preoccupation with defending itself, to make it impossible for it to establish a stable state which could proclaim a caliphate, and to keep the Jihadist groups in a constant state of war, until these forces find a chance to annihilate them.

The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq.

The fourth stage: It may coincide with what came before: the clash with Israel, because Israel was established only to challenge any new Islamic entity.

My raising this idea — I don't claim that it's infallible — is only to stress something extremely important. And it is that the mujahedeen must not have their mission end with the expulsion of the Americans from Iraq, and then lay down their weapons, and silence the fighting zeal. We will return to having the secularists and traitors holding sway over us. Instead, their ongoing mission is to establish an Islamic State, and defend it, and for every generation to hand over the banner to the one after it until the Hour of Resurrection.

Thanks, respectively, to cutaway and Bbeck.

Posted by: Ace at 12:45 PM | Comments (9)
Post contains 388 words, total size 2 kb.

Daily French Bashing, Part Deux
— Harry Callahan

Former French UN ambassador arrested for taking Saddam's bribes.

Anybody who is surprised ought to stop living under a rock.

Posted by: Harry Callahan at 11:44 AM | Comments (6)
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

Schroeder wins "Biggest Crybaby in the World" Prize.
— Tanker

From the people who coined the phrase "Degenerate Subhuman," we get the classic example of a degenerate subhuman.

Unable to lose like a grown man, this son of a Nazi still doesn't know when its time to suck on the business end of a Luger.

Poor little Gerhard called an election a year sooner than he needed to. He lost, just like everyone on the planet predicted he would.

So what does someone who's entire career is based on hatred of America and Capitalism do for a farewell? He makes a speech filled with hatred of America and Capitalism!

But don't let it be said that I'm not generous towards my defeated enemy! Even a degenerate subhuman can be right once in a while. And boy is he ever right about this one:

He quickly composed himself, hitting his stride in a passionate defense of a strong German state and lashing out at "Anglo-Saxon" economic policies favoured in Britain and the United States, which he said had "no chance" in Europe.

That's right mein fuhrer, there is no chance at all for Europe.

Ace's Update: I love that this jackass is still running on anti-Americanism even as he concedes defeat.

I also love that he cried like a pussy while saying goodbye. I don't even imagine it was the somewhat-manly choked-up-and-misty kind of semi-crying Nixon did as he went out. The reports call it "tearful," which to me says full-on blubbering like a schoolgirl who didn't get a pony for her Sweet Sixteen.

Goodbye and good riddance, you pussy-nancy Hun-of-a-bitch.

Posted by: Tanker at 11:17 AM | Comments (18)
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.

The Miers Gamble
— Ace

At this point I'm not sure whether to support Miers. Bush vouches for her, finding her to be politically sympatico, but then, she's served as his personal lawyer for a number of years. Your lawyer is your advocate; a good lawyer looks out for your interests and adopts your views of the law, to the extent that you don't ask them to do anything plainly illegal.

Little wonder why Bush has found Miers so agreeable. It was her job to agree with him, generally. To advise him, certainly, to warn him of illegality, of course. But in all the gray areas, all the debatable issues, she was on Bush's side because she was paid to be.

Bush is essentially betting his presidency, and perhaps the future of the Republican Party, on this nomination. By drafting an evangelical leader of sorts, James Dobson, into pro-Miers advocacy, he's using Dobson. If Miers turns out to be a reliable conservative vote, Dobson won't mind being used, and will in fact be happy to have enlisted. But-- if Miers turns out to be an O'Connor or, worse yet, a Souter, Dobson is going to feel poorly used indeed, and he's going to trash Bush (deservedly) for convincing him to give his personal voucher for Miers.

And conservatives, especially Christian conservatives, are going to be angry. The anger will equal if not exceed the anger after Bush the Elder's "Read my lips" broken promise.

If Miers isn't every bit of the conservative stalwart the White House is telling us through surrogates, there is going to be hell to pay, and conservatives will desert Bush, leaving him almost no support at all. (It doesn't even need to be said that he won't gain liberal support for nominating a liberal. But there, I said it anyhow.)

Now, given the great stakes here, I would normally say, "Gee, the White House must know what the hell it's doing. They are effectively ending their administration three years early if they're wrong. So perhaps I should trust them to act in their own best interests."

The trouble is that I can't quite rely on them to do so. Bush has flaws, and among them is the instinct of a losing gambler to double-up on bad bets, throwing good money after bad in a futile effort to win what is already lost. Sometimes this basic stubborness serves him well -- he got his tax cuts through despite great resistance, and it's doubtful that there are many other Presidents who would have been so steadfast, in the face of steadilly eroding support, in pressing forward in a war that must be won. I'm sure Bush understands the importance of the Iraq War, and this is the major reason for his tenacity; but I can't help but think his resolve is partly a personal matter, a determination to win, to defeat his enemies foreign and domestic, and to have personal vindication.

I hope in the Miers case that determination to win isn't causing him to make the biggest mistake of his Presidency.

I suppose I will mute my opposition to Miers, as Bush seems psychologically incapable of reversing himself at this point. He will press on with the nomination, and, as Hugh Hewitt observed, attempting to thwart him will only damage his political powers. In the end, Miers is almost certain to be confirmed, conservative resistance or not.

We tried to have an intervention of sorts; the Bush walked away from it and declined to go through the twelve steps. He's going to do what he wants, and what he wants to do is get Miers on the Supreme Court and win another battle, this one against his conservative constituents.

I'm not a praying man, but for Bush's sake, and for the sake of the President retaining some amount of political authority in these dangerous years, I hope to God his vaunted "gut" is right about Miers.

Because if he's wrong, that's it. The conservative base will not accept another "mistake" from a Republican President, this time with the historical opportunity of having a Republican (though not conservative) Senate behind him. We will not accept another "whoopsie" on a cause that has been central to our political agitation for thirty years.

If Bush gets this wrong, after being sternly warned off of Miers by half the Republican Party, after being presented the once-in-a-generation opportunity to truly shift the political orientation for the court, well, that's it for him then. His conservative supporters will walk away, and I'll be among those taking a hike.

Bush is a gambler. He better look long and hard at the hand he's currently in and decide whether it's smarter to lay it down or call all-in. If Miers is a good justice, he'll look smarter than all of his Ivy League critics, and he'll be owed many apologies. (I of course will offer one, despite not being Ivy League.)

And if he's wrong, he'll be a crippled president and won't have the support to fight the the only battle more important than the one for the court, the war against terrorism.

I sincerely hope I know what he's doing.

Posted by: Ace at 10:30 AM | Comments (295)
Post contains 867 words, total size 5 kb.

Today's Human Rights Guessing Game
— Harry Callahan

What prison has had the following comments?

The worst ever seen.

It has "squalid and inhumane" cells also described as "dungeons."

"Prisoners, mainly illegal immigrants, [go] without food, drink and lavatory paper as they huddle together for warmth."

"There have been numerous violent attacks and cases of detainees mutilating themselves and smearing their blood on the walls."

Guantanamo?

Nope.

Some other U.S. prison, then?

Nope.

The historic Palais de Justice in Paris.

I await the media's condemnation.

In a massive example of understatement, the cited article in The Telegraph concludes:

The interior ministry said that Mr Gil-Robles's findings would be studied diligently.

Oh, I bet.

Posted by: Harry Callahan at 09:14 AM | Comments (11)
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

Harass Republicans From Beyond the Grave
— Harry Callahan

Some people eternally can't MoveOn.

(via NRO's Corner)

Posted by: Harry Callahan at 08:22 AM | Comments (18)
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

Nostalgia Time. The Avenue of Flags; Do You Remember?
— LauraW.

Hermitage, PA. A man decides to put up one flag for every day Americans are kept hostage. Read it all.
Just to highlight:

While families of the hostages will always carry the memory of the Iranian hostage crisis close to their hearts, many Americans became more and more detached as each day of captivity passed. All too soon Americans watched news updates on the crisis with the feeling of indifference as they lost track of the duration of captivity.

But Tom Flynn, owner of Hillcrest Memorial Park, was convinced that this period in American history was too important to forget and determined to find a way to help Hermitage and the nation remember.

With the help of unemployed steel workers in the Valley and flags donated by the families of veterans buried at Hillcrest, Flynn decided to erect an American flag for each day the hostages had been held. On day 100, the first 100 flags were flown. In a special ceremony that evening, Mr. and Mrs. Matrinko of Oliphant, Pennsylvania (near Scranton) raised the 100th flag and lighted a flame of freedom for their son, Michael, who was still being held a captive. The flame would burn until Michael was able to come home and extinguish it. Flynn further committed to add a flag to the memorial for each day the hostages were held. Little did he know that this commitment would mean 344 additional flags.

Truthfully, this whole episode is a childhood memory to me, but I do remember the thought "But we're the US, isn't there something we can do?"

Over 1,000 flags were used to keep the flags flying during the original 444 days, as the flags needed to be replaced three to four time a year. All but 100 of these original flags were donated by supporters from all around the world. Most of them had once draped the casket of an American veteran. The flags represented periods in history from the Spanish-American War through the Vietnam conflict. One Canadian flag also flies on the Avenue in recognition of the Canadian embassy's help in saving six hostages from captivity and eventually returning them to freedom.

Emphasis mine. But I'm a big fan of repetition:
People gave the flags from the caskets of their beloved departed to be used up in this memorial.

The four hundred forty-four flag memorial has been maintained and still stands to this day.

Posted by: LauraW. at 08:03 PM | Comments (30)
Post contains 420 words, total size 3 kb.

Most Impressive!
— Harry Callahan

Ace, is that you?

(via Blackfive)

Posted by: Harry Callahan at 07:52 PM | Comments (6)
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

UNICEF Bombs the Smurfs
— Harry Callahan

Well, hell, who hasn't wanted to do that?

It fulfills one of my childhood fantasies.

The makers knew exactly what they are doing, having wisely chosen their emotional blackmail with care:

The advertising agency behind the campaign, Publicis, decided the best way to convey the impact of war on children was to tap into the earliest, happiest memories of Belgian television viewers. They chose the Smurfs, who first appeared in a Belgian comic in 1958.

However, I wonder how far they would have gone if they had been allowed:

"We wanted something that was real war - Smurfs losing arms, or a Smurf losing a head -but they said no."

Saving Private Smurf? Band of Smurfs? Yikes.

I'm actually surprised that they didn't blame the United States for killing the Smurfs.

Loose Shit Update:

Apparently this lone blogger called Ace covered this already. Hmm. I did not know that.

Well, at least it was only a few days old.

I'll have to dock myself a day's blogger pay for napping on the job.

(Anyone who gets the reference has very good taste.)

Posted by: Harry Callahan at 07:08 PM | Comments (16)
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.

Pravda Health Alert
— LauraW.

Pravda is an essential part of any serious news-junkie's diet. Besides the important content on centaurs, aliens, and teenagers with X-Ray vision, they also offer a full complement of lifestyle type news that you won't find anywhere else.
This is an Ace O-Spades Public Health Alert:

A wedding ring, which many men constantly wear on the fourth finger, may initiate a variety of sexual disorders and eventually end up with partial or even complete impotence. A recent research work conducted by Belarussian scientists revealed that widespread beliefs of losing strong virility after many years of wearing the wedding ring on the ring finger are based on certain scientific reasons.

This is horrifying. Certainly, any sane wife would want her husband to take his ring off for at least part of the day, to reduce the possibility of impotence. Like, say, when he's at work, or at Happy Hour at the bar, or at the strip club.
Not convinced? Here's the science.

If a finger is placed in the ring circuit, the latter intensifies the flow of specific energy in the finger. Some people may probably know that the so-called kidney meridian passes the fourth finger. The energy flows to the Swadhishthana charka (Self or Own Abode) which supervises the urogenital system and the sexual sphere to a certain extent.

See?
No less than the esteemed bio-therapist and healer Sergei Gagarin asserts that "On the whole, one may come to the following conclusion: those who do not wear wedding rings 24/7 may have a lot fewer problems in their sex lives."

Ladies, I don't make the pizzas, I just deliver 'em.

Fortunately my husband wears a platinum ring which has been specially cast in a form which accommodates and protects his 'kidney meridian.' So he's safe, and should wear his ring all the time. Forever.

Posted by: LauraW. at 04:47 PM | Comments (18)
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.