Shock:

In response to criticism about funds he contributed to Hizbullah, Sheikh Taj al-Hilali, the controversial mufti of Australia and New Zealand, said that the amount he had carried with him to Lebanon did not exceed $50,000. This sum, he said, would not buy "a quarter of a missile owned by Hizbullah."

Charles Johnson points out that he seems to know the finer details of illegal contraband terror-missile pricing.

Bonus: Terror-inciting "cleric" Abu Izzadeen arrested in Britain.

Posted by: Ace at 12:08 PM | Comments (9)
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.

That last part -- the background, the reason, the context -- is of course altogether absent from AP's story. Jules Crittendon adds it back in, quoting from the MNF site:

In Zaganiyah, Iraq, Saturday, citizens from the area approached members of the 5th Iraqi Army Division and Soldiers from the 5th Squadron, 73rd Cavalry Regiment, assigned to the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, to inform them of weapon caches and people responsible for placing improvised explosive devices.

The information provided by the citizens led to the discovery of two caches and the detention of two suspected terrorists who were still carrying the initiation systems for IEDs. Six anti-Iraqi forces were also killed in the area.

The caches included artillery rounds, an anti-tank mine, more than five rocketpropelled grenades and IED-making material.

Aside from the citizens providing information, the local tribal leaders have
approached the patrol base in Zaganiyah to meet with the Iraqi army and Coalition leadership and discuss the way ahead.

That report was released on the same day of the attack. And yet AP is intellectually incurious as to the "root causes" of this particular bit of terrorism, because the root causes are American success.

Related: The veto pen is out for the Democrats' surrender plan for Iraq. The whole trick is to force a defeat while retaining plausible deniability, of course.

Jeff Goldstein notes that Harry Reid had it right the first time, at least by his own lights-- he does believe the war is lost, or, I suppose, that the war should be lost. But he's not supposed to say so, because the Democrats have found that while Americans don't like the war in Iraq, they don't like military losses, either. So the trick is to advocate for defeat while pretending to be interested in success through "smarter strategies."

All of this is of course viciously cynical -- if the war is lost, then the troops should be brought home immediately, and not slowly, unit by unit, exposing those left behind to greater danger and higher casualty rates as the Democrats' seem to prefer.

But the Democrats are pushing the "slow bleed" "strategies" even knowing they will result in greater American casualties and guaranteed American defeat because this strategy, unlike defunding the war, allows them to pretend they had nothing at all to do with the defeat they're forcing.

They're trading American soldiers' lives for a few percentage points in polls.

And yet they accuse others of politicizing war.

Related: Reid says he'll flat-out ignore any reports of progress of David Petraeus.

Video of Reid's Vow To Ignore Inconvenient Testimony:

Where do the Democrats stand, then?

Reid doesn't believe Petraeus about progress in Iraq and will not accept any evidence that contradicts his position.

But John Kerry is willing to have a look at evidence "based on fact" that 9/11 was caused by a government conspiracy to inflict mass-murder on its own citizenry.

Strong, smart. Reality-based.

"Scathing" Cheney Attack On Reid, Reports MSNBC: This is "scathing"?

His visit to the doctor earlier today didn't stop Vice President Cheney from launching a scathing attack on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's recent statements on Iraq -- calling them "unfortunate," "uninformed," and "misleading."

In his remarks from Capitol Hill, Cheney added, "What was most troubling about Sen. Reid's comments is his defeatism."

If that's "scathing," what exactly is it when Democrats claim Bush "lied us into war"?

Posted by: Ace at 10:30 AM | Comments (40)
Post contains 592 words, total size 5 kb.

You know, she was named after Harriet "Hillary" Tubman, right?

"There may be some bumps along the road! You know this reminds me of one of my favorite American heroines, Harriet Tubman. For when she made it to freedom after having been a slave and she got to New York and she could have been so happy to just stay at home and just breathe a big sigh of relief but she kept going back down South to bring other freed slaves to freedom. And she used to say, 'No matter what happens, keep going.' So we're going to keep going until we take back the White House!"

A vote against Hillary! is a vote for slavery.

You don't... like slavery, do you?

The Democratic Party Votes For Slavery! Rasumussen has Obama and Hillary! tied at 32% each.

Posted by: Ace at 09:46 AM | Comments (67)
Post contains 162 words, total size 1 kb.

Allah pooh-poohs this, as is his wont. I disagree.

...I thought weÂ’d do him a solid this time and debunk this before it gets started.

Debunk? Oh dear, no. It may be true that Kerry is confused about the exact details of which walls were pulled down, but two facts are undeniable:

FACT ONE: Kerry knows full well what the "Truth" movement is, and their basic conspiracy theories. There is not a politician in America -- nor anyone politically minded, for that matter -- who has not been exposed to the "Truth." These guys get emails, faxes, phone calls, on-the-street harrassment ("Why won't you tell the truth about 9/11?," etc.). They see signs. It is simply impossible to believe he does not understand what he is being asked about in general terms, i.e., about the truth or falsity that the government was an active participant in the 9/11 terrorist attacks (or should I say "terrorist" attacks).

FACT TWO: He actively seeks to pander these imbeciles instead of telling them, properly, to get bent. Rather than simply saying "9/11 was caused by planes hitting skyscrapers, not a government-sponsored controlled demolition," he says he'd be willing to look into any theory "based on fact."

"I haven't been informed about that enough to have an opinion" is a go-to evasion used by politicians to dodge questions that might alienate part of their base, or part of the independent voting bloc they need. How did Al Gore answer when asked about Bill Clinton's alleged rape of Juanita Broadderick? He didn't know enough about it, and no, of course he had not seen the Dateline special. He just plum couldn't say a word about it.

John Kerry does the same thing here. His claim of ignorance is a cynical -- and vicious -- attempt to pander the worst sort of America-hating conspiracy schizophrenics. An elected Senator is now telling these people that their claims may have some merit; he just hasn't had the time to do all the reading necessary to form a solid opinion. And he further panders by offering to accept their "witness" (sounds sort of religious, doesn't it?) and evaluate it so that he can, perhaps, finally get to the Truth of exactly what went down on 9/11.

Rather than dismissing them as they should be dismissed, he encourages their pathological delusions. Just so he doesn't alienate that key "Truth" vote.

Debunked? I think not.

Do I believe he's a capital-T Truther? Not in the sense that he's a true believer in this lunacy. But he is a Truther in an even worse way -- he doesn't believe it, but he's perfectly willing to encourage continued libels against America. He's a supporter of the Truth movement, though not actually one himself. For the "movement," but not of it, as is often said of Republicans who aren't deemed to be conviction conservatives.

Disgraceful.

Shall we also pretend that Dennis Kucinich's proposed legislation to ban the government from using mind-control rays wasn't likewise a nasty attempt to pander to the diagnosably insane, and also a cynical calculation to elevate lunacies into respectable political discourse?

Rhetorical Questions: Sean offers the opinion that John Kerry was simply surprised and baffled by the question, which explains (and excuses) his failure to offer a straight-up refutation of the Truther conspiracy mongering.

I think that's wrong.

If someone suggested to him he had evidence the Holocaust never happened, does anyone belive he would have repsonded in the same "sure I'll look at the facts" way...?

How about if someone suggested to him Saddam had WMD's post 2003 , or that Saddam had lower-level involvement with 9/11?

You think he would have been baffled by such questions and offered a similar "I'll have to read up on that before offering an opinon" dodge? Or would he have been a tad more definitive in his answer?

Or let me put it this way:

Currently, John Kerry is on record as being of the belief that the debate over global warming is closed and no futher questioning is proper at all, but that the debate as to whether the American government blew up the WTC, WTC7, and the Pentagon -- and executed all the passengers they had taken off the remotely-controlled airplanes -- is, currently, open and subject to further review "based on fact."

Posted by: Ace at 12:44 PM | Comments (301)
Post contains 728 words, total size 5 kb.

Wow.

It is all so sad to me. We separate ourselves from each other. We create stress. Then instead of coming together we try harder to take control. Emotions cannot be regulated; in truth, we cannot mandate behaviors. If we are to be truly safe, we must ensure that every individual feels cared for to his or her core. I believe we must interact, not react.

...

Those that passed can no longer physically help teach us to be kind, aware, active, and giving. However, through them, I hope we all learn. Every moment of life is fragile, fleeting, and a foundation for the future.

This is not the time to teach fear. It is an occasion, an opportunity to reflect. Perhaps, we might learn to love every being, even those that appear to be different or distant.

Seung-Hui Cho My Sadness for Yours . . .

S/he is talking about Cho is that bit about "teaching us to be kind, aware, etc."

I'm getting into an Old Testament kind of mood here.

Daily Kos, the most popular website on the left, is now being used to praise mass-murderers and justify their slaughters. As well as to recruit new killers into the cult of death.

Posted by: Ace at 12:10 PM | Comments (68)
Post contains 235 words, total size 1 kb.

You thought John Kerry was nuanced?

He was a piker.

Posted by: Ace at 12:04 PM | Comments (11)
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

Shockingly, the MSM isn't interested.

Hizbullah Deputy Secretary-General Naim Kassem, told the interviewer that suicide bombings, terrorist attacks and even artillery barrages against Israeli civilians all receive prior approval from the AyatollahÂ’s in Teheran:

"The religious doctrine which dictates HizbullahÂ’s actions in general and those relating to the Jihad in particular, is based on the rulings of the spiritual leader in Teheran. The spiritual leader has the power to permit our actions, and the spiritual leader can forbid them.

"In order to know what is permitted and forbidden regarding the Jihad, we ask for and receive overall permission and only then do we carry out the operation.

“Even with regard to the suicide bombings, no one is allowed to kill himself without religious authorization.

“Even the rocket attacks on Israel, against the civilian population [Aug 2006] … in order to apply pressure, even this required overall religious authorization."

Admitting they're an Iranian proxy would undermine both spins, and so this will be the last time you see mention of it.

Posted by: Ace at 11:27 AM | Comments (20)
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.

So it is, in crudest form, according to Camille Paglia (though the theroy is itself somewhat crude, of course).

I don't discount it outright as a contributing factor. The sex drive is of course one of the most powerful urges driving us, and when it is frustrated, misdirected, or perverted, bad things tend to happen.

'Tis a shame that a little-dick loser like Choad had to resort to the lamest and most obvious of psychological fetishes -- the weapon as phallus -- to get his nut off.

But so it goes. Those who can't do, commit mass murder.

"Daemons:" I originally wrote "one of the most powerful daeomons driving us," because I thought, wrongly as it turns out, that when one was speaking of internal drives "daemon" was preferred over demon. That is, a "daemon" was a drive without, necessarily, a moral component, whereas when one speaks of a "demon" one's usually speaking of a morally-questionable urge (alcoholism, etc.) Since I didn't consider the sex drive itself on a par with alcoholism or klelptomania, I thought "daemon" was more proper.

But I don't see that distinction at www.m-w.com, so I guess I was wrong about that.

I've changed it to "urges." I didn't like the sound of "demons." Seemed the wrong word too.

Wasn't trying to geek-out on anyone or put on airs. I just had, it seems, an erroneous belief that the (obviousy closely related) words were distinct in some usages.

Posted by: Ace at 10:23 AM | Comments (58)
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

12,960.

The index is in the middle of one of its longest streaks of gains (interrupted by only one down day) ever. Not since fifteen years ago did the Dow gain 15 out of 16 sessions, and not since 1927 has it had a longer streak.

This comes less than eight weeks after stocks seemed on the verge of a meltdown. The Dow plunged 416 points Feb. 27 in response to an 8.8% stock decline in China that fanned fears of global financial contagion.

Janna Sampson, portfolio manager at OakBrook Investments, credits the ability of U.S. companies to top first-quarter profit forecasts as a prime reason for the rally. It suggests the economy, hobbled by a housing slump, is not in as bad of shape as people think. "People had gotten way too pessimistic."

Gee, I wonder what on earth could account for that?

Posted by: Ace at 10:09 AM | Comments (92)
Post contains 170 words, total size 1 kb.

Trapped like rats.

Why the offer to allow them to surrender? It's not required by the rules of law, and killing them -- or at least most of them -- would be far preferrable.

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Afghan forces have trapped up to 200 Taliban fighters in a southern village, possibly including the militia's military commander, demanding they surrender or come under attack, Afghan officials said Monday.

Afghan police and government officials said the suspected Taliban fighters were surrounded as they gathered for a meeting in the mountain village of Keshay in Uruzgan province on Saturday.

Provincial police chief Gen. Mohammad Qasim Khan said
NATO troops were also involved in the siege, but NATO spokeswoman Lt. Col. Angela Billings said she had no such information.

Khan told The Associated Press that Mullah Dadullah, a close aide to Taliban supreme leader Mullah Omar, and other regional Taliban commanders were at the meeting when the village was surrounded. The security forces were still positioned around the village on Monday, he said....

Abdul Hadi Khalid, the deputy interior minister for security, told a security commission in parliament on Monday that it was "possible that Mullah Dadullah is among" those who were attending the meeting. He said Afghan officials had demanded that the Taliban surrender or face military action. He did not mention any deadline for negotiations.

...

Killing or capturing Dadullah would be a major victory for the Afghan government and its foreign backers. A NATO airstrike killed senior Taliban commander Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Osmani in southern Helmand province in December.

Thanks to JackStraw.

Posted by: Ace at 10:05 AM | Comments (29)
Post contains 289 words, total size 2 kb.