Just a quick one to get back into the blogging groove.

The son of one of Hamas' founders served as a top informant for Israel for more than a decade, providing top-secret intelligence that helped prevent dozens of suicide bombings and other attacks against Israelis, a newspaper reported Wednesday.

Mosab Hassan Yousef, dubbed as "the Green Prince" by his handlers, was one of the Shin Bet security service's most valuable sources, Israel's Haaretz daily said. His reports led to the arrests of several high-ranking Palestinian figures during the violent Palestinian uprising that began in 2000, according to the newspaper.

Yousef's father—Sheik Hassan Yousef—was a founding member of the Islamic militant group Hamas in the 1980s. He is currently serving a six-year sentence in an Israeli prison for his political activities.

The younger Yousef converted to Christianity and moved to California in 2007.

If the Haaretz report is true, the revelation would deal another setback to Hamas, which is reeling from the assassination of a top operative in Dubai last month. There have been reports that a Hamas insider assisted the killers.

Hamas spokesman Mushir al-Masri told a Gaza Web site that he would not address the younger Yousef's claims, and accused Haaretz of "fabrications and lies."

You might be thinking it's disinformation, but the guy is publishing a memoir about his exploits.

Posted by: Ace at 08:04 AM | Comments (51)
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

Anyone who wants to reexamine the data is an anti-science nut job pretty much part of the mainstream. My how quickly things change.

In a document entitled Proposal for a New International Analysis of Land Surface Air Temperature Data, the Met Office says: “We feel it is timely to propose an international effort to reanalyse surface temperature data in collaboration with the World Meteorological Organisation.”

The new analysis would test the conclusion reached by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal”.

...The Met Office document stresses that the new assessment would be fully independent and be based on data that was freely available to the public and could therefore be examined by climate sceptics.

It says: “The proposed activity would provide a set of independent assessments of surface temperature produced by independent groups using independent methods.”

Naturally they say they don't expect the review to show anything any different but the fact that they are being forced to release raw data and start the fight over from scratch is a big victory for sanity. 6 or 7 months ago anyone suggesting this kind of transparency and reassessment would have been derided as 'a denier' and branded a heretic to the Cult of Gaia. Now one of the lead agencies pushing the warming agenda is on board? That's gotta smart.

Related enough, via Adam Baldwin (yes, Jayne Cobb himself), a fairly reasonable debate on the issue from, of all places, the Bill O'Reilly. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 06:59 AM | Comments (157)
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.

Round up over at Policitcal Wire, Rubio leading Charlie Crist by 18 points (notice in October he was down 14). Tell me what a difference the last few months have made.

Also Toomey leads Sestak and Specter in general election matchups for PA Senate, 18 and 10 points respectively. Republican Rob Portman holds small general election leads over Democrats Jennifer Brunner and Lee Fisher in Ohio.

Added [Gabe]: And public support for unions has collapsed. And only 10% rate Congress positively. /Gabe

As has been mentioned before, see kid: not getting cocky.

via TheDailyCaller on Twitter.

Texas governor race stuff below the fold. more...

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 05:42 AM | Comments (104)
Post contains 223 words, total size 2 kb.

I haven't been following the Toyota inquisition with any great attention because it seems more politically-motivated than grounded in fact. As more and more Democrats decided to beat up on the car-maker, an obvious question arose: is all the bleating likely to help Toyota, its employees, and its customers, or is it going to hurt all of them?

You know the answer to that and commenter TexasJew sarcastically sums it up well:

So today, they are going to beat the crap out of a man who runs a company that directly or indirectly employs over 250,000 Americans.

Brilliant.

That's right. They're not helping, but they don't care. They're scoring points against the officers, shareholders, and employees of Toyota. Of course Toyota said the Democrats are not "industry-friendly." They aren't.

Anyway, Karl over at Hot Air takes a good look at the situation. Read the whole thing.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:36 AM | Comments (110)
Post contains 152 words, total size 1 kb.

So this past weekend at CPAC, the legacy media, Democrats, and a few sheltered folks who really can't be blamed for anything found out something that everyone here at the HQ already knew: there are out gay Republicans and conservatives aren't going to stone them to death just for sharing political space.

No, seriously, I'm happy Big Journalism has a post about "the milestone for gays." I'm pleased that Lefty gay bloggers are wondering out loud what will happen when other gays find out. It tickles me that an American Family Association blogger is ticked off at Ed Morrissey for being too nice to gays and tickles me more that a Greenroom blogger has taken the accusation and run with it (and how!).

But let's not start suckin each other's dicks quite yet, gentlemen. The point of all this go-along-to-get-along harmony is that we've got bigger fish to fry. The take-away from the CPAC straw poll that found opposing gay marriage at the bottom of the list of things conservatives are interested in at the moment is not that the marriage issue isn't important. The conclusion is that it's simply not as important as defeating Obama's anti-prosperity expansion of government and unsustainable taxing and spending.

The Democrats' opportunity to perpetrate long-term damage to the United States with things like cap and tax, ObamaCare, "comprehensive immigration reform", and card check, just to name a few, represents the closest we've come to an existential threat in decades.

So we can stick together at least a little longer, which means not being asshats to each other. I believe that part of why Ryan Sorba got booed off the stage wasn't because of his anti-gay message. It was because he rudely attacked the very people who gave him a podium. It was a dick move and he didn't win any friends by it.

Single-issue conservatives, like Ryan Sorba, and single-issue identity groups, like AFA, will have a hard time getting along with others in the movement if they don't want to deal with Obama and the Democrats before attacking each other. Which is why I appreciate GOProud's advocacy on defeating ObamaCare, opposing Democrats' reckless spending, and giving Americans tax relief, even while the group maintains its support for gay marriage and DADT repeal.

I tend to hope, of course, that alliances will last longer than just the immediate crisis and I admit to an ulterior motive in encouraging gays to come out as Republicans and get involved in the movement. I will continue to share my belief that the government should not discriminate against gays in administering the civil benefits and responsibilities of marriage and that the dignity and indisputable value of marriage will benefit gays and straights as gay marriages becomes more common. But I'm certainly not going to boo anyone who wants to have a civil argument about it.

So while it's nice that homocons have had a spotlight this past week from bloggers on the Right and the Left, and from the legacy media, let's not get distracted. The President is still trying to cripple our healthcare system. His activist EPA is going forward with carbon dioxide regulation even if the Democratic Congress doesn't pass a climate bill. He's almost certainly going to get to replace another Supreme Court justice this year. And we've still got the November 2010 elections coming at us. Eye on the ball, folks.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:15 AM | Comments (166)
Post contains 595 words, total size 4 kb.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 04:59 AM | Comments (60)
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

The boringest night of the week beckons.

The Cop That Slaps Back
Apparently the woman was a Romanian teacher who was being arrested for abusing her students. So she can dish it out but she can't take it.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:03 PM | Comments (600)
Post contains 346 words, total size 4 kb.

Not content with a fight to let gays in the military, the Obama administration has decided that a pressing problem facing a nation at war is letting women serve on submarines.

The change was recommended by the chief of naval operations and the secretary of the Navy in addition to Gates, the official said, adding that there was no opposition to the move among Navy leaders.

A phased approach is being considered under which officers -- who already have separate living quarters -- would be the first to go co-ed, followed by crews, with the women bunking together, the official said. Crew space would have to be modified prior to that happening, the official added.

The submarines expected to carry women initially would be the larger ones -- nuclear-power, missile-carrying submarines known as SSBN and SSGN, the official said.

Follow the link to milblogger and retired submarine officer 'Bubblehead' for his take on the change, as well as the conversation in the comments.

I presume the Navy and its sailors will make this work but my question is why is this an issue? Are there not enough sailors volunteering for sub duty? Is the quality not high enough? I'm guessing silly things like what's good for the force aren't driving this change but rather a desire for that most important of all military assets...diversity.

And what won't be discussed? Things like this.

... pregnancy in the ranks is rising—especially among those in deploying units. That’s because the service does track—as a group—female sailors who have been sent to shore duty after their 20th week of pregnancy or those on an “operational deferment”—the guaranteed time the Navy gives women while they recover from childbirth.

These women are put on shore duty during their 12 months of deferment, then return to sea duty.

The Navy increased this deferment time in June 2007 from four to 12 months. As a result, the number of women leaving deploying units to have children has increased steadily from 1,770 in June 2006 to 3,125 as of Aug. 1. Junior enlisted women make up the bulk of those redirected to shore duty. Sailors in grades E-3 through E-5 account for 2,852 of the 3,125.

Are there dedicated woman who could serve on subs? Sure. Is it unfair that those women are denied the opportunity to serve because of larger issues? I guess. Thing is, unless I missed a memo, life isn't fair. We don't have a Navy and multi-billion dollar ships to ensure fairness of opportunity for men or women. The only purpose of a warship is to be ready to go in harm's way. There aren't a lot of extra bodies on ships, especially subs (which deploy for months at a time). Where are these extra crew members coming from in such a highly specialized talent pool when what everyone knows is going to happen, actually happens?

And then there are living space issues and consideration and on and on and on.

I'm fairly agnostic on Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Most of my military news and information comes from milbloggers and they overwhelmingly seem to think it's a not much of an issue that will sort itself out. I'd just prefer it would be dealt with from the perspective of what's best for the military and its mission, not for the sake of diversity or the self esteem of individuals.

My biggest concern is that as our combat commitment in Iraq winds down, fighting in Afghanistan ramps up, naval shipbuilding is in shambles, the JSF program continues to slide and we enter the 10th year of trying to replace 40+ year old aerial refueling tankers, all we seem to talk about is social issues. The public only can pay attention to so many issues at once, gays in the military and women on subs shouldn't be getting all the attention.

Posted by: DrewM at 03:46 PM | Comments (429)
Post contains 656 words, total size 4 kb.

ZeroHedge has the scoop and some very scary looking trend charts

Gosh, I wonder why consumer confidence unexpectedly plunged recently? Normally, I'd blame it on the introduction of some crap product like New Coke, a Tylenol cyanide scare, etc, but today I got nothing. The recovery is cruising along nicely, the deficit is well under control, gas prices are expected to spike over $3/gal by summer, and Obama want to glom your 401K assets and turn it into a government paid annuity.

What's not to like? Its all good. GOOD. Mass layoffs just seem kinda anti-state, counter-revolutionary. Perhaps some nice show trials will lift our mood? Everyone like show trials, right?

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 01:21 PM | Comments (294)
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.

Accidentally took the last four days off. I did nothing, and it was everything I thought it could be.

There were a bunch of unbanning requests that came in Friday that I didn't get to. Please re-send. We're getting there, little by little.

Posted by: Ace at 01:07 PM | Comments (126)
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.