.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

The Asylum

Welcome to the Asylum. This is a site devoted to politics and current events in America, and around the globe. The THREE lunatics posting here are unabashed conservatives that go after the liberal lies and deceit prevalent in the debate of the day. We'd like to add that the views expressed here do not reflect the views of other inmates, nor were any inmates harmed in the creation of this site.

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Sunday, July 30, 2006

'Tis Been A Joy, But We Must Be Moving On ...

I'm movin' on
At last I can see life has been patiently waiting for me
And I know there's no guarantees, but I'm not alone
There comes a time in everyone's life
When all you can see are the years passing by
And I have made up my mind that those days are gone

Yes, we can hear the chimes at midnight, striking softly, yet resounding throughout the night. And while we have enjoyed our time with Blogger.com, it is time for us to move onto to greater endeavors. Colin Powell once remarked that "Endeavors succeed or fail because of the people involved. Only by attracting the best people will you accomplish great deeds." We have that opportunity now ...

At the beginning of July, we posted that we were moving. Town Hall is now a veritable clearing house for some of the best and brightest bloggers on the Internet, and we are now joining them. We will miss having Chris Muir's brilliant and fabulous cartoon at the top of our page each day, greeting us with a cutting wit that brings a smile to our face everyday. But with all new steps taken in life, change occurs. Please, feel free to enjoy reading his cartoon each day, right here at the old Asylum. And keep this site bookmarked.

It will be our back-up site should technical problems arise at Town Hall. But to our old readers, and the recent newbies that have been keeping up with us, feel free to join us at our new home:

The "New" Asylum at TownHall.com is our new home, and hopefully will be our longtime home. And if you are a blogger who would like a better chance at more recognition, feel free to join us, and the hundreds of other bloggers in the "Great Migration of 2006."

And do not forget that as of August 1st, our new column will be up at Common Conservative.com.


Saturday, July 22, 2006

"Morning Glory and Evening Grace"

This post is a simple announcement. Both Thomas and I have some personal issues to attend to over this next week, or so. We will be keeping an eye on the news and events of the upcoming week, but we won't be posting on any of it short of a serious, major news story (such as a WMD attack on Israel, or another side formally jumping in on this fight).

We will be right back here on either 31 July or 1 August depending on how quickly we can attend to these matters. We wholeheartedly apologize to our readers for this inconvenience, however we see no other way around these matters. They must be dealt with, and prior to September.

This time off will also give us a chance to "recharge our batteries" because when we return, we will be full swing into the election season. Blogging day in and day out, covering a variety of news sources, and doing the work we do here sort of wears you down mentally. Many of our longtime readers have noticed our writing is slipping a bit. It is not as "spot-on," specific, or as funny as it used to be. Hopefully this brief hiatus away from the site will help put us back on track.

And a quick reminder to all of our readers, our new column should be up on Common Conservative on 1 August, and awaiting your perusing eyes. (This was done last weekend and submitted then. We are simply awaiting confirmation that it will be published.) So we'll see you on the flip side when our personal business is attended to.

Marcie & Publius II

Friday, July 21, 2006

The Mad Mullah Of Britian Wants A Right Of Return

Omar Bakri used to live in Great Britain, but the man preached hate and violence from the mosques there. He celebrated al-Qaeda and other Middle Eastern terrorist groups, calling their "soldiers" "marytrs" and "freedom fighters" against the infidel West. Great Britian grew real sick of men like this, and issued a deportation order for them. Mr. Bakri jetted to Lebanon just shortly before the enforcement of the deportation.

Now, he begging Great Britain to allow his return:

EXILED preacher of hate Omar Bakri has begged the Royal Navy to rescue him from war-torn Beirut.

The Muslim cleric who fled Britain last year, tried to board a ship full of women and children yesterday but was turned away.

He also wrote to the British embassy asking to be allowed back on “humanitarian grounds”.

In an email to officials, dole scrounger Bakri pleaded: “The current situation in Beirut left me without any choice but to appeal to you to grant me a visit visa to see my children for one month.”

But his bid to sneak on one of our ships was blocked at harbour gates by sharp-eyed officials.

Bakri, 46, left his family in Edmonton, North London, last August and went to Lebanon after a Sun campaign to kick him out.

Charles Clarke, then Home Secretary, banned him from returning here.

The mad mullah, who hailed terrorists as “magnificent” martyrs, bought a £150,000 bolthole in the exclusive Doha district of Beirut.

In March he boasted: “When I left England I bought a one-way ticket out. I never want to see the place again.”

But cowardly Bakri changed his tune as soon as bombs started dropping.

He contacted the British embassy asking to be allowed back to see the six children he deserted. Bakri said last night: “What concerns me is my safety. I’d be happy with a month’s visa but this morning they told me I couldn’t because I’m not a British citizen any more.”

Shadow Immigration Minister Damian Green said last night: “This man has a cheek trying to come back to Britain after what he did here.”

A diplomat said: “He hasn’t spoken to any of our people. But he may have been turned away by security guards patrolling the port entrance.”

Anjem Choudary, Bakri’s right-hand man, said last night: “He plans to write to the British authorities and see if they will give him a visa for a passage out.”

Syrian Bakri can’t return there because he faces 20 years’ jail over a coup bid.

Over 20 years in the UK, Bakri sponged £300,000 in benefits. He preached violence and praised the 9/11 al-Qaeda terrorists as the Magnificent 19.

Bakri, dubbed the Tottenham Ayatollah, was a member of al-Muhajiroun, which he left to form al-Ghuraba.

Both have since been outlawed.

Aww ... poor widdle boy cannot go home because the home he once had does not want him back. Letting Bakri back into Great Britian would be as much a mistake as letting Osama bin-Hidin' back into Saudi Arabia. All you will have is spite, hate, vitriol, and headache after headache.

No, I am sorry, but Bakri made his bed and now he can lie in it. I hope that British immigration authorities tell him to get stuffed. And the next time he tries to smuggle himself aboard a british ship, the crew needs to lock him up in the brig for the duration of the voyage.

And I think he also makes a perfect opportunity even better. If Israelis can grab this guy, it is a possibility they could hand him over to Syria in exchange for Syrian pressure on Hezbollah to return the two IDF soldiers. The Israelis would get back their people, and the syrians would get a man that they have been seeking for some time now. It is a win-win proposition that both Syria and Israel may wish to consider.

But he does not head back to Great Britain. I do not care if his wife or children are dying in greater London; he does not go back there. He is not welcome there, and he made it blatantly and painfully clear he does not like living there or anywhere in the West. His only option is to live among those he cheered and supported. If their little war is too much for him to handle, maybe he should re-adjust his priorities, or his mind-set. His allies, his heroes, start wars with sovereign nations for the stupidest of reasons. He left Great Britain for the stupidest of reasons.

But, then again, birds of a feather flock together and the Islamofascists have never been the brightest bulbs in the box.


Israeli Tanks Along The Border ...

"General, prepare your troops for a surface attack."

Though not over the border yet in total force, The Israelis are preparing for a massive invasion, according to Yahoo News:

Israel massed tanks and troops on the border, called up reserves and warned civilians to flee Hezbollah-controlled southern Lebanon as it prepared Friday for a likely ground invasion to set up a deep buffer zone.

The army's chief of staff said forces would conduct ground operations as needed in Lebanon, but they would be "limited." Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz also said nearly 100 Hezbollah guerrillas have been killed in the offensive in Lebanon.

"We will fight terror wherever it is because if we do not fight it, it will fight us. If we don't reach it, it will reach us," Halutz said in a nationally televised news conference. "We will also conduct limited ground operations as much as needed in order to harm the terror that harms us."

An Israeli envoy said the nation will allow aid supplies into Lebanon, a day after the United Nations
warned of a growing humanitarian crisis in the country.

This marks the second day of build up prior to the ground invasion. And Lebanon knew this was coming. They had to have known that it wasn't simply going to be rockets and missiles fired back at Hezbollah along with an air campaign. Even Hexbollah knew that Israel would be rolling in with a few tanks. Of course, they don't really have a choice. Just like they did in Gaza after the kidnapping of Sahlit, the Israelis are about to create a buffer zone to prevent Hezbollah from hitting them again.

Naturally, this won't work for long unless the Lebanese military can get into that buffer zone, or the Lebanese people do to Hezbollah like what they did to Syria when they booted them out of the country. Israel, in a way, is helping Lebanon do just that. Now, we cannot expect miracles overnight. Obviously this will be a process just as it was in getting rid of the Syrians, but at least the Lebanese might be willing to try. To truly get rid of Hezbollah, they need to be kicked out of the Lebanese parliament.

Hezbollah, like Hamas, claims "legitimacy" because they are a part of the Lebanese government; Hamas is the elected leader of the Palestinians. Both groups thought that if they directed themselves into the realm of politics that they would be seen as licit and sanctioned; protected by the very political power they had been handed. As Hezbollah has learned, all the political power in the world can't make the people you attack back off. And even if the world--the entire world--had condemned Israel, does nayone think this would've stopped? The human rights groups out there have condemned both sides, though Amnesty International has been harsher towards Israel. No surprise as they always seem to be telling the "good guys" that they're being too rough on the "bad guys."

B-O-O H-O-O. It's a war. Get over it, and they need to get over themselves. Let's just sit back and let the Israelis roll on in to deal with Hezbollah. Marcie correctly assumed yesterday that Hezbollah is seriously hurt from the massive Israelis strikes. Hezbollah's rocket attacks were sparse yesterday, and none were really on target. But that hasn't deterred Hezbollah from fighting. That's fine, too because I'm sure the Israelis aren't going to roll on in to deal with civilians. They want the little cowards to come out of their hiding places, and take this one on the chin like a man.

Publius II

Thursday, July 20, 2006

This Is A Good Sign

It seems that Hezbollah and Lebanon did not hear or care about the Arab League condemning them. Now, the Saudis have upped the ante against Hezbollah. Well, at least one Wahhabi sheik has:

One of Saudi Arabia's leading Wahhabi sheiks, Abdullah bin Jabreen has issued a strongly worded religious edict, or fatwa, declaring it unlawful to support, join or pray for Hezbollah, the Shiite militias lobbing missiles into northern Israel.

The day after Hezbollah abducted two Israeli soldiers on July 12, Sheik Hamid al-Ali issued an informal statement titled "The Sharia position on what is going on." In it, the Kuwaiti based cleric condemned the imperial ambitions of Iran regarding Hezbollah's cross border raid.

The surprising move demonstrates that Sunni Muslim fundamentalists in the Middle East are deeply divided over whether Moslems should support Hezbollah, Iran's Shiite proxies in the war raging in Lebanon.

While the Gulf's ascetic Wahhabi sects, who are closer to the ethnic fighting between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq, have opposed Hezbollah in its stand against Israel's forces, other Sunni fundamentalist groups, such as the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, have pledged their solidarity. On Friday, the brothers will host a rally in support of Hezbollah at Cairo's most influential mosque, Al-Azhar.

The profound division between the most violent Muslim enemies of America and Israel may be one reason Arab capitals have not yet exploded in rage about Israel's bombardment of Lebanon. The White House has already pointed to Jordanian, Egyptian, and Saudi government condemnation of Hezbollah.

It is about time that the Arabs decided to start coming out against Hezbollah. Today, Israel had a light time; very few missiles and rockets landed in Israel today. Many went off course. Hezbollah is reeling from this fight, and rightly so. It is just about time for Israel to step in, and finish this once and for all.


A Lesson For The World Today

(Hat-Tip: Hugh Hewitt; he tipped us in the direction of this new blogger. Trust us, he is worth the read.)

They say that wisdom comes from strange places, and bloggers do have their quirks. And while WE read this piece, thoughts flew naturally to Israel and Hezbollah right now. Hence the reason why I called it a "lesson" for the world. Kofi Annan today stated that "excessive use of force should be condemned."

What, pray tell, is considered "excessive" force in a war? To me that means that the soldiers and commanders on the ground will wage war--open hostilities--against an enemy, targeting their command and control structure, their ground forces, and their ability to wage war from the air. Israel has done precisely that. Now, this is a war, and sometimes it does not go as planned. Have civilians been killed? Quite possibly, but I do not believe a single count coming from Hezbollah (as CNN has). It is propaganda, and it cannot be confirmed one way or another. And we should not forget that Hezbollah is notorious for putting their military hardware and troops amongst civilians.

Israel will do as we do, and as every domocracy does when they go to war. They will take care to avoid civilian casualties, but not to the detriment of the troops. The rules of engagement still apply. If a fighter jet sees a rocket about to fly, and the launcher is in a civilian area, he will try to minimize the damage, but he is taking out that rocket. If Kofi Annan has a problem with this concept, I suggest he file his complaints in the appropriate place. They will end up in the round file when it is all said and done.

And that is the small example that Mr. Bogner gives us:

When I was in the Navy, I once witnessed a bar fight in downtown Olongapo (Philippines) that still haunts my dreams. The fight was between a big oafish Marine and a rather soft-spoken, medium sized Latino sailor from my ship.

All evening the Marine had been trying to pick a fight with one of us and had finally set his sights on this diminutive shipmate of mine... figuring him for a safe target. When my friend refused to be goaded into a fight the Marine sucker punched him from behind on the side of the head so hard that blood instantly started to pour from this poor man's mutilated ear.

Everyone present was horrified and was prepared to absolutely murder this Marine, but my shipmate quickly turned on him and began to single-handedly back him towards a corner with a series of stinging jabs and upper cuts that gave more than a hint to a youth spent boxing in a small gym in the Bronx.

Each punch opened a cut on the Marine's startled face and by the time he had been backed completely into the corner he was blubbering for someone to stop the fight. He invoked his split lips and chipped teeth as reasons to stop the fight. He begged us to stop the fight because he could barely see through the river of blood that was pouring out of his split and swollen brows.

Nobody moved. Not one person.

Sound a little familiar? Sounds like that Marine was playing the Hezbollah game. Please stop, please stop. You are killing us. You are killing our civilians. You are bombing innocent people and not Hezbollah. Same mantra, day in and day out, since Hezbollah picked this fight. The bully on the block is getting its collective rear handed to it, and they are whining that Israel is using excessive force.

I guess Hezbollah forgot that Israel does not draft empty resolutions, or pass on strongly-worded letters. They responded, just like that sailor did. Israel is not letting up, and neither did that sailor. Not until he heard what he was demanding.

Say "I give up." That is what Israel is waiting for. They want their soldiers back, but more importantly, they want Hezbollah to end this. They do not want to go to war, just like any sane nation chooses to avoid the mess as much as possible. However, like the United States, like Great Britain, like any other free nation, Israel is going to retaliate; and they do not go halfway. I know there are complaints from many people connected with Israel that are complaining that their leaders are not doing enough.

There are always "armchair quarterbacks." I am not insulting those people. Thomas and I speculate and war game all the time. It is healthy. However we always bear this in mind: WE are not on the battlefield, and are basing moves, countermoves, and criticism on what we hear through the media--both dinosaur and New.

But the point Mr. Bogner made was a good one, and one that should be picked up by a larger amount of people. (I suggest Pat Buchanan read this, and catch a clue instead of ranting on about "neo-cons.") And we hope our readers read it and enjoy it, as well. It is most definitely one of the best lessons of this young 21st Century that needs to be learned. Nations are not simply going to rollover and take it on the chops. "Nuanced" Europe may be willing to capitulate, but the rest of the world will not. We will defend ourselves. And we should support those that do the same.


Run For Cover: Erwin's On The Case

Every one of our readers know that we listen to Hugh Hewitt. They also know that once a week (at least they try for a once-a-week-spot) Hugh hosts John Eastman of Chapman Law and Erwin Chemerinsky of Duke Law on his show. They cover the variety of legal topics confronting the nation during these spots. They are, of course, the essence of "balanced." And Marcie an I delight in listening to the verbal banter of the trio. (And, of course, we love skewering Erwin.)

Yesterday was a rare day. For the first time in a long time (And we're talking months here) the trio agreed on one particular topic. It was a red-letter day, and one certainly worth noting on the calender. Also, it proved that Erwin's not unhinged, he's just simply wrong on a great many things. HT to Generalissimo Duane for the transcript:

HH: All right. Now I've got to switch, gentlemen. I've got to switch to the just war doctrine. Professor Bainbridge has been writing that Israel's response to the Hezbollah terrorist attack upon their soldiers, kidnapping two, killing eight in the rocket attacks, indiscriminate against civilians, is disproportionate, and I want to summarize here and be fair to Stephen, unjust. Erwin, do you agree with Stephen Bainbridge?

EC: From everything I know, I strongly disagree. We know that Hezbollah went into Israeli territory and kidnapped Israeli soldiers, and killed Israeli soldiers. We know that they're launching hundreds of missiles a day. Israel gets to respond to defend itself. It needs to get a...take out the Hezbollah bases in Lebanon. It can do so by bombing their support lines. They can go in by sending in troops. But so far as I know, Israel's just here protecting itself from a very militant organization bent on destroying Israel.

HH: I think we're coming close to one of those strange occurrances when the three of us agree. John Eastman?

JE: Put this day down on the calendar.

HH: You betcha.

JE: We do agree. In fact...and I've been a little bit out of pocket this week, so the technical details, I'm not quite up to speed on. But my understanding is the technological nature of the missiles that Hezbollah has used implicate much more than Hezbollah, that implicate the Iranian government, and perhaps the Chinese government as well. This is very serious. And Hezbollah is on record as saying they will not stop until Israel is obliterated from that region. I think it is quite far from disproportionate for Israel to be doing what it's doing. In fact, I think they have legal authority to go much further in order to stop this enemy bent on their destruction.

Now that we're done congratulating Erwin on his intelligence in understanding that Israel, in fact, defending itself. In deed, they are doing quite well, and Hezbollah is suffering greatly from their counter-attack. And, of course, we know that Hezbollah is in charge of it's own fate at this point: Return the soldiers, end the attacks, allow the Lebanese military to come to the border as a "buffer" for both sides, and all the Israeli attacks will end.

Good for Erwin. Every dog has his day, and Erwin had his two minutes. The day was ruined unfortunately at the beginning of the interview with this exchange: (And yes, I'll be jumping in from time to time)

HH: I'm joined now by Erwin Chemerinsky, professor of law at Duke University Law School, John Eastman, my colleague, professor of law at Chapman University Law School. John from the right, Erwin from the left. We've got to cover the just war theory as applied to Israel's response to the Lebanon terror attacks mounted by Hezbollah. But first, Erwin, you're of counsel to Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame.

EC: I am. I'm co-counsel in their lawsuit against Dick Cheney, Lewis Libby and Karl Rove. It was filed last Thursday in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

HH: Please tell me you're getting paid, Erwin.

EC: I'm not. I'm doing this pro bono.

HH: Unbelievable. Now Erwin, of course it's all nonsense, and Joe Wilson...what are you going to do when he gets on the stand and people try and reconcile his eight different versions of what he said and did?

EC: Oh, I don't think there's eight different versions. I think we have an extremely strong case. Here's what we all know at this point. Joseph Wilson wrote an op-ed in the New York Times, in which he showed that there were falsehoods in President Bush's State of the Union address. As a result of that, the Vice President, his top aide, Lewis Libby, and the President's key political advisor, Karl Rove, decided to reveal that Valerie Plame was a secret CIA operative. They did so by telling journalists like Robert Novak this, and was reported by Robert Novak in a column published three weeks ago Friday. You know, I've heard you and John say so many times that those who release classified information commit treason. The first President Bush said there's nothing more despicable than revealing the identity of a secret CIA agent. I think you should share my outrage here, and I think both of you should volunteer, along with me, to represent Valerie Plame Wilson and Joseph Wilson.

Stop. LMAO ... Did he seriously just ask two of the nation's finest legal minds to go in with him on a case that has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese? This case is so bad, in terms of arguable merits, that the only thing that compares is southern Lebanon right now. And John and Hugh are about to kill this case with simple, direct facts and logic.

HH: I'll let John respond in just one second. But has Joe Wilson contradicted himself as to his public accounts of what happened?

JE: He has, and it's pretty well documented, both before the 9/11 Commission and in House representatives' investigation into this, that his official report was distinctly different from what he published in the New York Times.

HH: Erwin, do you agree with that?

EC: I do not agree with that at all. I think his official report was he found no evidence that Iraq was trying to purchase uranium from Africa.

OK, which "official" report is he referring to. His intial report to the Congress stated that there was evidence to show that Saddam Hussein had tried to open up the doors to buying enriched uranium from Niger. Niger produces only one, serious tradeable commodity and that's enriched uranium. Since then, his story has changed time and again. And he keeps playing the victim card every time its changed to remind people of how "damaged" his wife's reputation is, and the lie that they were in any serious danger, and the supposed, non-existent leak of her was used to "discredi" him because he didn't tow the party line.

HH: Did the 9/11 Commission find differently?

JE: It did.

HH: Erwin?

EC: I don't...I would have to go back, to be honest, and look at what the 9/11 Commission found.

HH: You haven't looked at that yet???

EC: I read it, but I sure didn't look at this aspect of it, since...

HH: And you took the case???

EC: Oh, this has nothing to do with the case. You know, even if everything Joseph Wilson said was wrong, and as far as I know it was quite true, it still was completely inappropriate to reveal that his wife was a secret CIA agent, solely for retaliation, because they didn't like what he was saying.

THEY--those named in the case--didn't reveal her at all. Her husband did so a full-year-plus before Robert Novak even mentioned her. Her friends knew of her, and so did acquaintances. THIS FAMILY made NO SECRET about what Valerie did for a living. And "secret?" Is Erwin serious? She was no more secret than any other analyst at the CIA is. She was a low-level one, at that, and a low-security clearance analyst to boot. She was not a covert operative. Her NOC status was utilized abroad, and had expired shortly before Robert Novak's column.

HH: John Eastman...

EC: If you disagree with him, reveal what he's saying is wrong. Attack him. But don't reveal that his wife's a secret agent for the CIA.

She wasn't secret. And attacking Joe Wilson is easy as pie. He was such an ineffectual diplomat and foreign service agent to begin with, and the toughest thing he probably ever had to do was sign for packages. In all seriousness, this sounds more like a schoolyard fight between two sets of kids. The first ones--the Wilsons--are throwing a temper-tantrum because the big kids--the Bush administration--aren't buying their garbage. Careful, their next tactics might be to hold their breath until we cave in to them.

HH: John Eastman, Joe Wilson's a liar.

JE: Well, he is, and two, it wasn't just for mere retaliation purposes. Valerie Plame, at the time, was understood to be the person who was responsible, or at least involved, in the decision to send Joe Wilson over to Niger to look at this. The administration was trying to figure out how this guy, and how a cabal in the CIA who were so obviously anti-administration position, could have played such a pivotal role in trying to undercut the administration's policies. I think it was perfectly fair game for the administration to say we've got somebody over in CIA who's partly responsible for this, and to disclose to the press that connection, so we have the full story.

EC: I want to respond.

JE: Now the complaint that Erwin...

HH: Of course, Erwin. I'll let you. Go ahead.

JE: Yeah, the complaint that Erwin has filed makes no allegation that any of the disclosures were done knowing that Valerie Plame was a classified CIA operative, other than just an employee over there. And I think that's pretty important.

HH: Go ahead, Erwin.

EC: I apologize for interrupting. I thought that John was done. John, if you're going to use strong languages like liar, you should be sure what you're saying is accurate. And in this instance, the CIA verified that Joseph Wilson was not sent because of any suggestion, or even with the knowledge of Valerie Plame Wilson. She had absolutely nothing to do with why Joseph Wilson was sent to Africa and to Iraq to see whether or not there was the purchasing of uranium. And the allegation of the complaint is that her status as a secret CIA operative was private, that here what you had was public disclosure of private facts. You had it as retaliation for free speech, and I think that states many claims under the Constitution under tort law.

HH: All right. Now I want to switch...

JE: Hang on. Let me go back, because that's not what I said, Erwin. I said at the time, there was some indication that Valerie Plame may have been involved in the decision to send Joe Wilson over. She was his wife, and she was working at the CIA. It was that that made it fair game to discuss, so we get the full story of how this thing came to be, and what his bias in the reporting might be, so that we can understand the veracity of it, and whether he is trying to skew what he learned because of an animosity toward the administration. That's perfectly fair game, and it is routine politics in Washington. And to make a federal case out of it is, I think, bordering on frivolous. And beyond that, it's...I think it's fairly clearly going to get dismissed on various immunity grounds.

It should be dismissed on a lack of merit alone. If not fir that, possibly for, as John points out, the various immunity grouds when it comes to someone in Washington, DC, and one that has access to information that is deemed "classified." This case, quite simply, is Valerie and Joe Wilson all shades of ticked off because through the full grand jury investigation, the best they managed to get was a guy named "Scooter." They made the allegation that someone in the administration leaked the name of his wife to the press. (Nevermind the fact that John Kerry outed an undercover agent while he spoke on the floor of the Senate.) And do they have someone indicted on that charge? That they revealed the name of a clssified operative?

No, they think they caught "Scooter" in a lie. That case is going to be fun, but it'll be even more fun watching Erwin suffer through this case. IF this case makes it to a judge that will hear it, and IF it goes forward, I do hope Erwin doesn't break out the bubbly too soon. This case is a dead-dog, and he has no strengths--true strengths--within the Wilson's lies to compensate for the facts that are going to be laid out.

Publius II

Disproportionate My @$$

I am truly getting sick of hearing this sort of nonsense in the press. And I am especially disgusted hearing such a thing come out of the collective mouths of EU ministers:

EU foreign ministers have urged Israel "not to resort to disproportionate action" when defending itself against Hezbollah attacks, while member states are evacuating their own nationals.

Foreign ministers, meeting on Monday in Brussels, were briefed by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana following a Sunday trip to assess the escalating violence in Lebanon.

EU ministers agreed on a statement which was as similar as possible to a text adopted by G8 leaders in St Petersburg over the weekend in order to create an "international front to press Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah," Dutch foreign minister Bernard Bot said. ...

The "EU recognises Israel’s legitimate right to self-defence, but it urges Israel to exercise utmost restraint and not to resort to disproportionate action,” the statement adds.

According to EU observers, the passage of the declaration on Israeli actions was notably weaker than earlier statements issued by the current Finnish EU presidency last week, which had called Israeli violence "disproportionate."

An Israeli diplomat in Brussels said that Israel disliked this wording, asking: "What do people expect Israel to do?" in face of the "indiscriminate terror" by Hezbollah rocket attacks.

EU ministers also recalled "the need for the Lebanese state to restore its sovereignty over the whole of its national territory and to do its utmost to prevent Hezbollah attacks."

I fail to see or to grasp the EU's side in all of this. Was it disproportionate in World War II as nation after nation was gobbled up by Hitler's advancing blitzkrieg? What about France's notable foray into French Indochina (Vietnam, for the Steeler's fan), or their recent excursion to put down riots in the Ivory Coast. I seem to recall French troops firing on unarmed civilians there (the only sort of war the French would never surrender in is one in which they alone are the armed party).

Israel does have a right to defend itself. I am happy to see the EU recognize at least that aspect of this war. However, they would prefer Israel use some restraint. What? Has the EU been watching CNN's "Situation Room?" Have they been buying the lines coming from Hezbollah that Israel is simply out to kill innocent people? Or, do they buy the lies and the chicanery of Iranian President< Mahmoud Amadinejad that Israel is acting Nazi-esque in their war?

I find it utterly appalling that the EU would act like this. And mostly my disgust comes from the fact that the statement "disproportionate action" in and of itself is hypocritical, and intellectually dishonest. It is captious for them to decry Israel when they full well that if that were to happen to them they would respond in like kid; that is, with the full measure of force THEY felt was necessary, and they would not be discussing the use of such force with the world. and that also goes towards the dishonesty they are showing to the world, as a whole, in demanding that Israel show some restraint.

Israel is showing restraint. We can see that alone in the number of dead thus far. Israel, technically, has not even started rolling yet. And in the puff-piece done by CNN Tuesday (linked above) we can clearly see that Hezbollah is not simply capable of terrorism, but acting, as well. It is well-known in the region, and throughout the world, that Hezbollah, Hamas,, al-Qaeda, and other Middle Eastern terror groups place their men, their weapons, and their equipment in civilian areas. For crying out loud, terror groups have been using human shields for years. Al-Qaeda has been using them effectively for the past three years in Iraq.

To the EU I say "Butt out of the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict." Let Israel do what it has to in dealing with Hezbollah. And I dislike the idea as part of the cease-fire offer of having the Lebanese military in the border region. If Lebanon cannot reign in Hezbollah, then Hezbollah must have deeper access to the Lebanese government than just their parliament. It is a distinct possibility that in addition to Hezbollah having its tentacles intertwined within the government and the military, Assad's intelligence service is still there, as well. That alone adds extra fuel to the fire.

The world needs to shut up and either support Israel, or sit on their hands. Enough is enough of these European bureaucrats and them sticking their nose in places where it does not belong. And because no other nation is willing to undertake the dismantling of Hezbollah, I would say to sit back and enjoy this. Either Hezbollah goes, or Israel will not stop until they are gone. There is simply no other way.

Oh yes. The "shut up" is also extended to the likes of Pat Buchanan, George Will, and other conservatives that dislike anything having to do with this war, or ours. Let us do what we need to do. Let the Israelis do what they need to do. This has nothing to do with any stupid paper written by a conservative. Quit using the term "neo-con" because its clear that despite their intelligence, they have no clue with the term means, where it originated, and when it originated. The term is older than myself and Thomas put together. And yet, this is what our side is referred to now. Sheesh, tell the paleo-conservatives its time for them to lie down and let the sane adults engage in this.


Wednesday, July 19, 2006

CNN Has Chosen Its Side

This was deplorable. As if it were not bad enough that Eason Jordan, former CNN news executive, admitted to covering up the atrocities of Saddam Hussein in 2003. And, it obviously was not bad enough to have the same Eason Jordan accuse our troops of committing war crimes--that being the deliberate targeting, torture, and killing of journalists. No, now CNN has decided to act as the LA Times did a while back when Barbara Demick wrote the puff piece on North Korea. CNN, yesterday morning, decided to to shill for Hezbollah. I have heard this over and over today, and I now present the transcript for those that have not yet heard this disgusting pap.

BLITZER: For the past five days, six days that is, Israeli raids have targeted the southern suburbs of Beirut where Hezbollah has had its heartland of support. Hezbollah has sealed off the worst hit areas and made it nearly impossible to discover exactly what's been hit. The Israelis say they're targeting Hezbollah military and Hezbollah leadership. Today a Hezbollah media representative and a Hezbollah security team took CNN's Nic Robertson on a very brief tour of the damage. Let's go back to Beirut. Once again Nic Robertson is standing by with this exclusive report -- Nic.

ROBERTSON: Well, Wolf, just in the last couple of minutes we did hear a distant thud. It sounded like a bomb going off in the distance. Not as loud as those two huge explosions we heard about 20 minutes ago. We went in to those southern suburbs of Beirut with that media representative from Hezbollah. They haven't let western reporters into some parts of that very, very, very carefully controlled southern suburbs.They have people going around there on motor scooters stopping you operating freely in that area. They have blockades set up on some of the roads. We had a media representative from Hezbollah. We had security representatives around him, informing him about where and when there might be Israeli aircraft coming over. But they took us in because they wanted to show us what was being damaged. What they wanted to tell us was -- and show us was how the civilian infrastructure in that area was being damaged.


ROBERTSON: Where are we going now?

HUSSEIN NABULSI, HEZBOLLAH PRESS OFFICER: Now we are moving to where Israeli jet fighters bombed what it's called Hezbollah headquarters. I'm going to show you on the ground that this is -- these are buildings inhabited by civilians, innocent civilians.

ROBERTSON: We're moving around very quickly here I notice. Are you concerned that there could be strikes at any time?

NABULSI: You never know when Israeli jet fighters come and hit any target in this area. So now we are objected to any fire from Israel. ROBERTSON: It could come down right here at any moment...

NABULSI: Right now. Right here. There's now jet fighters in the sky.

ROBERTSON: There's jets in the sky right now.

NABULSI: Exactly, so you never know when they hit this area.

ROBERTSON: What happened here?

NABULSI: This is one of the bombs that fell and look what happened to this building, which is only like -- inhabited by innocent civilians living there. People who are just working like everybody else. No military bases. Nothing. (inaudible) aircraft fire, just building, people living there.

ROBERTSON: How many people were killed and injured in this particular attack here?

NABULSI: Thank God people evacuated these buildings early and luckily no one was killed in this -- in such attacks. But I want to tell you something. Where is the international community? Where is the Security Council? Where is the United Nations? Where is the whole world? We are under fire.

ROBERTSON: You're really worried about another strike here right now, yes?

NABULSI: Of course. Of course.

ROBERTSON: How dangerous is it in this area at the moment?

NABULSI: It is very, very dangerous. We are now the most dangerous place, the most dangerous moment.

ROBERTSON: In civilian housing. Well what was here?

NABULSI: Just -- look. Shoot. Innocent civilians. Buildings. Look at this building. Is it a military base? Is it a military base or just civilians living in this building?


ROBERTSON: You know, in all that time we were there, which was a very, very brief period, we didn't see any evidence of any military equipment. We didn't go into the buildings. We didn't search underneath the rubble, but some of the buildings were really torn up. There was a lot of debris hanging out of broken -- the sides of buildings, a lot of debris strewn across the roads. And in all of that we didn't see any evidence of military infrastructure or anything like that. Again, though, Wolf, I have to say it was a very, very brief and swift tour escorted by Hezbollah -- Wolf.

BLITZER: (inaudible) Israeli officials point out that Hezbollah often would put their military equipment in heavily civilian populated areas, but you didn't have a chance to really inspect that?

ROBERTSON: We didn't, Wolf. And I think that's one of the huge difficulties of anyone that wants to un-take Hezbollah's military capability. That it is an organization that's grown out of the people. It is -- it doesn't have huge formal bases where you can target obvious stockpiles and obvious barracks such as the Lebanese army might have. And you know without picking through the debris, without going into the -- some of the bombed out crated basements of buildings, we wouldn't get a good assessment of what was there. You know what you can see though is that there are a huge number of civilians living right there, right where the bombs are coming down, right in those buildings that are collapsed and broken in the streets -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Nic Robertson, one of the most courageous television journalists in the business today. Nic, be careful over there. Thanks very much for that exclusive report.

Courageous? With a Hezbollah propaganda officer and a Hezbollah "security detail?" Is Wolf Blitzer serious?

And the very idea that an American news agency, who watched 9/11 occur--a direct attack on our nation--and it has decided to cast its lot with the terrorists that started this war with Israel.

Hezbollah attacked their IDF post, killed eight IDF soldiers, and kidnapped two others. That was an act of war; a direct provocation, and a direct challenge via a proxy of Syria and Iran. Yes, both of these nations are involved in this war, which is now going into its second week.

And Hezbollah crying the crocodile tears does not make me feel sorry for them at all. They brought this on themselves. They always do, then immediately play the victim card when Israel begins to really kick their @$$. This time Israel is not backing down. In fact, they have turned up the heat, again. But, there was one thing that I caught at the end of the back-and-forth with Wolf Blitzer that really irritated me.

BLITZER: (inaudible) Israeli officials point out that Hezbollah often would put their military equipment in heavily civilian populated areas, but you didn't have a chance to really inspect that?

ROBERTSON: We didn't, Wolf. And I think that's one of the huge difficulties of anyone that wants to un-take Hezbollah's military capability. That it is an organization that's grown out of the people. It is -- it doesn't have huge formal bases where you can target obvious stockpiles and obvious barracks such as the Lebanese army might have.

Would Robertson be willing to equate al-Qaeda the same way? How about Islamic Jihad, or the PLF? The PLO, even?

When our own media services begin to place enemy propaganda on our TVs, in our newspapers, and on the radio, we have to ask whether or not they have been corrupted by their identification with the world. That being, the MSM believes they are "citizens of the world," and they they alone are completely unbiased. Yet here we have another war, and nothing but bias in favor of a terrorists organization. And not just ANY terrorist organization, but one that has a long history of not only attacking Israel, but also the United States:

* Bombing of Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia killing 19 U.S. servicemen (1996)
* Bombing of Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires killing 96 (1994)
* Bombing of Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires killing 29 (1992)
* Abduction, torture and death of CIA Station Chief in Lebanon (1985)
* Hijacking of TWA Flight 847 killing one U.S. Navy diver (1985)
* Bombing outside U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut killing 24 (1984)
* Car bombing of U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut killing 241 U.S. servicemen (1983)
*Car bombing of U.S. Embassy in Beirut killing 63 people, including 17 Americans (1983)

Yet, CNN decides to support them, and give them a mouthpiece in America for their lies, their deceit, and their evil.

In closing, remember that CNN is not the only MSM outlet who shills for terrorists. The New York Times cast itself into the camp of the enmy a long time ago. (BTW, the top photo in the collage was the focus of a piece I put together on Monday morning.)

Our media is not to be trusted. They cannot be trusted again. Their perfidity in the past few months has lent to this unforgivable act. I urge people to tell CNN what they think, and turn the damn network off--once and for all.


The Captain Is On Deck: Israel On Our Minds

Captain Ed Morrissey, blogger extraordinaire, has two interesting stories regarding Israel today. The first, reported just a little while ago involves Israel's version of "shock and awe."

IAF fighter jets dropped over 20 tons in bombs late Wednesday night on a Hizbullah bunker, possibly the hiding place of the group's leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, in the Bourj al-Barajneh refugee camp in southeast Beirut. It was still unclear who was in the bunker at the time and what their fate was, but IDF sources said the bunker was totally destroyed and that all that was left was a crater.

The IDF obtained intelligence information late Wednesday night that Hizbullah leaders possibly including Nasrallah had taken refuge inside the bunker. A wave of aircraft immediately took to the air and dropped 23 tons of explosives on the bunker.

IDF sources would not confirm that Nasrallah was in the bunker at the time, but said that high-ranking Hizbullah leaders were inside, and that it appeared that the attack was successful.

Hizbullah has said none of its "leaders or members" died in the IAF strike.

"The truth is that the building targeted by the enemy warplanes with 23 tons of explosives is just a building under construction to be a mosque for prayers," said the statement, issued on the group's Al-Manar TV and faxed to The Associated Press.

"It seems that the enemy wants to cover up its military and security failures with lies and claims of imaginary achievements," it said.

The IDF said the strike occurred between 8 and 9 pm but refused to give further details. Reporters in Beirut said they heard a huge explosion around 8:30 p.m.

Hizbullah has a headquarters compound in Bourj al-Barajneh that is off limits to the Lebanese police and army, so security officials could not confirm the strike.

FOX News has reported that al-Manar--the Hezbollah propaganda wing--has reported that no Hezbollah leaders were killed or injured in the raid. If this were true, then where are the leaders--especially Nasrallah--denouncing the attack. As for the excuse that this was a mosque under construction, I don't buy it. Mosques are hardly reinforced against attacks, unless the Islamofascists are actually learning that they can't hide in them.

The second story from Captain Ed lends more to the idea that Syria and Iran are very much involved in Lebanon, and more importantly, they are neck deep in the Israeli/Hezbollah war. From YNET News:

Although Hizbullah has suffered a harsh blow from Israeli air force strikes which took out a good percentage of their available weapons, Syria was continuing to smuggle arms into Lebanon to rearm the group, IDF Operations Branch Head Major General Gadi Eisenkot said during a press briefing Tuesday.

Thus far, the IAF managed to intercept a number of trucks transporting rockets from Syria to Hizbullah, including trucks laden with the 220mm-diameter rockets with warheads like the one that hit the Haifa train depot Monday, claiming eight lives. Maj.-Gen. Eisenkot said he would be very surprised if official elements in Syria were unaware of these transports.

“These are rockets that belong to the Syrian army. You can’t find them in the Damascus market, and the Syrian government is responsible for this smuggling,” Eisenkot said, but stressed, “We are not operating against Syria or the Lebanese army.”

During the briefing, Maj.-Gen. Eisenkot said the IDF has hit over 1,000 targets, 180 of them Katyusha and rocket storage sites and 350 launch sites. Over 250 missile strikes were carried out with the aim of blocking traffic arteries, and 200 buildings used by Hizbullah were hit. According to Eisenkot, Israel’s offensive would continue without time limitations

I would consider these actions an act of war, and I hope Israel sees it as such as well. To turn a blind eye to Syria's involvement in this conflict is a serious mistake, and one that might be a misstep of great proportions. But, Iran is involved, as well, and Israel can't forget that.

Hundreds of Iranian Revolutionary Guard personnel are on the ground in Lebanon fighting Israel, security sources say.
"I have no doubt whatsoever that they are there and operating some of the equipment," an Arab diplomatic source told The New York Sun yesterday.

Another foreign source, based in Washington, said the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps contingent in Lebanon is based in Beirut and in the Bekaa Valley. He said the troops usually number a few dozen, but that the size of the force increased in connection with the hostilities that have broken out between Israel and Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, over the past week.

The sources said the Iranians had directly operated a radar-guided C–802 missile that Iran acquired from Communist China and that hit an Israeli navy missile boat off the coast of Lebanon on Friday, killing four Israeli seamen.

"This was a direct message to the Israelis that we are fighting the Iranians here," the Arab diplomatic source said.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard's mission in Lebanon includes keeping custody of Zalzal missiles and drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles. A report by an Israel-based research group, the Intelligence & Terrorism Information Center, identifies the units of Iran's Revolutionary Guard "deployed and active in Lebanon" as the "Al-Quds Force." The Lebanon-based Iranian force "provides military guidance and support for terrorist attacks against Israel," the report says.

Again, can these people spell "a-c-t o-f w-a-r"? Obviously Syria and Iran weren't taught spelling in school. And it's pretty clear that they don't care what is and isn't an act of war. What these two nations are doing is exactly that. It's time for Israel to really take the gloves off, and hit both nations with a campaign of "shock and awe" that NO ONE has ever seen.

Publius II

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Snow Vs. Thomas: An Unhinged "Grudge Match"

This exchange was hilarious. It happened this morning at the daily White House press briefing, and the "Wicked Witch" of the Media was at her unhinged best. For those that have been following the Israeli/Hezbollah War, you'll delight in Helen Thomas' uneducated, and ill-informed view, which Tony Snow scathingly referred to as the "Hezbollah View," but you'll see what Tony Snow brought to the White House.

For those that can't watch it via the link above, I have located a transcript of the exchange, which is cited below:

Helen. ...

Q The United States is not that helpless. It could have stopped the bombardment of Lebanon. We have that much control with the Israelis.

MR. SNOW: I don't think so, Helen.

Q We have gone for collective punishment against all of Lebanon and Palestine.

MR. SNOW: What's interesting, Helen --

Q And this is what's happening, and that's the perception of the United States.

MR. SNOW: Well, thank you for the Hezbollah view, but I would encourage you --

Q Nobody is accepting your explanation. What is restraint, a call for restraint?

MR. SNOW: Well, I'll tell you, what's interesting, Helen, is people have. The G8 was completely united on this. And as you know, when it comes to issues of --

Q And we stopped a cease-fire -- why?

MR. SNOW: We didn't stop a cease-fire. I'll tell you what --

Q We vetoed --

MR. SNOW: We didn't even veto. Please get your facts right. What happened was that the G8 countries made a pretty clear determination that the guilty party here was Hezbollah. You cannot have a cease-fire when you've got the leader of Hezbollah going on his television saying that he perceives total war -- he's declaring total war. When they are firing rockets indiscriminately --

Q We had the United Nations --

MR. SNOW: Please let me finish. I know this is great entertainment, but I want to finish the answer. The point here is they're firing rockets indiscriminately into civilian areas. The Israelis are responding as they see fit. You will note the countries that disagree with the --

Q -- bombardment of a whole country --

MR. SNOW: -- that disagree with the government of Israel in terms of its general approach on Palestine, many of our European allies agree that Israel has the right to defend itself, that the government of Lebanon has the right to control all its territory, that Hezbollah is responsible and that those who support it also bear responsibility. There is no daylight between the United States and all the allies on this. They all agreed on it. This was not difficult --

Q At that point, why did we veto a cease-fire?

MR. SNOW: We didn't veto a cease-fire.

Q Yes, we did.

MR. SNOW: No, we didn't. There was -- there was no cease-fire. I'm sorry --

Q Wasn't there a resolution?


Q At the U.N.?

MR. SNOW: No -- no. You know what you've -- I see what you -- what happened was that there was conversation about "a cease-fire" that was picked up by some of the microphones when some colorful language made its way into the airwaves yesterday. And the President was continuing a conversation he'd had earlier with Prime Minister Tony Blair about staging. Would we like a cease-fire? You bet, absolutely. We would love to see a cease-fire. But the way you stage is that you make sure that the people who started this fight -- Hezbollah -- take their responsibility --

Q There was no veto at the U.N.?

MR. SNOW: No, there hasn't been a resolution at the VN -- U.N., whatever it is. (Laughter.) There hasn't been -- I was in Germany too long. There's been no resolution at the U.N.

Q Why aren't we proposing a truce, no matter who is to blame? At least stop the killing.

MR. SNOW: Because it wouldn't stop the killing. What it would do is it would say to the killers, you win.

Q Might save lives.

MR. SNOW: No, I don't think so. And I'm glad you raised this. You do not want to engage in a cease-fire that has a practical -- when you say to the Israelis, you guys just stop firing, when you have Hezbollah saying, we're going to wage total war, because Hezbollah would read that as vindication of its tactics, and the idea that if you get the right sort of videos on television, and you get the right things going on, you can allow them to behave with impunity. Even though they are weakening the sovereign government of Lebanon, they are acting independently; even though they have --

Q And bombarding Lebanon --

MR. SNOW: Even though they have received --

Q -- wipes out infrastructure.

MR. SNOW: All right, this is hectoring now.

Irritating would be more like it Mr. Snow, because that's exactly what that unhinged old bat is. She may think she's god, but she's not even close. She's been at this too long, and lost too much of her mind to be worth anything than a poor man's comedic sketch role. If you haven't been able to see this, find a site that has it. It is hilarious to see just how unperturbed, unhinged, and completely oblivious the Left's propaganda service has become.

Publius II

Israel: Almost Finished With Hezbollah

Yes, that was the comments from the IDF today in the Jerusalem Post:

IAF planes on Tuesday night showered southern Lebanon with flyers making fun of Hizbullah head Hassan Nasrallah and calling on him to come out of hiding.

"Where are you hiding?" the flyers read in a mocking tone.

Earlier Tuesday, The Jerusalem Post learned that 40 to 50 percent of Hizbullah's military capability has been destroyed in the six days of the IDF counter-attack following last Wednesday's Hizbullah raid in northern Israel.

The IDF, it is understood, believes it needs at least another week or so to achieve its military goals in terms of removing Hizbullah's capacity to threaten Israel.

The IDF further believes, it is understood, that it will be given at least that long to continue its actions, in light of the G8 nations' essential support for Israel and those nations' branding Hizbullah and Hamas as being responsible for the current escalation.

Operations in Lebanon, the Post has learned, are costing Israel NIS 50-100 million a day.

The IAF reported that it hit 52 targets in Lebanon during Tuesday.

Only Tuesday afternoon, IAF aircraft attacked two weapons-filled trucks parked on the coastal road in the town of Byblos, north of Beirut. They also hit two similar trucks on the narrow mountain road between Beirut and Syria, which has become the main route to Damascus since the air attacks made the highway unusable.

The IAF has recently begun targeting vehicles in Lebanon it suspects of transporting missiles for Hizbullah.

Television showed pictures of one truck on fire and another damaged on the mountain road. One driver was reported wounded.

In other attacks Tuesday, IAF jets carried out two raids on southern Beirut - where Hizbullah is known to occupy many buildings - and the eastern city of Baalbek.

Talk about a "six-day" war. Hezbollah is almost finished in Lebanon, at least when it comes to rockets hitting Israel. One more week--a total of fourteen days--and Israel is all done. This has to bring a smile to many faces, and that includes our own. The president knows Israel is doing the world a favor, as do the others at the G-8 conference. Hezbollah is not excused from being targeted in this War on Terror; whether it is ours, or Israel as they defend themselves.

Hopefully this serves as a warning to others in the region--namely Iran and Syria--that they aren't to be trifled with. When you play games like this with Israel, you're playing with fire, and they have learned what it feels like to truly be burned.

Publius II

Monday, July 17, 2006

Israel Updates: Taking Out Missiles And Crossing Into Lebanon On The Ground

Yes, the fighting is still ongoing, and still quite frustrating to a few. The president, while speaking briefly and candidly with tony Blair at the G-8 summit surmised the current situation as this:

"What they need to do it to get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit."

And yes, the MSM is making a hullabloo about the expletive dropped by the president. Of course this was said into a live microphone that Prime Minister Blair did not notice until after the president had said it. It was a gaffe, but an important one that shows what the president is going through right now. He is naturally concerned that the fighting over there could cause problems for the region. But I am sure he still remains steadfast in his support of Israel to do what it must to protect itself.

Which leads us to news report number one from Breitbart:

An Israeli airstrike in Lebanon on Monday destroyed at least one long- range Iranian missile capable of hitting Tel Aviv, military officials said.

Israeli aircraft targeted a truck carrying the weapons before they could be launched, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of military regulations. The force of the blast sent at least one missile flying into the air, but it fell nearby.

During nearly a week of fighting, Hezbollah militants have fired missiles up to 25 miles into Israel. But officials have raised concerns the guerrilla group could strike Tel Aviv, about 80 miles south of the border with Lebanon.

We already have enough rumors floating around that either Hezbollah is using Iranian weaponry, or that Iranian Revolutionary Guards are manning these missile and rocket emplacements. If Iran is manning these weapons, then Hell is sure to follow Israel when they go into Lebanon, which leads us to story number two from the Jerusalem Post:

A government spokesman said Monday afternoon that IDF ground forces had briefly entered southern Lebanon to target Hizbullah bases along the border in order to push the terrorist group out of rocket-firing range.

Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz declared that the IDF currently had much better alternatives than to launch a major ground incursion into Lebanon.

And, no one can blame Israel for not wanting to mount a major ground offensive into Lebanon. It would not be easy, and the fighting is sure to reach fever-pitch proportions quickly. But, the Israelis acknowledge that they cannot simply rely on air power and "push-button" warfare. They will need to lead certain excursions into Lebanon to deal with Hezbollah. Their air supremacy is guaranteed as Lebanon--Hezbollah specifically--has no air force to speak of. And artillary barrages, rocket attacks,a nd missile attacks cannot be precisely guided the way that an IDF strike team can be. It is literally the difference between using a scalpel over a chain-saw for surgery.

Kevin McCullough at TownHall Blogs has this little tidbit today:

A friend and Pentagon source for my show tipped me over the weekend to the main 10 signs to look for that Israel is about to launch a ground invasion into Lebanon. Boy do these make sense...

--Bulldozers went forward to clear mines. Pulled back. Already small numbers of ground forces went into Lebanon and returned. This is called route reconnaissance and engineers making certain the coming attack is organized correctly.

--A reserve division was called up over the weekend. This is a sign of a substantial operation.

--Shaping the battlefield: It may be that the air campaign is not complete which explains delay in ground attack.

--Israel looking for longer-range missiles than already seen. Fear is that Hezbollah will attack Tel Aviv with long-range missiles once Israel attacks. Thus, the special forces are frantically looking for those missiles and then targeting with fighters.

--Saudis and Egyptians are holding Hezbollah responsible. G8 statement wasn’t hostile to Israel. UN desperate for a solution.

--Fighting continues.

--Blockade in place.

--US seems slow in removing citizens from Beirut. Team that arrived yesterday is working details out of US Embassy and Marine Expeditionary Unit should be off shore soon – but out of sight for protection.

--Politically, Olmert has the support to attack and if not he would face serious problems in Knesset.

Bottom line: Israel taking more time to deploy ground forces, allow air campaign to shape battlefield.

My brother-in-law, soon to be Navy pilot bad boy killiing terrorists from the skies, asked me over the weekend my thoughts on Israel and the crisis.

My easy response was... ARM THEM TO THE TEETH and GET OF THEIR WAY.

He agreed.

Indeed. It is clear from the minor incursions into Lebanon that the Israelis are preparing for some sort of ground offensive. And Israeli planes can do their best to make sure the terrorists do not bolt for Syria the same way Palestinians bolted out of Gaza shortly after this started. The Palestinians blew a hole in the Egyptian barrier separating Egypt from Gaza, and the Palestinians were fleeing under the invasion of Israel into Gaza. Israel does not want to do that with Hezbollah, and allow those animals to go to ground in Syria. If they do, then Israel will have lost the chance to finish them off. This is why the bridges were blown up and the airport was taken out. With the ports blockaded, no ships are leaving for any destination. (And this is no more evident than the fact that Hezbollah has been trying to his Israeli ships in the ports with rockets rather than attacking them with gunboats.)

Israel literally has Hezbollah over a barrel. And there are talks of a possible cease-fire on Israel's part, as reported by the New York Sun.

(Hat-Tip: Captain Ed Morrissey)

Israel would agree to a cease-fire in its six-day-old offensive against Hezbollah if the Lebanese guerrillas withdraw from the border area with Israel and release two captured Israeli soldiers, a senior official said Monday.

The official, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the diplomacy, said Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had conveyed Israel's position to Italy's prime minister, who is trying to broker a cease-fire deal.

Israel had previously demanded the full dismantling of Hezbollah as a condition for ending hostilities. However, the senior official said Israel would agree to Hezbollah merely leaving the border area - with the Lebanese army taking its place.

These are the stated conditions to grant a cease-fire. I know that many in Israel, and those abroad (ourselves included), would love nothing more than to watch Hezbollah blow off this offer, and be destroyed by Israel. However, this step does show that Prime Minister Olmert has not abandoned the idea of diplomacy. However, this should also serve as a reminder to the world that if Hezbollah refuses this offer, they can expect more of the same. And God help them if those Israeli soldiers are killed by Hezbollah. I doubt that Israel will be all that merciful in response.


The Name Of The Enemy: The New York Times

I do not make this statement lightly. Not after watching Michelle Malkin's Vent or reading the following post from Little Green Footballs:

New York Times photographer Joao Silva was right there in the room as a member of Muqtada al-Sadr’s “Mahdi Army” tried to kill American troops: The New York Times - New York Region - Slide Show - Slide Show: Memorable Photographs.

Below that caption is a photograph of a member of the al-Sadr militia preparing to fire a Dragunov SVD Soviet-made sniper's rifle. And this was the caption below the picture, penned by the New York Times:

A sniper loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada al Sadr fires towards U.S. positions in the cemetery in Najaf, Iraq.

Michele McNally: “Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage.”

Incredible courage. That is how these morons describe what their reporters are doing. This photo journalist was there, during the fighting in Najaf, and he was amidst our enemy. As if that were not enough, the Times is pimping a new book by him:

Here’s a site where New York Times photographer Joao Silva is hawking a book about his uncomfortably close friendships with people who want to kill your neighbors, your sons, and your daughters: In the Company of God by award-winning New York Times photographer, Joao Silva.

In the Company of God is a photographic compilation that portrays Iraqi Shi’a Muslims in a period of occupation and transition. This photographic body of work, recorded over twelve months, richly captures the Shi’as’ intense commitment to their faith and their indomitable spirit of sacrifice.

About the pictures: The pictures in this book are not displayed in a chronological order but rather in a manner that best illustrates a narrative about faith, sacrifice, war and martyrdom.

They were taken while on assignment for The New York Times, from July 30 to November 3, 2003, from January 16 till April 1, 2004, from June16 until August 30, 2004, and again from January 18, 2005 until March 31, 2005.

Propaganda. That is what this is. While I appreciate the photo journalists and war correspondants going into a hot region, it is deplorable and detestable that these people opt to hang around with our enemy rather than coalition forces. And, of course, should they step the wrong way, and upset our enemy--let us say they end up like so many others and are beheaded or tortured to death--it will be the New York Times and other questionable outlets blaming the United States for the death of a journalist.

And Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom weighs in with a couple of thoughts. (welcome back Jeff after your continued hiatus thanks to the wacky U of A moonbat.)

Looks like the NYT has decided to go with neutrality over objectivity—essentially severing ties with their own country in the service of what they believe is a higher journalistic good: Pulitzer Prizes. ...

... Incredible courage? Well, far be it for me to question such self-congratulatory enthusiasm, but it seems to me that actual “incredible courage” would have entailed, say, Joao Silva getting word to US troops, or bumrushing the sniper and beating him unconscious with a heavy telephoto lens.

Whereas what we’ve witnessed here is the product of (admittedly) dangerous
opportunism in the service of plaudits and cocktail party invites.

But then, I’m still into the whole bourgeois nationalism thing. Just like a Nazi!

They say we should know our enemy on sight, and by name. And while the War on Terror presents us with unique opportunities when it comes to knowing our enemy on sight, the media in this country never seems to let us down. Or, they actually do, and bloggers welcome the continued beatings. The New York Times is a rag; a hack's rag, at that. And now we can add a question as to where their loyalties lie in the real world.

Bill Keller proclaimed on Charlie Rose's show that the New York Times was not neutral in this war:

It does not sit well with me at all. I have a large staff of people who work for me, who are not frivolous about this kind of matter, who are not unAmerican, who are in fact not agnostic or neutral in the War On Terror. We have...when I hear somebody yelling treason in a case like this, I want to have them go over, as I did in May, and visit our Baghdad bureau, where we've got people who put their own lives at risk to keep people informed about what's going on. Not just Americans, we've got a vast network of reporters and support staff who are Iraqis. You know, for us, the War On...

So, how would Mr. Keller spin this photo journalist's idea of neutrality? Do we, as Americans, really need to see this side of our enemy? Do we really need to see them shooting at our troops? Do we need to see them this up close and personal? Do we need to see the war from their point-of-view? The answer, in my opinion, is no, we do not. We do not care about what our enemy does, how they think, or what they think. That is a job for military intelligence, not for an American reporter. And if Mr. Silva is not American, I still do not care because he is bneing paid by an American newspaper for the pictures he takes.

The New York Times, with these photos, are not representing America in a war. They are pimping the enemy for a Pulitzer Prize. Do not get upset and threaten a boycott as they do not work. Cancel your subscriptions, and tell that rag to shape up, or close its doors. America does not need behavior such as this from the New York times. It is more than evident, now, that they are not as neutral as they claim. they are biased, and they are the enemy within.


weight loss product