US to Target Iranian Intelligence/IRG in Iraq, Elsewhere

It's like a late Christmas present. Thank you President Bush.

I still think your SOTU speech was tepid at best, but this is exciting stuff. Of course the lefties will say that we are instigating war with Iran, and this will only create more terrorists, or something. After all there no Iranians in Iraq, As the MSM hurries to inform us.

Meanwhile the Democrats have a Surrender to Iran bill prepared. (H/T Terresa from 910 Group)

Season Open: No Bag Limit

Sectarian Violence (or at least Squabbling)

No, not in Iraq, in the west. Amongst those of us who agree that there is a battle to be waged against Jihad, which is a small enough number as it is, the question on what is to be done, is leading to an enormous amount of blue-on-blue. Like this duel I got into with another commenter on GOV.

The sides seem to be between those who suggest that Muslims who want to be islamic, and yet still secular, democratic, and peaceful should be used to battle the Islamists, and those who do not.

As you can see from the arguments between myself and the commenter Anonymous, the problem is that the Koran backs the Jihadis. That is, that the violent radicals are the koranicly, letter perfect, correct ones. If you doubt this, you can read Robert Spencer's Truth About Muhammad. I'm reading it now. His scholarship, which seems impeccable, shows that the Jihadis are the accurate practitioners of Islam, and those who we would hope to label moderates, i.e people who wish to practice the age old human desire of being left alone, are the ideological black sheep. Some argue that this, along with the practice of Taqiyya (or jihad under deception), makes any alliance with moderate muslims impossible.

My problem with that is two-fold. One, if we accept that there are no "good muslims" (because anyone acting in a manner tolerable to us would be, by koranic definition an apostate muslim) than those muslims who wish to be islamic, but do not want jihad or sharia, are left swinging. We refuse to ally with them, the Jihadis of course will view them as apostates. Secondly, it makes the threat that much more difficult to deal with. If we insist that all muslims are jihadis, than those who wish to be muslims will be pushed to become jihadis, because both the enemy, and us, say there is no third path.

You will never defeat totalitarianism by accepting their view of the world as reality. If neither option 1, nor option 2 is acceptable to us, we must create an option 3, whether or not it exists at present.

News You aren't Getting From Iraq

This file was sent to me by a member of the State Department's Iraq GO Team, in my capacity as a News Director for a small town Radio Station. I don't have a responsibility for international news, so I can't put it on the radio, but I can put it here. This is just another example of the news NOT coming out of Iraq.

Progress of the Iraqi Navy

Enjoy.

Danish SIAD Files Charges against Ministry of Justice

H/T Zonka from 910 Blog The 910 Group has been working on this, sending out letters to the Danish Justice Ministry from around the world. Apparently not only will the Danish government not allow the group to exercise the right to a peaceful protest, but when leftist goons attack them, the police fail to even investigate properly. That's what SIAD is charging. Remember folks, criticising Islamists or their multicultural leftists allies is forbidden. Be a good little Dhimmi, shut up and know your place.

R.I.P Capt. Rhett Schiller

Captain Rhett W. Schiller, 26, died Thursday, November 16th, 2006, in Balad Ruz, Iraq, of injuries received from small-arms fire during combat operations

I suppose it was only a matter of time before some I knew died in the war.
Rhett was a year older than me in high school. We both went to Shanghai American School. My graduating class had less than a hundred people, and his was the year before and even smaller than mine, so everyone sort of knew everyone. Still, sad to say, I didn't know Rhett as well as I might have wished to. I remember two things about him. One, is not so much a memory as a general sense that Rhett was a good guy. You just got a good feeling talking to him. I don't think he really rubbed anyone the wrong way. My second, and only specific memory of him was that he had this sorta lavender or powder blue tuxedo which he wore to prom one year. (In Shanghai everyone, regardless of class went to prom every year, because otherwise we couldn't afford to rent the ballroom) He wore that tux, and a set of real dark sunglasses which in shanghai we associated with taxi drivers, damn near the whole night. No one else could have pulled it off, but Rhett did.

I remember he was dead set on going to West Point, which is not an easy place to get into, and even harder when you are way overseas.

The article says Rhett was "hard-charging" and a "lead from the front" sorta guy. The articles always say that. But I'm sure its true. I remember in gym glass, we had this insane teacher, and he would send us running around the streets of Shanghai, dodging bicycles laden with ducks, or small tractors or pig trucks or who knows what. Everyone just sort of phoned it in, because besides being potentially lethal everyone thought it was just kind of stupid. Rhett of course set a good pace, and sprinted in to boot. Only other person I know who did that was my brother, and he went to the Naval Academy. So I guess that says something there.

I signed a guest book i found online for Rhett, just to say I thought he was a good guy. I wish I had spent more time getting to know him while our paths crossed in ol' Shanghai.

Rest in Peace Rhett, god bless you.

It Really Is that Bad...

If you think the Islamist threat is over-stated, I would urge you to examine this 6 part series from the British show Dispatch. (H/T JMJ2 and the 910 Blog) I watched the first three parts, and was utterly amazed, and I've already been converted to the idea of the islamification of Europe. So if you aren't convinced it would be a good idea to check these out and see if your disagreement can withstand the investigative journalism being conducted.

How did things get that bad? Well I have an idea. It became possible after multiculturalist brainwashing, hate speech legislation and just general cowardice were used to put down free speech for any except these preachers of hate. Free Speech for anyone but the Kuffar. We can see that in action even now in Denmark, where the once bold norsemen prevent peaceful Demonstrations because some who disagree with it may break out
into violence. If you click the link you'll see another 910 Blog story, this one about a group in Denmark whose efforts at an anti-islamification demonstration were prevented by the nation's ministry of justice, out of concerns that thugs on the other side might take an exception to the protest and come with violence. I sent the following letter to the Ministry's head official:

Dear Minister Lene Espersen, I was deeply disappointed to learn recently that a permit for a peaceful demonstration was denied SIAD (http://siad.dk/index.php) out of concerns for violent retribution from those opposed to their political message. While I am an American, and not a Dane, and therefore not one of your constituents, I would like to say that I developed a deep sense of appreciation and goodwill for your nation, after its unjust ridicule during the jyllands-posten/Muhammad Cartoon incident. Myself, and many of my fellow Americans took great care to use our buying power to purchase imported Danish goods, after some groups and nations called for an economic boycott of your country. It was a small effort, but one meant in solidarity for your country’s support for freedom of speech and
the press. The right to freedom of expression is a human right, which both your nation and mine take with the utmost seriousness. That it should be disregarded in this case is most shameful. I will admit that my interpretation in this case relies on an available english translation of the events, and should you or your office wish to elaborate on them I would be more than willing to hear your reply.

You will be interested to know that the same group, SIAD, had one of its group meetings attacked by leftist thugs, where several people recieved minor injuries. The thugs were only repulsed by a handful of SIAD members, who risked being struck with thrown bottles to defend their membership, which included a number of elderly. (H/T Zonka, 910 Blog and GOV)

If this sounds familiar, its because it mirrors the street battles conducted by the Nazi and Communist parties in Weimar Germany, as they shut down participation in the political process for any parties not backed by an armed corps of thugs. Or maybe you're recalling what happens in the Palestinian territory everyday.

Of course the whole purpose of the the right to free speech is to say those things which others would seek to prevent from being said, including through violent methods. We understand why speech is restricted when it is used to call fire in a theater, or to threaten another's life, but when freedom of speech is restricted because the lives of those who speak it are threaten, or because the feeling of those to whom the speech refers are hurt, well this is insanity.

Fortunately for us Americans it is just in the European territories. right? Oh no... HRES 288.

Where is the shrieking hystrics of the the ACLU for this tacit endorsement of a religion? And while I realize its simply a non-binding resolution, its only a short step from resolution to binding law. And anyway, in many of these areas of Europe we are telling you about, its not the laws, but the policies of the government, which give rise to problems.

And of course we know why its vital to have congressional resolutions prohibiting insults to the great Abrahamic faith of Islam:

Surging...

Bush Asks for More Troops, just like everyone knew he would. The question is whether Bush will take the handcuffing ROEs off the troops. He seems to suggest that he will.

"There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have."

There in is the problem. We can have as many troops as we want, but if they aren't allowed to take on the Iranian backed death squads like Sadr's than its not gonna matter. Bush seems to trust that Maliki will kick Sadr to the curb. I'm not so sure. The problem is that the Iraqi politicians will hedge their bets as long as they aren't sure about success. Politics in most of the world comes out of the barrel of a gun. So the goal will be to make Iraqi politicans comfortable that they can count on Iraqi Security Forces for their security, and until they are, they will court militas.

Our country has continued to have unrealistic expectations about how easy, or how long it should take to accomplish the process. That in no way alters the fact that the process is a necessity. Terrorism is fostered by failed states and rogue states, and they must be conforted, defeated, and transformed into functioning states with representive governments, or it will continue.

The Kind of Military Assault Even the Media Can Get Behind... Sorta

Al-Qaeda linked Terror Camp in Somalia struck by US Gunships
Well good. Fox News is titling it a payback attack since the likely targets were the masterminds of the East Africa Embassy Bombings, and of course for the fact that it took place in Somalia, site of the Black Hawk Down Incident, which of course also had Al-Qaeda links according to Bodansky, amongst others. But the story tells us something else interesting. The only reason we were able to get this hit, was because of Somali government and Ethiopian troops on the ground providing intel. Meanwhile, The ABC Radio news took no short time in linking the desire of Ethiopian troops to withdrawal and replace with UN troops with Iraq. Yes, the ability of a third world country to sustain an occupation is TOTALLY the same thing as the United States of America, the world's only superpower. You know for all the effort from some to distance Iraq from the GWOT, every time the enemy turns out to be Islamist (and when are they not??), the link is made. "Oooh Iraq, Iraq, Sectarian Violence Run Away!" Oh, they also pointed out that Ethiopia is a majority Judeo-Christian country, and ran their sectarian violence meme again. (They actually used the asinine term "sectarian violence" in the 7 am EST news, despite the fact that Christianity and Islam are too utterly different religions, not sects. Morons.)

Still, this aerial gunning of Islamist camps is the kind of military endeavor which even the MSM can get behind, because it makes a nice headline, has no real cost, and, notably, doesn't actually secure any strategic objectives. It does secure the tactical objective of dead terrorists, but that doesn't accomplish all that much. This post, H/T Jihad Watch, highlights the kind of military action which will work to defeat Islamic totalitarianism. The only problem? Its utterly impossible. Not because we couldn't do the large scale, World War II style campaigns and occupation described, but because the public will not accept it. I was watching a show on the history channel, which discussed how the United States lost 5,000 marines in the battle of Bellau Wood, in WWI. 5,000! to capture a tree-line. Yet the battle is considered one of the most hallowed in Marine Corps History, where they earned the nickname Devil Dogs. Terrible casualties, but considered worth it, because they led to victory. The problem in Iraq, is that our casualties will never lead to victory, because the Media WILL NEVER ALLOW IT. Just as its said that you go to war with the forces you have, unfortunately we also have to go to war with the public we have. Which is where the poster I linked too goes astray. We have the military necessary to do the job. We don't have the public necessary to do the job.

Gunmen Rout National Guard at Arizona Border or What Part of Sovereignty Don't You Understand?

News Report (HT: Hotair)

Jesus H. Triple Platinum Selling Christ, what the hell do we have to do to be recognized as a sovereign country anymore? Another armed incursion on our border, and this time, even though we have troops present, their rules of engagement require that they tuck tail and run rather than defend themselves and their country? It's a disgrace. Does the National Guard even have a purpose anymore? Let's just disband them if we aren't going to let them do their job. If there was any sense in the world that report would have gone as follows:

(Lukeville, Arizona): Twelve armed gunmen are dead, and six more captured after a short gunbattle at a border crossing station between Lukeville and Nogales. National Guard Colonel Bill D. Fence tells Oughta be News, "A number of armed men crossed over from the Mexican side of the border last night, where they opened fire on National Guard troops. My men responded with small arms fire, killing a number of the attackers and capturing 6 of them in the counter-assault. Those men have been turned over to Border Patrol agents for prosecution. No American forces were injured."

That's what should have happened, but of course it didn't. Not that this is the first time we've had armed incursions from the other side of the border, and it certainly won't be the last. What part of sovereignty don't people understand?

In constitutional and international law, the concept of sovereignty
also pertains to a government possessing full control over its own affairs within a territorial or geographical area or limit, and in certain context to various organs (such as courts of law) possessing legal jurisdiction in their own chief, rather than by mandate or under supervision.

It's actually a pretty simple concept. Now explain to me how things got so twisted that the more powerful you are as a nation, the less sovereignty you get to exercise within your own boundaries? What the hell is fricking wrong with people? It's America's funniest home Videos, not the North American Continent's funniest home videos.The irritating sense of entitlement from our own people is enough of a pain in the ass, but this is beyond the pale. Both this, and the immigration issue, are simply symptoms of the international Gimmie Gimmie epidemic. Nevermind that what we've created, our sovereign nation and the right to protect its borders, or our right to decide what video Americans in fact find the funniest, are ours. This calls for another Sobchak:

"Am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules?"


edit: The reference to America's Funniest Home Videos, refers to a story, which was mysteriously eaten in the post, where a man was suing the televison show because Canadians are no allowed to vote. The man was apparently convinced that if Canadians had voted, he would have won the $10k prize.

Confessions of a Desktop Crusader...

I have been working alongside the folks at The 910 Group for sometime now, and continue to be amazed by their energy and dedication. I haven't been able to do a whole lot of work on the topic lately because of the holidays, and family obligations something I feel pretty bad about. Thinking about that problem, and an earlier discussion with a fellow 910er got me thinking. How do we triumph over jihad? They can fund themselves through credit card fraud, selling afghani heroin, extortion, and the suitcases full of cash from rogue state intelligence agencies. We are funding ourselves with money graciously donated from folks with already maxed out credit cards. They live on welfare in the socialist european nanny-states, and plan terror on our dime, we work 9-5, and usually more to keep the kid in school clothes, and dinner on the table. We, in short, have and love life, and they have no need for anything but death delayed. And while on the physical battlefields in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and elsewhere the jihadis have been no match for professional soldiers (not even the Ethopians, who are not exactly the pinnacle of the military science), we've seen that except for missions which can be achieved by either immediate technological advantage (cruise missile strikes) or with such rapidity that success can be achieved in weeks ,if not days, the countries of the west do not have the stomach for the prolonged battles necessary to truly defeat the enemy. No failure of our men at arms, but a failure of will from the populace they defend and the representatives who are supposed to have the interests of the people at heart, yet it is increasingly obvious that they do not. When the FBI is attending CAIR dinner parties, not to gain intelligence but to establish goodwill, one knows that the government is not serious about the threat of Jihadism (or Islamo-Fascism, or however you want to describe the ideology represented by the desire to see the House of Islam defeat the so called House of War.)

So it comes back to us, the 9-5ers, the homemakers, the officer workers, the citizen journalists, the 910ers, the Counter-Jihad. We've seen what a number of disorganized bloggers can do to expose lies, (through the fauxtography of the Hezbollah-Israel war, the Jamil Hussein-gate) to support the troops (the Protest Warriors, the Freedom Riders) and to petition the government to force it to do the job it evidently does not wish to do on its own. The Baron in the post I linked earlier points out about our government,

" To get into politics it helps to be greedy and ambitious, but brains are not required."

But that greed and ambition work in our favor, but only when we can so persuade the masses that they must not tolerate politicians more in favor of appeasement than in defending a way of life.

Which brings me back to my initial point. From the Greek Hoplite, to the American Mintueman, the history on the west is predicated on the idea that those who have something to live for are the only ones who can be trusted to defend it. Contrast this with the most notable element of the islamic military tradition... the Janissaries and Mamelukes, that is to say slave soldiers, with nothing to live for, but, perhaps the prospect of booty taken from the conquored. How little things change.

This thought both concerns and comforts me. I am concerned, because if the analogy holds, than we must remain constantly vigilant, because the islamic-fascist will never be satisfied with what he is given or builds for himself, only what he has seized from another. But it comforts me, because again, if the analogy holds, than the 910 concept of the part time counter-jihadist, the one half office worker, one half information warrior, will work, just as predecessors, the one half farmer, one half soldier, has worked for millenia.

Good Night Sweet Prince or Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

It’s been six weeks since Saddam Hussein was killed by a pack of wild boars and the world is still glad to be rid of him

That's how the South Park movie from several years ago starts off. Unfortunately, although the makers of South Park usually bring the funny, their powers of divination were weak in this case. With the noise coming out of the MSM, one would think that the flag was at half mast for Saddam, and not for Jerry Ford.

That being said, the execution was a travesty of justice, and not because Saddam was executed. Rather it was in the manner of his execution. If you watch the video, (shot on a shaky phone camera like it was a G-Unit Concert.) You see Saddam is hung in a dark cellar, a former secret police facility, by masked men in leather jackets. At one point these thugs yell and scream at Saddam, while throwing honorifics on Moqtada Al-Sadr, that fat little weasel we duked it out with earlier in Najaf and elsewhere. As AllahPundit says the execution has all the appearance of one gangster whacking another, instead of an execution of a war criminal. And so it does.

Compare it to the decorum in the execution of the Nazis tried at Nuremburg. And Here

Saddam Hussein committed acts as vile as have ever been committed, one man upon another, and if Iraqi society, and indeed the world at large cannot say that Saddam Hussein was deserving of the most severe sanction society can impose, than society has no ability to impose punishments upon any one.

And despite the best efforts of Saddam, and his Quisling media opportunist lawyers like Ramsey Clark to disrupt it, the trial was conducted with at least some sense of decorum and law.

But the execution was not. Evidence points to the fact that the execution of Saddam was symbolic. Moqtada's goons got to pull the switch, and the facility used was a center for torturing Maliki's Dawa Party. The fact that Sadr's representatives agreed to rejoin the government shortly after the killing of Saddam seems to me to represent a deal made.

One does not overcome gangsterism with still more gangsterism. and one can not do it by putting a silk hat on a pig. One overcomes gangsterism with a steady, unrelenting application of the law. Unfortunately We do not seem to have the strength of will to maintain the control necessary to carry out the conversion of a country from a government which was little more than state-run mafiosos, to a representative free society. As I said in my post on Civil Society, there is more to freedom than elections.

I don't think all is lost. There seemed to be some evidence a few weeks ago the Al-Sistani was ready to disown Sadr which would undercut alot of his ideological value, but if Maliki's decided that he'll take the Mahdi Army over the Iraqi Army, then we may have to find someone else to work with.