Hillary's Campaign Is Under Hostage, and I Don't Care

A man with a device strapped to his chest that he claims is a bomb has released two hostages he took at a Hillary Clinton campaign office in Rochester, New Hampshire. Details from local television station WMUR:

An armed man took hostages at the office on 28 North Main St. Friday afternoon, and officials with the campaign said that there were two workers taken hostage in the office, but police have not confirmed that those were the only two hostages in the building.

The two hostages were released at about 3 p.m.

Clinton, who is not in New Hampshire, canceled a National Democratic Committee meeting in Virginia.

A woman and her baby told workers at a neighboring business that she was released by the hostage-taker.

"A young woman with a 6-month or 8-month-old infant came rushing into the store just in tears, and she said, 'You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape,'" witness Lettie Tzizik said.

Witnesses described the man as in his 40s with salt-and-pepper hair. There are several police officers in the area with guns drawn.

Actually, I do care about the people held hostage (since released) and hope that the person with the alleged bomb surrenders peaceably, but what I don't care to do is start speculating about motives or allegiances when so little is known.

Others have rushed to judgment and made some quite stupid comments, such as calling the hostage taker a "suicide bomber" (and yes, those on the right did it too).

Just to point out the obvious, suicide bombers don't generally take hostages. Their goal is not to talk, or negotiate, or make a point, but to turn their bodies into a weapons delivery platform, killing as many people as possible without advance warning.

This also goes from those bloggers and commenters who immediately determined that the hostage taker must belong to political ideology "X" because... well, just because.

We don't always happen to rush to publish just to get something out there, folks. Sometimes just shutting up and waiting is the best thing to do.

No Heart of Darkness

Perhaps due to all the words of praise over the Fred Thompson War on Terror Conversation, Pajamas Media has brought me on to write a weekly "column" the first of which is posted today.

I put the word column in quotes because we--Pajamas and I--are hoping to use this as a chance to post original reporting as much or more so than the opinion pieces normally associated with the term "column."

Without further adieu (or Freddy Adu), here's my first post as a "regular" at Pajamas Media, No Heart of Darkness: An Ex-Sunni Insurgent Becomes US Ally.

Debate Plant?

It's Democratic!

A "Tepid" Riot

Terribly Enraged People of Indeterminate Descent (Tepids) have raged through France for the third night now.

Sustaining in excess of more than 80 injuries thus far, including more than 30 officers shot, French police are probably wishing they were somewhere relatively safer right now. Like Baghdad, Ramadi, Fallujah, Tikrit...

TNR's Last Stand?

1/18 Infantry, Second Brigade Combat Team, First Infantry Division, rotated out of Iraqi several weeks ago to their home base in Schweinfurt, Germany. This included noted fabulist Scott Thomas Beauchamp. Whether Beauchamp is still in Germany or has been allowed home on leave is rather irrelevant; he matters quite little now that he has established that he will not support his dark fantasies on the record.

What does matter is that Franklin Foer and The New Republic have lost yet another excuse in their continued failure to account for the actions of the magazine's editors since "Shock Troops" was first questioned July 18, over four months ago. Now that Beauchamp is out of the war zone and back in western civilization, Foer is unable to claim that he military is muzzling his communication or that of his fellow soldiers.

Rumor has it that Franklin Foer is presently attempting to pen his final justification of the story, and that it will be published in a December editor of the magazine.

Foer's story needs to include only three key elements to be successful, and without these three elements Franklin Foer's career and the integrity of The New Republic is shattered.

Names.
What is the name of the fabled woman with the melted face? What was the name of the other soldier in the chow hall that participated in this alleged verbal assault along with Beauchamp against this woman? What is the name of the soldier that wore a fragmented child's skull on his head? What was the name of the Bradley IFV driver who ran over three dogs in one mission?

Will Scott Thomas Beauchamp stand behind his stories on the record, or not?

Dates.
How does the magazine justify standing behind the central theme of "Shock Troops"—that war made the author into a horrible person—when the magazine itself now claims that the alleged verbal attack took place before the author ever entered combat?

Why has it taken so long for the magazine to mount a defense for an article that the editor claims was fact-checked prior to publication?

Places.
Where is the "Saddam-era dumping ground" filled with, "All children's bones: tiny cracked tibias and shoulder blades"?

It All Comes Down to This.

Does The New Republic have the solid factual evidence to support these stories?

Did the editors of The New Republic act unethically by burying collected testimony, deceiving their readers, misleading and hiding expert witnesses, and falsely attacking the military as it conducted a formal investigation?

Franklin Foer's next article on the "Shock Troops" scandal needs to contain names, places, dates, and unimpeachable justifications for unethical behavior that have been sorely lacking in the nearly five months up until this point. If he cannot provide these details, this next article in The New Republic should be his last.

I'm sure TNR's few remaining advertisers will be watching.

Wearing a Gimmick to Tatters: Huckabee to Bring Norris to Debate

I think that if I see much more of Republican Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee using actor Chuck Norris as a prop, I think I'll upchu- er, vomit:

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee appears to be milking cult hero Chuck Norris' endorsement for all it's worth.

The former Arkansas governor told reporters on a conference call Monday morning that the "Walker Texas Ranger" star will be joining him at the CNN/YouTube debate this Wednesday night.

"[He] will be part of that experience," Huckabee said. "So it will be fun and hopefully very substantive."

Norris officially endorsed Huckabee last October, hailing him as a "respected and fearless leader" and one who's "not afraid to stand up for a Creator and against secularist beliefs."

Since then Norris has penned a fundraising e-mail on Huckabee's behalf, and even appears alongside the candidate in a television ad running in Iowa.

It's amusing to watch celebrities lend their endorsements to political campaigns, but when a candidate's campaign campaign is starting to look like it exists solely because of celebrity endorsements with little underlying substance, then as a voter, I have to start questioning the suitability of the candidate for even the vice presidential slot on the ticket that he is so obviously running for.

Huckbee, despite the endorsements of cult hero Norris and professional wrestler Ric Flair, has issues of integrity that the folks back home find troubling.

The "pro-life liberal" label seems to be sticking, and apparently, for good reason.

Thanks a Lott

Pork provider Trent Lott is said to be contemplating a retirement announcement as early as today.

I can guess why:

While the exactly reason Lott is stepping down before he finishes his term is unknown, the general speculation is that a quick departure immunizes Lott against tougher restrictions in a new lobbying law that takes effect at the end of the year. That law would require Senators to wait two-years before entering the lucrative world of lobbying Congress.

Like AP and Glenn, I won't miss him.

Hussein in the Membrane

Forgive me for not trusting you, Tom, but when you purposefully obfuscate the fact that Bilal Hussein was arrested as an unknown as the military targeted Hamid Hamad Motib, a known member of al Qaeda, and that he supposedly did not announce he was a journalist when arrested, I somehow doubt your story.

Bilal Hussein was picked up as an unknown, and apparently hoped to remain that way, knowing that insurgents without previous records not caught in the act of an attack are frequently released. Before he was able to matriculate out of our "catch and release" system, however, he was identified by an alert guard who just happened to remember his face from a picture of Hussein posted to The Jawa Report. Hussein had been quiet about his true identity for roughly a month before he was identified.

Hiding his true ID and occupation... not very innocent behavior from an innocent journalist, is it?

To my admittedly inadequate understanding of Iraqi law, Bilal Hussein's pending court date in front of a Iraqi magistrate is the Iraqi equivalent of a U.S. grand jury or preliminary hearing. Since when do defense attorneys--or the media overlords signing their paychecks--get to see grand jury evidence?

According to Wikipedia--yeah, I know:

Unlike the trial itself, the grand jury's proceedings are secret; the defendant and his or her counsel are generally not present for other witnesses' testimony.

If this is correct, and defendants don't get to see evidence in these preliminary hearings, then Tom Curley is more or less lying to the readers of the Washington Post, isn't he?

Sounds like he needs to re-read his corporate ethics policy.

One of Those Two Americas

"Limousine liberalism" may be more accurate than we thought:

Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts.

In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats.

He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats.

"If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said.

It isn't by any means bad or wrong that Democrats aspire to wealth and success, but is is a bit hypocritical for them to label themselves the party of the poor as they carefully sip overpriced bistro coffee to keep from spilling it on the leather interior of their late-model European sedans.

Happy Thanksgiving

Now get of off the computer and spend some time with your family, will you?

Impeach Bush!

...right after you buy the book:

Scott McClellan's admission that he unintentionally made false statements denying the involvement of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby in the Bush-Cheney administration's plot to discredit former Ambassador Joe Wilson, along with his revelation that Vice President Cheney and President Bush were among those who provided him with the misinformation, sets the former White House press secretary as John Dean to George Bush's Richard Nixon.

It was Dean willingness to reveal the details of what described as "a cancer" on the Nixon presidency that served as a critical turning point in the struggle by a previous Congress to hold the 37th president to account.

Now, McClellan has offered what any honest observer must recognize as the stuff of a similarly significant breakthrough.

The only question is whether the current Congress is up to the task of holding the 43rd president to account.

Call my cynical, but I somehow doubt that three selectively-quoted paragraphs ripped from context for the PR campaign of a book launch will signal the beginning of the end of the George W. Bush presidency.

Perhaps the author of this article, John Nichols, should wonder if McClellan might be enjoying a chance to tease the press that so long tormented him.

AP's Grandstanding on the Hussein Case

Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein was arrested in a terrorist sweep in September of 2006 with Hamid Hamad Motib, a known member of al Qaeda, and another insurgent. Yesterday, it was announced that Hussein will be brought before an investigative magistrate in the Iraqi legal system, and the magistrate will determine whether or not there are grounds to try Hussein under Iraqi law.

AP Associate General Counsel Dave Tomlin made quite a bit of noise in response:

An AP attorney on Monday strongly protested the decision, calling the U.S. military plans a "sham of due process." The journalist, Bilal Hussein, has already been imprisoned without charges for more than 19 months.

And from AP boss Tom Curley:

"While we are hopeful that there could be some resolution to Bilal Hussein's long detention, we have grave concerns that his rights under the law continue to be ignored and even abused," said AP President and CEO Tom Curley.

"The steps the U.S. military is now taking continue to deny Bilal his right to due process and, in turn, may deny him a chance at a fair trial. The treatment of Bilal represents a miscarriage of the very justice and rule of law that the United States is claiming to help Iraq achieve. At this point, we believe the correct recourse is the immediate release of Bilal," Curley added.

These Associated Press officers are taking the infuriating course of trying to spin this case in terms of American law, and not Iraqi law.

As an American military source in Iraq said moments ago:

In the Iraqi system, there is an investigative judge who does the initial work and you can think of it closer terms to a grand jury. Those are not open to the public and that is where indictments are made.

Some of the information is currently classified and as such won't be made public per se, but will be provided at trial, but again, not to the public. Just as in a military court-martial, they are open to the public, but if classified information is to be discussed, it is then closed to the public for that portion. Just like testimony in Congress...there are open and closed sessions.

The biggest issue is the attempts to equate it to our system when it should not be.

Curley and Tomlin, respectively the AP President/CEO and Associate General Counsel, are grandstanding as they try to spin this pending case in the court of American public opinion.

Hussein's actual guilt or innocence as a potential terrorist seems to be to them a secondary concern.

Federal Grand Jury Investigating Blackwater Shooting?

Seems like it:

A federal grand jury is said to be investigating the role of Blackwater Worldwide security guards in the shooting deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad.

The Blackwater guards involved in the September 16 shooting at Nisoor Square in west Baghdad initially were given limited immunity from prosecution by State Department investigators in exchange for their statements about what happened. One senior FBI official close to the investigation told The Associated Press last week that he was aware of evidence that could indicate 14 of the shootings were unjustified.

By far, the most damning part of the story is this:

ABC said it had obtained statements given to State Department diplomatic security agents. According to the statements, only five guards acknowledged firing their weapons in the incident. Twelve other guards witnessed the events but did not fire, according to the statements.

As it stands, only five of 17 discharged their weapons. If the convoy was actually under fire as some have maintained (which the evidence does not seem to support), I would have expected a much higher percentage of the guards to have expended rounds.

Sacrificial Lamb? Head Fact-checker Gone at TNR

Interesting (my bold):

The New Republic is looking for an assistant editor to fill an immediate opening in our Washington, DC office. The assistant editor will be responsible for guiding the magazine's fact-checking department (including overseeing the reporter-researchers), along with writing stories for the magazine and the website. Ideally, you'd be coming into the job with 1-2 years experience fact-checking and reporting, some solid clips, and a passion for the kind of long-form magazine reporting we do. Experience with specifically political journalism is, of course, a major plus — attention to detail and strong research skills are a prerequisite. Send cover letter, resume, and 4-5 clips to Britt Peterson at job@tnr.com with "assistant editor application" in the subject heading.

Looking at the masthead, the Assistant Editor that TNR is replacing seems to be Keelin McDonell, who was the longest-serving of TNR's most recent crop of assistant editors.

If she was indeed the "responsible for guiding the magazine's fact-checking department" during the period Scott Beauchamp published three articles with glaring fact errors in them, it would seem just cause for the magazine to find a replacement.

It would in no way, however, excuse the multiple, high level ethical breaches of more senior editors who seem intent on swearing to the veracity of this proven false fabulist to their very last breath.

(h/t Just a Canuck)

Bringing Out the Dead

Recent stories of a mass grave turning up in the Doura district of Baghdad very well may be "fake but accurate," according to sources in Iraq, including Michael Yon.

The bodies, found inside unfinished homes, appear to be at roughly seven months deceased—some little more than bones—and sources state that it appears that the bodies were only recently dumped there.

I'm seeking more information through the PAO system, but in the meantime, I'm unsure just what the dumping of these bodies means.

Are the various anti-Iraqi forces (AQI and the ISI for the Sunnis, or Shia militias) fearing that holding on to these bodies might lead to them get caught? Or were they desperately trying to create a media spectacle, and have found themselves reduced to this level?

I find it very hard to believe that anti-Iraqi forces are in such disarray at this point that they are reduced to a Pythonesque "Bring out your dead!" stunt to get media attention, but the thought that they felt the need to dump these bodies certainly seem to mean that they are feeling the pressure of recently coalition advances.

The Pajamas Media War on Terror Conversation with Fred Thompson

The Pajamas Media War on Terror Conversation with Fred Thompson that Roger Simon and I did last week is online, and I hope that the questions we asked Senator Thompson will give you a better idea of his positions and his passions than do the short, 15-second sound bites candidates are usually allowed.

I don't want to lead anyone—these War on Terror conversations are about informing, not guiding—but I did want to comment on the some of the "conventional wisdom" regarding Senator Thompson, that claims his campaign lacks energy and drive, and that it is lazy.

I was able to watch the first part of the Senator's speech before leaving to get ready for our interview, and I found him to be a passionate and engaging speaker. But don't take my word for it. Watch the conversation, and decide for yourself.

Fred Thompson Interview Preview

A preview of the interview Roger Simon and I did with Fred Thompson last week at The Citadel in Charleston, SC, that will air tomorrow morning.

On Coming Home

What you need to know, first and last, is that so-called PTSD is not an illness. It is a normal condition for people who have been through what you have been through. The instinct to kill and war is native to humanity. It is very deeply rooted in me, as it is in you. We have rules and customs to restrain it, so that sometimes we may have peace. What you are experiencing is not an illness, but the awareness of what human nature is like deep down. It is the awareness of what life is like without the walls that protect civilization.

You might need this, or know someone who might need this. PTS and PTSD affect not only those in the military and civilian first responders, but your friends, neighbors, and family members, for a multitude of reasons.

Read it all.

Back to Church

U.S. Army photo by Cpl. Ben Washburn

Shortly over a week ago, Michael Yon shot an iconic photo of a group of Muslim and Christian Iraqis placing a cross back atop St. John's Chruch in Baghdad's Doura neighborhood, in Thanks and Praise.

Yesterday, American soldiers and Iraqi citizens attended the first service in St. John's since May 5. The church had been bombed and burned in 2004.

Update: I should have known he'd be there, too.

Getting it Wrong... Again

You've got to love our intrepid media covering the war in Iraq. Even eye-to-eye with their subjects they can still drastically misunderstand the situation.

Such was the case last Saturday, Nov. 11, when Ghaith Abdul-Ahad wrote about a commander of former Sunni insurgents (now "concerned citizens") Abu Abed in the Guardian.

Lt. Col. Dale Kuehl, the U.S. Battalion Commander that works with Abu Abed and the citizens of Ameriyah felt that the Guardian article was inaccurate enough to warrant a written response, duplicated below.

Ghaith Abdul-Ahad's recent article on Abu Abed of Ameriyah does not paint an accurate picture of him nor of Ameriyah. Mr. Abdul-Ahad spent several days as a guest of Abu Abed in his home, but failed to see the totality of the security framework established within Ameriyah. While the events he describes occurred, I believe he embellished on the facts and selectively ignored the contribution of the Iraqi Army and of my Soldiers of the 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment. His characterizations of Abu Abed as a "Sunni warlord" and the Forsan al-Rafidain as the "only authority inside" Ameriyah are completely off base.

The statement of a senior Sunni sheikh in Beirut, that this was just a way to prevent the army and police from entering the area, is absurd and reflects ignorance on the part of this Sheikh on the objectives of Abu Abed and other leaders within the Ameriyah community.

Abu Abed has demonstrated to me time and again that he is non-sectarian.
Some of his closest advisors and much of his Personal Security Detachment are Shia. He has been instrumental in encouraging approximately seventy Shia families to return to Ameriyah. His men regularly check on these families to ensure their safety.

Abdul-Ahad's assertion that the Forsan are the only authority within Ameriyah is completely false. On the contrary they are part of a security network that also includes the 2nd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division and the 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment.

The Iraqi Army commander and I have established control measures to provide oversight over the Forsan's activities. We developed a memorandum of agreement signed by myself, the Iraqi Army commander and Abu Abed that lays out how they will conduct operations to include provisions for detainees and authorized weapons. We have established a system to conduct investigations for any violations of the law. We investigate complaints, and at times I have disciplined members of the Forsan to include detaining one member for criminal activity. Abu Abed published a code of conduct for his men and on occasion has fired those that would not adhere to the published standards.

Abdul-Ahad also fails to mention the importance of local civil oversight on Abu Abed and his men. From the start, local civil leaders have been an important part of the Concerned Local Citizen movement in Ameriyah. If it was not for the endorsement of two local imams, I probably would have never agreed to work with Abu Abed.

The results of our efforts speak for themselves. We have not had a mortar or rocket attack within Ameriyah since July. Dead bodies used to litter the streets, but we have not had a murder reported since August. The last IED attack was on August 7th. Since that time, my battalion has suffered no casualties within Ameriyah, while 2/1/6 IA has had only one wounded Soldier.

With the increased security situation we have finally been able to provide essential services to the community. For the first time since 1-5 CAV deployed to Iraq last November, the beladiyah is routinely providing trash clean up. We have fixed numerous water pipes, pulled out destroyed car hulks and are working to clean out the sewer system. Likewise the local economy is gaining steam with over one hundred stores opening up the last two months.

Over time I have come to trust Abu Abed as a brother. Our men have fought together and in some cases died while fighting a common enemy that has no regard for the innocent civilians of Ameriyah. Abu Abed invited me into his home and showed me not only hospitality, but friendship and camaraderie. He has demonstrated to me that his goal is for the safety and security of the people of Ameriyah and has resisted attempts by outsiders to take credit and control of what he has been able to accomplish. He is an inspiring leader who demonstrates personal and moral courage on a daily basis. I am proud to call him my friend.

Lt. Col. Dale Kuehl
Commander
1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division

No Leading Questions Here

From the 07/11/07 NBC-WSJ Poll:

Recently the United States Senate passed a resolution that declared that the Iranian government's most elite military unit is a terrorist organization. Which of the following statements comes closer to your point of view about this?

Statement A: Passing this resolution was a GOOD thing, because it sends a strong message to the Iranian government that the U.S. has put it on notice and will see that it pays an economic and diplomatic price for its actions.
Statement B: Passing this resolution was a BAD thing, because it moves the United States closer to a potential conflict with Iran, which the United States is not prepared to carry out militarily.

Notice that? ...which the United States is not prepared to carry out militarily.

This is their opinion, stated as fact, to guide those polled to a prescribed response.

I'd consider such poll tampering unethical.

What do you think?

Kos Joins Newsweek

From the man himself, a copy of the press release that announces:

New York -- Markos Moulitsas, the founder and publisher of dailykos.com, will become a Newsweek contributor for the 2008 presidential campaign, offering occasional opinion pieces to the pages of the magazine and to Newsweek.com.

"We have always sought to represent a diversity of views in Newsweek, and we think Markos will be a great part of that tradition," said Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham. "He will give our readers in print and online a unique perspective. As always, our job is to create the most energetic and illuminating magazine possible, and Markos will help us do that as the campaign unfolds."

I'd like to offer Markos my sincere congratulations on landing this gig, which will presumably bring at least a little more attention to the blogosphere as a whole and political bloggers in particular.

I just hope he can stand the reduction in traffic.

Update: In counterpoint, Gateway Pundit points out that the "diversity of views" Kos brings to the show.

As more pointed evidence keeps coming in that the War in Iraq is indeed going favorably, it will be interesting to see if this "screw them" mentality will be more of an asset, or a hindrance.

On Will

The media had some rather interesting takes on Fred Thompson's speech at The Citadel this morning in Charleston, SC, or at least takes different than my own.

Jim Davenport of AP keyed in on the size of the military that a President Thompson would champion. Jeremy Pelofsky of Reuters parroted the same sentiments.

I saw the first half of the speech, and then Roger L. Simon and I were fortunate enough to have Senator Thompson alone for an interview that will run on Pajamas Media Thursday.

I was impressed with the military numbers that Thompson favors, but found his call to engage the will of the American people in winning the "long war" to be a far more compelling story.

Twice in Thompson's speech, he referred to the synergy needed between civilian will and military might needed to win wars.

I spent some time recently with a book called A History of the English-Speaking Peoples Since 1900, by the historian Andrew Roberts. He describes the strengths that have seen America and England through danger and adversity. But there's one quality in particular that no nation can do without in such a time. As Roberts observes, "The will of a people is at least as important as their military might in overcoming an enemy."

And later:

This radical threat we face today is committed to a hundred year war, and has been waging one against us for decades ... in Beirut, Somalia, embassies in Africa, Saudi Arabia, on the USS Cole. Each time Americans were killed. Yet each time our response sent the wrong signals. This is an enemy that understands only the language of power. Today, the focus of this war is Afghanistan and Iraq, but it is clear that this struggle and our enemies extend far beyond those borders. To defend ourselves, we in the democratic world must assert our intentions in the clearest possible terms.

Diplomacy, economic influence, and other means of persuasion are always to be preferred in our dealings with dangerous regimes and rival states. But the words of our leaders command much closer attention from adversaries when it is understood that we are prepared to use force when force is necessary. And for that deterrent to exist, the will of our people and the strength of our military must be unquestionable.

We had a chance to establish that synergy as lower Manhattan, the Pentagon, and a Pennsylvania field still smoldered. Our leadership failed to unite us then, and has since.

Senator Thompson seems to have some ideas about what it takes to unite our country to win "the long war."

It's too bad that such ideas are so easily overlooked by the fourth estate.

Name that Party: "Little Rascals" Edition

Read the lede and guess the candidate's political party. Just don't count on finding it in the first six paragraphs:

A state representative in a runoff election infuriated civil rights leaders after she ended a conversation with the mother of the NAACP's local president by saying, "Talk to you later, Buckwheat."

State Rep. Carla Blanchard Dartez, of Morgan City, acknowledged she made the remark during a Thursday night telephone conversation with Hazel Boykin to thank her for driving voters to the polls.

Buckwheat, a black child character in the "Little Rascals" comedies of the 1930s and '40s, is viewed as a racial stereotype demeaning to black people.

Yes, that's only three paragraphs, but when the entire article is just nine paragraphs long, you can only cite so much before violating the spirit of fair use.

On the bright side, the candidate's husband does support minorities, as has been shown by his indictment for hiring illegal aliens.

Calvan Didn't Fall Far From The Tree

I've got to head out for a blogging-related trip to South Carolina in a few hours, so I'm going to point you to this delightful article by Armando Acuna, public editor of the Sacramento Bee.

I didn't cover the Bobby Caina Calvan fiasco when it occurred, but the displayed response shows quite a bit of arrogance by Acuna and Mark Seibel, the managing editor in charge of foreign coverage for McClatchy's Washington Bureau.

It seems they've learned nothing.

Update: More from Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive:

Your "reporting" on the war in Iraq is about as real as your "support" for the troops.

Ouch.

Veterans Day Repost: Thirteen Folds

Originally posted on Nov 11, 2005

Our church was honored this past weekend when three American soldiers presented our congregation with a flag in recognition of the small acts we have performed for our military at home and aboard. As they presented the flag, the sergeant leading the detail explained the significance of each fold.

Via US History.org:

1. The first fold of our flag is a symbol of life.
2. The second fold is a symbol of our belief in the eternal life.
3. The third fold is made in honor and remembrance of the veteran departing our ranks who gave a portion of life for the defense of our country to attain a peace throughout the world.
   
4. The fourth fold represents our weaker nature, for as American citizens trusting in God, it is to Him we turn in times of peace as well as in times of war for His divine guidance.
5. The fifth fold is a tribute to our country, for in the words of Stephen Decatur, "Our country, in dealing with other countries,
   may she always be right; but it is still our country, right or wrong."
6. The sixth fold is for where our hearts lie. It is with our heart that we pledge llegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it tands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
7. The seventh fold is a tribute to our Armed Forces, for it is through the Armed Forces that we protect our country and our flag against all her enemies, whether they be found within or without the boundaries of our republic.
8. The eighth fold is a tribute to the one who entered in to the valley of the shadow of death, that we might see the light of day, and to honor mother, for whom it flies on Mother's Day.
9. The ninth fold is a tribute to womanhood; for it has been through their faith, love, loyalty and devotion that the character of the men and women who have made this country great have been molded.
10. The tenth fold is a tribute to father, for he, too, has given his sons and daughters for the defense of our country since they were first born.
11. The eleventh fold, in the eyes of a Hebrew citizen, represents the lower portion of the seal of King David and King Solomon, and glorifies, in their eyes, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
12. The twelfth fold, in the eyes of a Christian citizen,
    represents an emblem of eternity and glorifies, in their eyes, God the Father, the Son, and Holy Ghost.
13. When the flag is completely folded, the stars are uppermost, reminding us of our national motto, "In God we Trust."

A sincere thanks to all of you who have served our nation's military.

Your sacrifices are not forgotten.

Update: Jonn Lilyea (Sergeant First Class, US Army-Retired) has a post from Arlington National Cemetery, including video of the wreath-laying at the Tomb of the Unknowns over at This Ain't Hell.

A Matter of Honor: Advertisers Respond II

From Tony Jewell, media contact for Astrazeneca, via email:

Good afternoon and thank you for giving us a chance to respond to your concerns.

We last bought an advertisement in The New Republic in late May, though they ran a free ad as part of a promotion last month. We currently have no plans to advertise in The New Republic for the foreseeable future.

"It is the Greatest Scam in History"

So says John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel, as he discusses global warming. He is not kind to global warming advocates, some of which preached the horrors of the impending ice ages of global cooling just several decades ago with the same cocksure fanaticism.

It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

"Friends in government?"

Gee, I wonder which former vice president and political party he could be referring to...

Thanks and Praise

Mike Yon:

I photographed men and women, both Christians and Muslims, placing a cross atop the St. John's Church in Baghdad. They had taken the cross from storage and a man washed it before carrying it up to the dome. A Muslim man had invited the American soldiers from "Chosen" Company 2-12 Cavalry to the church, where I videotaped as Muslims and Christians worked and rejoiced at the reopening of St John's, an occasion all viewed as a sign of hope.

The Iraqis asked me to convey a message of thanks to the American people. "Thank you, thank you," the people were saying. One man said, "Thank you for peace." Another man, a Muslim, said "All the people, all the people in Iraq, Muslim and Christian, is brother." The men and women were holding bells, and for the first time in memory freedom rang over the ravaged land between two rivers.

Comparisons to Rosenthal's iconic Iwo Jima photo are both obvious and immediate. Rand Simberg thinks Yon should win a Pulitzer for this photo. Frankly, that honor should have come two years ago. Instead, they gave it to a gaggle of Associated Press photographers, one of which, Bilal Hussein, was later arrested with a known al Qaeda terrorist and remains in jail.

No, this photo is not as iconic as the Rosenthal photo, nor Yon's 2005 photo of Major Mark Bieger carrying a mortally wounded Iraqi child after an al Qaeda car bomb attack.

The symbolism of an ending sectarian conflict, and possibly the dawning of an Iraq that is appearing more and more like it is verging upon moving into a post-war period, however, is every bit as great.

Update: Chris Muir captures the moment at Day-by-Day.

11/08 Update: Major Kirk Leudeke, Public Affairs Officer for
4th IBCT, 1st ID, states that 2-12 IN is one of the units attached to his brigade, and that they've been in combat for about a year.

He said that St. John's Church had been bombed and burned back in 2004, but that since that time, the church's inner sanctuary has been restored, and putting the cross back on the building was the "crowning touch."

A Matter of Honor: Advertisers Respond

At least two of the leading advertisers for The New Republic are reconsidering their advertising relationships with the magazine in the wake of the magazines handling of the Scott Beauchamp "Shock Troop" scandal.

Kathy Leech, Director of Brand Communications for BP, stated via email that "We are very aware of the allegations against the New Republic and are reviewing the situation prior to making a decision about our advertising."

In a follow-up email, Leech stated that BP did not "need any further information."

When asked on when they might make a decision, she stated, "We are reviewing the situation as we speak, so we're likely to make a decision shortly."

BP's decision will be an internal decision, and will not be made public. The only way the results of the decision will be known is by whether or not BP is still advertising in The New Republic in the months ahead.

According to reliable sources, at least one other key TNR advertiser is re-evaluating their relationship with The New Republic in the wake of the magazine's handing of the Scott Beauchamp "Shock Troops" scandal. The scandal developed when the author, an Army private in Iraq, made allegations of brutality against his fellow soldiers that were found to be false in a formal U.S. Army investigation.

Though apparently unable to produce any evidence to support the claims for almost four months, The New Republic continues to stand by the story.

A "Who's Who" of Ignorance in the Intelligence Community

Larry Johnson has done us a wonderful favor by compiling a list of intelligence operatives that don't understand how the legislative and judicial systems in this country work:

Brent Cavan
Intelligence Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA

Ray Close
Directorate of Operations, CIA for 26 years—22 of them overseas; former Chief of Station, Saudi Arabia

Ed Costello
Counter-espionage, FBI

Michael Dennehy
Supervisory Special Agent for 32 years, FBI; U.S. Marine Corps for three years

Rosemary Dew
Supervisory Special Agent, Counterterrorism, FBI

Philip Giraldi
Operations officer and counter-terrorist specialist, Directorate of Operations, CIA

Michael Grimaldi
Intelligence Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA; Federal law enforcement officer

Mel Goodman
Division Chief, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA; Professor, National Defense University; Senior Fellow, Center for International Policy

Larry Johnson
Intelligence analysis and operations officer, CIA; Deputy Director, Office of Counter Terrorism, Department of State

Richard Kovar
Executive Assistant to the Deputy Director for Intelligence, CIA: Editor, Studies In Intelligence

Charlotte Lang
Supervisory Special Agent, FBI

W. Patrick Lang
U.S. Army Colonel, Special Forces, Vietnam; Professor, U.S. Military Academy, West Point; Defense Intelligence Officer for Middle East, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); founding director, Defense HUMINT Service

Lynne Larkin
Operations Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA; counterintelligence; coordination among intelligence and crime prevention agencies; CIA policy coordination staff ensuring adherence to law in operations

Steve Lee
Intelligence Analyst for terrorism, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA

Jon S. Lipsky
Supervisory Special Agent, FBI

David MacMichael
Senior Estimates Officer, National Intelligence Council, CIA; History professor; Veteran, U.S. Marines (Korea)

Tom Maertens
Foreign Service Officer and Intelligence Analyst, Department of State; Deputy Coordinator for Counter-terrorism, Department of State; National Security Council (NSC) Director for Non-Proliferation

James Marcinkowski
Operations Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA by way of U.S. Navy

Mary McCarthy
National Intelligence Officer for Warning; Senior Director for Intelligence Programs, National Security Council

Ray McGovern
Intelligence Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA; morning briefer, The President’s Daily Brief; chair of National Intelligence Estimates; Co-founder, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

Sam Provance
U.S. Army Intelligence Analyst, Germany and Iraq (Abu Ghraib); Whistleblower

Coleen Rowley
Special Agent and attorney, FBI; Whistleblower on the negligence that facilitated the attacks of 9/11.

Joseph Wilson
Foreign Service Officer, U.S. Ambassador and Director of Africa, National Security Council.

Valerie Plame Wilson
Operations Officer, Directorate of Operations

Some of the names you know well, such as Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. Some are minor luminaries such as Johnson and Rowley, a famed FBI whistleblower who later sat ditchside with Cindy Sheehan and ran for Congress as a Democrat. The rest my be outstanding in their field, but are not household names.

They signed on to a letter confronting Senators Specter and Leahy over the nomination of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next Attorney General, because these intelligence operatives did not like Mukasey's refusal to comment on the legality of waterboarding.

They do not seem to grasp the basic fact that the Attorney General has no dictatorial powers, and does not make laws.

I have a further newsflash for Mr. Johnson and the rest of his ill-informed posse: waterboarding is not illegal.

The United States Congress (both houses Democrat-led) has not passed a law outlawing the waterboarding of terror suspects. Despite any personal feelings Mukasey may have that waterboarding is torture (and indeed, I think most of us agree it is), it would be irresponsible for a candidate for Attorney General to declare this or any other action illegal that Congress has not made illegal.

If Johnson, et al do not think the practice of waterboarding is justifiable even in extreme circumstances to save thousands of American lives, then that is their issue to take to their fellow Democrats in Congress, but it is not an issue on which Mukasey should comment, at least not until he has clear legal authority to act upon it.

Everything Matters

As you are probably aware, were on our second week of raising funds to buy voice-controlled laptop computers for our wounded soldiers, in an online competition called Project Valour-IT.

More about the program, from Soldier's Angels:

Every cent raised for Project Valour-IT goes directly to the purchase and shipment of laptops for severely wounded service members. As of October 2007, Valour-IT has distributed over 1500 laptops to severely wounded Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines across the country.

Valour-IT accepts donations in any amount to support the purchase and distribution of laptops, but also offers a sponsorship option. An individual or organization may sponsor a wounded soldier by completely funding the cost of a laptop and continuing to provide that soldier with personal support and encouragement throughout recovery. This has proved to be an excellent project for churches, groups of coworkers or friends, and members of community organizations such Boy Scouts.
Originally Valour-IT provided the voice-controlled software, but now works closely with the Department of Defense Computer/electronic Accommodations Program (CAP): CAP supplies the adaptive software and Valour-IT provides the laptop. In addition, DoD caseworkers serve as Valour-IT’s “eyes and ears” at several medical centers, identifying possible laptop recipients. Wounded military personnel can also directly request a laptop through the sign-up form or through the Valour-IT/Soldiers' Angels representatives at the following medical centers:

* Balboa Naval Hospital

* Brooke Army Medical Center

* Madigan Regional Medical Center

* National Naval Medical Center (Bethesda Naval Hospital)

* Naval Hospital, Camp Pendleton

* Robert E. Bush Naval Hospital (29 Palms)

* Walter Reed Army Medical Center

Thanks to the efforts of the Military Order of the Purple Heart, Valour-IT is also able to reach patients in VA hospitals who would benefit from a Valour-IT laptop.

So here is what I'm asking of you, Confederate Yankee readers.

As was noted with unerring accuracy on a whiteboard somewhere in Iraq, "America is not at war. The Marines are at war. America is at the mall."

In addition to our Marines, of course, are tens of thousands of soldiers, sailors, and airmen, all putting their lives on the line in Iraq and Afghanistan, and sometimes, those lives get shattered.

But there is something you can do. As part of "Team Air Force" I'd like to ask for Confederate Yankee readers to donate five dollars to Project Valour-IT. That's it. Just five bucks.

So many times I've caught myself almost donating to a worthy cause, and then I didn't, because our budget was tight that month. I wanted to donate a "worthwhile" amount, and was ashamed to offer the small amount I could possibly afford. Sound familiar?

But even on my worst day, I could squeeze five bucks out of my thin wallet for a worthy cause, even if I wish I had $50 or $500 to give. And so that's what I'm asking of you: five bucks.

Five bucks from every CY reader would be able to buy a voice-activated laptops for one of our brave wounded soldiers so that he can communicate with loved ones.

So please, donate just five bucks via the button below. Because they deserve it.

Because everything matters.

Shocker: Media Heavily Biased

Of course, this comes from the hard right-leaning people at The Limbaugh Letter Harvard University, so they are doubtlessly wrong:

Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race, the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.

Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage. They get more coverage period. This is particularly evident on morning news shows, which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."

The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.

Breaking it down by candidates, the survey found that Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the favorites. "Obama's front page coverage was 70% positive and 9% negative, and Clinton's was similarly 61% positive and 13% negative."

In stories about Republicans, on the other hand, the tone was positive in only a quarter of the stories; in four in 10 it was negative.

The study also discovered that newspaper stories "tended to be focused more on political matters and less on issues and ideas than the media overall. In all, 71% of newspaper stories concentrated on the 'game,' compared with 63% overall."

In related news, newspaper circulation is circling the drain. Do you think that these two stories just might be related in some way?

It has long been understood that newsrooms have been left-leaning for decades, and have been tilting further leftward, if slowly, over time. News consumers, however, have been more moderate throughout most of the country, and have been anchored against this leftward drift by the emergence of talk radio, the Internet, and cable television networks. As a result, the gap between the ever-more-liberal media and the average news consumer is widening not because of the public moving away from the media, but because of the media moving to the left of even many Democrats. This phenomenon is especially pronounced in print newsrooms on the coasts.

And so we see situations where the media exhibits a strong bias or even tells lies, and then swears the lie is the truth even when exposed.

And yet they act perplexed when their readers quit them in disgust.

Perhaps if responsible media organizations would actually stand up against those dishonest and unethical journalists, columnists and editors among them, instead of reveling in an incestuous "I'm okay, you're okay, can't we all get along" relationship, then we might be able to drum up some sympathy for them.

But they've done precious little to deserve our respect.

I've been told point-blank by journalists for national news organizations that their editors will not let them report on false stories or strongly-biased stories pushed by other organizations because of a warped sense of professional courtesy, and the very real fear that if that door was opened, that someone might then turn around and investigate short-comings at their magazine or newspaper.

Self-inflicted wounds, indeed.

JPost Attributes Nuke Attack On Syria To Al Jazeera, Proving the Incompetence of Both Media Outlets

I suppose I should find it somewhat comforting to note that the international press is just as lazy as the American media, but when the subject is as deadly-serious as alleging a nuclear weapons attack, "comforting" is not the word that comes to mind.

The September 6 raid over Syria was carried out by the US Air Force, the Al-Jazeera Web site reported Friday. The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab sources as saying that two strategic US jets armed with tactical nuclear weapons carried out an attack on a nuclear site under construction.

The sources were quoted as saying that Israeli F-15 and F-16 jets provided cover for the US planes.

The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear weapon and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed.

At the beginning of October, Israel's military censor began to allow the local media to report on the raid without attributing their report to foreign sources. Nevertheless, details of the strike have remained clouded in mystery.

As AllahPundit notes, it doesn't seem that this story is on the al Jazeera web site, so if it was published, it certainly didn't make it into the English-language version. JPost was sloppy in not proving more specific detail about the al Jazeera report, and for a claim of this magnitude, should have collected a screen capture or provided a link to the article.

If the JPost attribution is accurate, then al Jazeera article should be rebuked as lazy pandering to it's reader base of the lowest order, blatant propaganda, and incompetent reporting.

A few simple minutes of web searching would have revealed that tactical nuclear weapons suitable for this kind of attack, such as variants of the B61 or the ground-penetrating variant known as the B61-11, would have created a massive and distinctive signature, as noted by GlobalSecurity.org:

A 1-kiloton nuclear weapon detonated 20 to 50 feet underground would dig a crater the size of Ground Zero in New York and eject 1 million cubic feet of radioactive debris into the air. Detonating a similar weapon on the surface of a city would kill a quarter of a million people and injure hundreds of thousands more.

Nuclear weapons cannot be engineered to penetrate deeply enough to prevent fallout. Based on technical analysis at the Nevada Test Site, a weapon with a 10-kiloton yield must be buried deeper than 850 feet to prevent spewing of radioactive debris. Yet a weapon dropped from a plane at 40,000 feet will penetrate less than 100 feet of loose dirt and less than 30 feet of rock. Ultimately, the depth of penetration is limited by the strength of the missile casing. The deepest current earth penetrators, the B61 Mod 11, can burrow is 20 feet of dry earth. Casing made of even the strongest material cannot withstand the physical forces of burrowing through 100 feet of granite, much less 850 feet.

Even a minimal level of Internet research would have revealed that it is impossible for a nuclear warhead to have been used without immediate and noticeable effects including a massive crater, something approaching a million cubic feet of radioactive material being ejected into the air, and of course, a massive seismic shockwave that would have been recorded by other nations around the region.

Photographic evidence shows no such crater. There has been no radioactive fallout recorded in the region, nor was distinctive nuclear seismic shockwave reported by friend or foe.

Reporters for both al Jazeera and the JPost should have known that this story was hihgly suspect from the beginning and could have easily debunked it with minimal reasearch, but they obviously didn't want to let facts get in the way of a good story.

By the Light of the Silvery... Moon?

Not to be hyper-critical, but is this supposed to be a photo, or a photo-illustration?

I only ask because the object in the sky in this photo is as seems as bright as the sun, and yet, the soldier is clearly looking through a nightvision monocular mounted to his helmet. I suspect that NVG would do him very little good if the sun (or moon) was a bright as the picture suggests.