Abu Wabu

Joseph Lieberman has just returned from Iraq and writes in the WaPo:

In Iraq today we have a responsibility to do what is strategically and morally right for our nation over the long term -- not what appears easier in the short term. The daily scenes of death and destruction are heartbreaking and infuriating. But there is no better strategic and moral alternative for America than standing with the moderate Iraqis until the country is stable and they can take over their security. Rather than engaging in hand-wringing, carping or calls for withdrawal, we must summon the vision, will and courage to take the difficult and decisive steps needed for success and, yes, victory in Iraq. That will greatly advance the cause of moderation and freedom throughout the Middle East and protect our security at home.

Let's compare the two competing approaches to winning in Iraq as Senator Lieberman describes them:

Jack Murtha, other anti-war idiots:
Handwringing, carping, calls for withdrawal.

President Bush, Coalition Forces, Senator Lieberman:
Vision, will, courage.

I appreciate Joe Lieberman's clarity of vision. He has one goal in mind in Iraq: win the war.

In the same vein but with broader reach, here's Jim Geraghty:

Day by day, I am more stunned at how much of our national discourse is looking back and bitching about the past, as opposed to looking forward and figuring out what to do next.

Life is not an endless succession of terrorism, war, natural disasters, scandals, economic instability, extremism, demagoguery and escalating violence. (Although 2006 had its share of those.)

Amongst the tragedies, horrors and setbacks, the world enjoys greater and a wider range of information at its fingertips than ever before. It is a world in which a woman runs Germany, a woman may run France in the coming year, and who knows what 2008 holds for America’s political leadership. Saddam faces the gallows next year, and one of these years – heck, perhaps one of these days - Castro will kick the bucket. Libya is scheduled to destroy the last of its chemical weapons in April. Somehow, Iraq’s economy grew anywhere from 4 to 13 percent amidst all the violence there. Knocking on wood, there have been no successful attacks on American soil since the anthrax mailings, and no successful attacks in Europe since 7/7/05. The high cost of oil for much of the past year spurred more interest and investment in alternative fuels than ever before. Ahmadinejad had a setback in Iran’s most recent elections, suggesting not everyone in Iran is eager for a bloody confrontation. China managed to nudge – or perhaps shove – North Korea back to the bargaining table. And the consensus of the Iraq Study Group that the Middle East will calm down as soon as Israel makes concessions looks a little silly, as Hamas and Fatah are too busy killing each other to consider negotiating with the Israelis.

Then again, the Jets control their own destiny for the NFL playoffs, so maybe I'm just in an unnaturally optimistic mood.

The deathwatch begins. Can't happen soon enough for me. And for all the idiots crying about "perfect procedural justice" and "nurturing hope" for Iraq, well, fuck 'em. It never was any of their business if they couldn't see the righteousness of killing this bastard, who should have been yanked from his hole by a humvee and a chain and delivered straight to the gallows by the same means.

The moment this motherfucker is gone, I will raise a toast to President Bush, who did the right thing in taking the bastard down for good, and to the fine men and women whose work carries on saving the country Saddam turned into a living hell. Most importantly, I will say a prayer for the souls whose lives he brutally cut short.

Remember, there are those who would have tolerated more innocent Iraqis dying at Saddam's hands because they hate President Bush and the U.S. You'll know them by their hateful whining.

UPDATE
Done. The whining has already begun but, as always, there is an answer.

NRO's Corner is sizzling tonight: One example:
... IF MEMORY SERVES: [Mario Loyola]
"In twenty years, you will be gone, and we will still be here."
— Foreign Minister Tarik Aziz to Secretary of State James Baker, 1991
Posted at 10:28 PM

Barcepundit on the latest example of Moronic Reporting:

Did anyone ever think to criticize World War II after the 2.303 'grim milestone' was reached (the number of people killed at Pearl Harbor)? Obviously not; back then people had the moral compass in place. Just think that as the war ended, they would have been able to count that 'grim milestone' a staggering 182 times, since in WW2 about 420,000 Americans [note: corrected from 'people'] died, 407,000 of them military.

Still got that BDS thing going.

Via Gateway Pundit, Ethiopia is smashing Somali islamists and driving them back to Mogadishu, where they will be snuffed out.

Via Power Line, this gratifying story of John F'n Kerry's comeuppance. His latest trip to Iraq did not provide the photo-ops he needs for his next run at the White House (hardy-har).

This is a true story....Check out this photo from our mess hall at the US Embassy yesterday morning. Sen. Kerry found himself all alone while he was over here. He cancelled his press conference because no one came, he worked out alone in the gym w/o any soldiers even going up to say hi or ask for an autograph (I was one of those who was in the gym at the same time), and he found himself eating breakfast with only a couple of folks who are obviously not troops. What is amazing is Bill O'Reilly came to visit with us and the troops at the CSH the same day and the line for autographs extended through the palace and people waited for two hours to shake his hand. You decide who is more respected and loved by us servicemen and women!

I know many leftards who thought John F'n Kerry would have been so much better a President than Dubya. And, truth be told, if their aim was to insult, demoralize, exploit, reject and then ridicule America's men and women who volunteer to serve, Kerry would have been perfect. That's why John F'n Kerry, Who Fought In Vietnam, sits with a lone civilian in this photo in the midst of a hall full of America's finest, whose every back is turned to The Leftard's Hero.

Note to idiots: the people who protect your liberty love Bush and scorn Kerry. Not one of them met or sat with Senator Kerry, but 400 of them lined up to meet and shake hands with Bill o'Rielly, who was also present. These people know who is on their side and who isn't. So do idiots.

More
Lazy Slackers Shun Misunderstood Jokester
Dining Alone In Iraq
Schaudenfraude (Or John Kerry Visits Iraq)
Michelle Malkin: Mr. Lonely
Blackfive on Kerry
I’ve never seen a snubbing so richly deserved.

Saddam Hussein murdered 180,000 Iraqi Kurds in 1987 and 1988.

He's going to hang for it, perhaps in hours rather than weeks. It should be done soon, on live television, so Al Jazeera and CNN can broadcast it around the world. It'll be a nice follow-up to all the sniperporn they both so love to air.

High-ranking Iranian military officials have been captured inside Iraq by Coalition Forces. This after a high-ranking British military advisor was exposed as an Iranian spy in Afghanistan.

Anyone here notice that Iran's Islamist leaders are waging war against Western civilization?

Ethiopia has noticed its own problems with Islam.

NATO forces leave Afghan Taliban insurgents 2 choices: Surrender, or fight your way out.

If I'm fighting this war I'll give this enemy one choice only: unconditional surrender. Nothing but.

The Hamas-Fatah power struggle intensifies.

The definition of a traitor is one who violates his allegiance and betrays his country*. Sandy Berger is exactly that person and he should wear that brand forever in American history.

*Note to idiots and the New York Times: there is no good reason to do this.

Michelle Malkin:

Under a trailer.

Oh, my: Former national security adviser Sandy Berger removed classified documents from the National Archives in 2003 and hid them under a construction trailer, the Archives inspector general reported Wednesday.

The report was issued more than a year after Berger pleaded guilty and received a criminal sentence for removal of the documents.

Inspector General Paul Brachfeld reported that when Berger was confronted by Archives officials about the missing documents, he said it was possible he threw them in his office trash.

The report said that when Archives employees first suspected that Berger - who had been President Clinton's national security adviser - was removing classified documents from the Archives in the fall of 2003, they failed to notify any law enforcement agency.

Berger, who pleaded guilty to unlawfully removing and retaining classified documents, was fined $50,000, ordered to perform 100 hours of community service and was barred from access to classified material for three years.

The report said that when Berger was reviewing the classified documents in the Archives building a few blocks from the Capitol, employees saw him bending down and fiddling with something white, which could have been paper, around his ankle.

However, Archives employees did not feel at the time there was enough information to confront someone of Berger's stature, the report said.

Brachfeld reported that on one visit, Berger took a break to go outside without an escort.

"In total, during this visit, he removed four documents ...

"Mr. Berger said he placed the documents under a trailer in an accessible construction area outside Archives 1 (the main Archives building)."

Per Malkin:
Sandy Berger: Guilty
Berger and a side order of lies
Berger's "copies"
Ground turkey Berger
Sandy Berg(l)er?

Bill Crawford at All Things Conservative:

And while all this was happening, the left was screaming for Karl Rove's head for doing...nothing.
But let's be fair, the left believes in law and order, as long as it doesn't get in the way of their rewriting history.

Remember: Sandy Berger was President Bill Clinton's National Security Advisor.

Sandy Berger stole and destroyed classified government documents in preparation for testfying to that very same government on his role as NSA to President Clinton. He got off with a fine and a holiday from the MSM.

Contrast that to the MSM's handling of the so-called Foley scandal. Or the fact that Tom Delay stepped down from the Republican leadership when he was accused of a wrongdoing. Despite resigning upon hearing the accusations, and no court having found him guilty of anything at all, DeLay is regularly slandered by the SPs who despise him.

Imagine if Tom DeLay had done what Sandy Berger had done, and you'll have an idea of the blinders now in fashion throughout the MSM.

Glenn Reynolds, puppy-smoothie guy, on how Iraq was going to be a disaster!

Wretchard on Islam's digital attack:

...the virtual Jihad poses a formidable challenge because it uses the very sinews of an open society as a vector to spread.

...is nowhere near happening.

As for the Godforsaken shithole that is the Palestinian territories, it's Game On. Andy McCarthy points out that while the Financial Times has the news, NBC and their MSM brethren ignore their own standards when it comes to calling that particular game :

When Is NBC Going to Pronounce Civil War in "Palestine"?
[Andy McCarthy]
This from the Financial Times:
Security forces loyal to President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah fired on a Hamas rally in the West Bank on Friday and firefights erupted between the rivals in Gaza, pushing the Palestinians closer to civil war. "What a war Mahmoud Abbas you are launching, first against God, and then against Hamas,” senior Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya told a Gaza City rally of 100,000 Hamas supporters, who fired their guns in the air and chanted “God is Greatest”. At least 32 Hamas supporters in the West Bank city of Ramallah were wounded by gunfire from Abbas’s forces, hospital officials said. Several were in critical condition...

Blame the Jews.

A leftard once told me about a really cool website for deep thinkers. Today, the guy who runs that website suggested it would be splendid if Michelle Malkin is killed when she visits Iraq. And his minions are whooping it up in support of that notion, just as they whooped it up when four American contractors were murdered, set on fire, ripped apart and hung from the bridge to Fallujah.

Some of them also hope Malkin will get shot in the face, but by and large they're generally very open-minded about how she eventually gets it:

I’m sure there’s a soldier or two who’d be happy to let her take a turn in a Humvee gun turret. Maybe she can satisfy her self-loathing by capping off a few hundred rounds at some brown folks. And imagine her being able to live what had previously only been the vicarious thrill of having an IED blow up a few yards from her……the BIG BOOM….the luscious scourging of her flesh…..why what more could any right wing woman ask for?

"...the luscious scourging of her flesh..."

What kind of person would write such a thing?

Fun at The Corner:
Jon Carey in Irak [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
Via Matt at Blackfive :
RE: Reception of John Kerry by troops in Iraq.

Usually, the way it works is that (1) either a combat commander plays host for the visiting politician or (2) they find a bunch of troops from Massachusetts and make them hang out with Kerry at the Palace (Hillary does that).

One of my Army buddies, a lieutenant colonel in MNF HQ, said this about the meeting planning the glorious return of John Kerry to Iraq:

Hey, I just came from a meeting where they were trying to get some commander, any commander, in the Green Zone, to host Jawn Carri.

Swear to God, the CG is saying, "You can't tell me you ALL have things going on at that time! Come on!"

So, it appears that JF'nK will be coming to the Palace at the Embassy Annex and sitting around sucking up coffee at the Green Bean while we all try to ignore him.

Me, I'm gonna get a picture with him.

When he says commanders, he's talking about Colonels. I deleted his next sentence. It's not for folks of gentle persuasions. Let's just say he's not going to wash his hands before meeting the Senator.

Bet he will afterwards, but I digress: I am really looking forward to watching John F'n Kerry squirm his way through his next visit with the troops he so consistently pisses off. Maybe we'll get lucky and some milblogger there will write a book about it in time for the '08 election.

David Frum explains Real Realism to the I Surrender Group:

Tony Blair suggests that the failure to solve the Palestinian problem enflames and radicalizes the Middle East. This suggestion is not totally false. But it raises this question: Of all the dozens and hundreds of ethnic and territorial disputes to roil our planet since 1945, why is this one so uniquely unsolveable? Germans do not blow themselves up in the streets of Gdansk to protest Polish rule over Danzig. Greeks do not hijack schoolbuses full of Turkish schoolchildren to demand the return of Smyrna. Bolivia does not wage endless war against Chile to revise the outcome of the war of the Pacific.

The Arabs could have had peace with Israel on easy terms at any time since 1949. They have persistently refused it. The Palestinians could have had a state in the West Bank and Gaza at any time since 1967. They have disdained that offer too.

Might it not be closer to the truth to say that Arab radicalism is the ITAL cause END ITAL of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute – not the result of it? There is no peace because Israel’s neighbors – and too many of the world’s Muslims – cannot accept the right of a non-Arab, non-Muslim minority to live unsubjugated in the Middle East. That is the true “core” of the dispute, and it cannot be fixed by negotiation.

Emphasis mine. It's the most lucid description of the problem that I've read in years.

Eliot A. Cohen at Opinion Journal dissects the folly of the I Surrender Group report. I quote at length:

Some of the commission members and their advisers cordially detest the president and his administration and opposed him and his war from the outset; others were equally passionate in their defense of both the man and the conflict. And yet this diverse group had an overwhelming mandate, from the beginning, to produce a consensus document. The commission members spent four days in Iraq, and with the exception of a one-day foray by former Marine Chuck Robb, they stayed in the Green Zone, that bubble of palaces and residences that has little to do with the real Iraq of Basra, Kirkuk, Ramadi, Baquba and Mosul. At the end, they had breakfast with the president and a few hours later posted their conclusions on the Internet for all the world to ponder. There is something of farce in all this, an invocation of wisdom from a cohesive Washington elite that does not exist, a desperate wish to believe in the gravitas and the statecraft of grave men (and women) who can sort out the mess in which the country finds itself.

A fatuous process yields, necessarily, fatuous results. "Iraq's neighbors are not doing enough to help Iraq achieve stability"--a statement only somewhat ameliorated by the admission that some are even "undercutting stability," which sounds as though Syria and Iran were being downright rude, rather than providing indispensable assistance to those who have filled the burn wards of Walter Reed, the morgue in Baghdad, and the cemetery at Arlington. The selected remedy is, first and foremost, rather like the ISG's credo for its own functioning, consensus. "The United States should immediately launch a new diplomatic offensive to build an international consensus for stability in Iraq and the region," as if our chief failure with Bashar Assad or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad lies with the hitherto unnoticed laziness or rhetorical ineptitude of our diplomats, or as though Europe, Saudi Arabia and Israel have not yet figured out that stability in Iraq is a good thing. "Syria should control its border" and "Iran should respect Iraq's sovereignty."

No kidding--but who is going to make them? That perennial solution, "resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict," makes its appearance, including direct negotiations between Israel and Palestinians, but only with "those who accept Israel's right to exist." The report conveniently forgets that the elected leaders of Palestine do not, in fact, accept Israel's right to exist. And it also neglects the grim reality that one of the most terrible things about Gaza, and possibly the West Bank as well, is that no one, not even Hamas, is really in charge.

The ISG report is so delusional and neglectful of fact as to evoke Chamberlain's paper-waving. There is very little "realistic" thinking there.

An aside: Love the joke about Israel negotiating only with "those who accept Israel's right to exist." There's your sound of one hand clapping. Time to come to terms with the fact that the Palestinians want war with Israel.

Note to terrorist assholes, especially British terrorist assholes: If you are offended by the phrase "War on Terror", then quit being a terrorist, asshole.



Note to Kofi Annan: You presided over genocide in Darfur and Rwanda, sex-for-aid programs, prostitution and child pornography rings, and Oil-For-Food, the biggest fraud in history. You ran interference for Saddam against President Bush, and screwed the Israelis every chance you got, including celebrating Palestine Day with the "no-Israel" map.

So on this, the occasion of your long-anticipated retirement as Secretary-General of The United Nations, take your criticisms of the United States and shove them up your monumentally corrupt ass.

Apologies to the Captain for both my redundancy and my lack of decorum.



Note to feminists: it's time to celebrate the new laws in Pakistan reflecting the last few hundred years of Western thinking on the subject of rape. You may even want to write a column or two about that sometime, maybe after you're finished with that whole BDS hysteria thing.



Note to Arec Bardwin: Pussy Diplomacy is for F.A.G.s There's a better way.



Note to moonbats: it's healthy and instructive to look at an adult assessment of the history of torture by America against its enemies. There is no crying in baseball, nor in waging war.

There appears to be a new oil revenue-sharing agreement emerging in Iraq, and a movement to replace al-Maliki with a new Prime Minister who isn't beholden to Iranian plaything Moqtada al-Sadr. The world has had enough of this toothless fuck, who hasn't the balls to leave his own little 'hood because he knows he'd be dead in a Sadr City minute. This cur should have been killed years ago. Never mind: al-Sadr and his militias are now on the wrong side of Iraq's future and will all probably be arrested or iced.

Senior Shiite politician Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, who met with President Bush last week, will lead the new contingent, but will not serve as PM. Additionally, the whole scenerio appears to have the backing of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

Iraqi Shiites must be convinced that anyone following Sadr's way will be crushed; Bush will take al-Maliki down to convince the Shiites that he means business, but he will also leave Sadr in power for now in order to evaluate his strategic and tactical values, if any.

Mark Steyn goes medieval on the I Surrender Group's report in a column filled with brilliantly caustic putdowns. In other words, exactly what Baker-Hamilton and their mess deserve:

Why would anyone -- even a short-sighted incompetent political fixer whose brilliant advice includes telling the first Bush that no one would care if he abandoned the "Read my lips" pledge -- why would even he think it a smart move to mortgage Iraq's future to anything as intractable as the Palestinian "right of return"? And, incidentally, how did that phrase -- "the right of return" -- get so carelessly inserted into a document signed by two former secretaries of state, two former senators, a former attorney general, Supreme Court judge, defense secretary, congressman, etc. These are by far the most prominent Americans ever to legitimize a concept whose very purpose is to render any Zionist entity impossible. I'm not one of those who assumes that just because much of James Baker's post-government career has been so lavishly endowed by the Saudis that he must necessarily be a wholly owned subsidiary of King Abdullah, but it's striking how this document frames all the issues within the pathologies of the enemy.

And that's before we get to Iran and Syria. So tough-minded and specific when it comes to the Israelis, Baker turns to mush when it comes to Assad assassinating his way through Lebanon's shrinking Christian community or Ahmadinejad and the mullahs painting the finish trim on the Iranian nukes. Syria, declare the Surrender Gran'pas, "should control its border with Iraq." Gee, who'dda thunk o' that other than these geniuses?

Read it all. No time? Okay, here's the short version:

Sell out American and Israeli interests; kneel before your Islamist masters.

Power Line blasts Dhimmi Carter's book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, which title is meant to portray the Israelis as violent racists and Palestinians as victims. In other words, the same old load of crap.

The problem with Carter's writing on the Middle East, though, isn't that it has run afoul of some nefarious lobby. The problem is that it is so bizarrely out of touch with reality that it is hard to interpret except as a manifestation of some kind of animus. Carter writes:

The book describes the abominable oppression and persecution in the occupied Palestinian territories, with a rigid system of required passes and strict segregation between Palestine's citizens and Jewish settlers in the West Bank.

Note that just a few paragraphs earlier, Carter called for "a balanced position between Israel and Palestine."Is this what he meant by "balanced?" Why is it that Israel has been forced to impose a "rigid system of passes and strict segregation between Palestine's citizens and Jewish settlers..."? This was done in self-defense to stop Palestinian mass murderers from blowing up Israelis. But Carter calls self-defense "abominable oppression and persecution."

In that case, I'm all for abominable oppression and persecution. Who wouldn't be?

In which they discuss the I Surrender Group report. Steyn and O’Reilly are a great combination with a great future; they're what Hannity And Colmes could be were it not for Alan Colmes.

Hugh Hewitt has a comprehensive roundup of reactions to the I Surrender Group report (PDF).

The ISG report is a great example of the dangers of James Baker's hubris. Thank God President Bush has already pulled the plug on Baker's volatile brew of intellectual laziness and wishful thinking, and defined victory over the extremists in Iraq as the only acceptable exit strategy.

Can we please move on, now, to victory?

Ace thinks we must, and so do I.

One very brave and talented man, Bill Roggio is now embedded with a Marine Police Transition Team in Fallujah. His article, The Military And The Media, chronicles his first order of business: gaining the confidence of the troops, whose collective respect for the MSM's "balcony reporting" to the home front is less than zero.

While waiting to manifest on the flight to Fallujah, CNN played a news segment of President Bush announcing there would be no “graceful exit” from Iraq, and that we'd stay until the mission was complete. Two sergeants in the room cheered. Loudly. They then scoffed at the reports from Baghdad, and jeered the balcony reporting.

In nearly every conversation, the soldiers, Marines and contractors expressed they were upset with the coverage of the war in Iraq in general, and the public perception of the daily situation on the ground. They felt the media was there to sensationalize the news, and several stated some reporters were only interested in “blood and guts.” They freely admitted the obstacles in front of them in Iraq. Most recognized that while we are winning the war on the battlefield, albeit with difficulties in some areas, we are losing the information war. They felt the media had abandoned them.

During each conversation, I was left in the awkward situation of having to explain that while, yes, I am wearing a press badge, I'm not 'one of them.' I used descriptions like 'independent journalist' or 'blogger' in an attempt to separate myself from the pack.

What a terrible situation to be in, having to defend yourself because of your profession. I've always said that the hardest thing about embedding (besides leaving my family) is wearing the badge that says 'PRESS.' That hasn't changed. I hide the badge whenever I can get away with it.

I greatly respect and appreciate Bill Roggio. Give here to support him: he's the kind of reporter we need in Iraq.

by Robert Kagan & William Kristol 12/11/2006, Volume 012, Issue 13

It's not as if the Baker commission has accomplished nothing, however. Although its recommendations will have no effect on American policy going forward, they have already had a very damaging effect throughout the world, and especially in the Middle East and in Iraq. For the Iraq Study Group, aided by supportive American media, has successfully conveyed the impression to everyone at home and abroad that the United States is about to withdraw from Iraq. This has weakened American allies and strengthened American enemies.

It has exacerbated the problems in Iraq, as all the various factions in that country begin to prepare for the "inevitable" American retreat. Now it will require enormous efforts by the president and his advisers to dispel the disastrous impression that the Baker commission has quite deliberately created and will continue to foster in the weeks ahead. At home and abroad, people have been led to believe that Jim Baker and not the president was going to call the shots in Iraq from now on.

Happily, that is not the case. Although neither the American media nor many observers of the American political scene seem to realize it, there is nothing the Baker commission can do to force Bush to take a different course than the one he chooses. Nor is it easy for a Democratic majority in Congress to call the shots in Iraq. In the American system, the president always has enormous authority in foreign policy, if he wants to exercise it. President Bush clearly does. He intends to pursue steadfastly his own course in Iraq. He is determined not to withdraw before it becomes stable and, yes, democratic. He will not be buffeted by conventional wisdom or by Baker and his colleagues, no matter how much they employ public relations tactics to defeat him.

Lots of adult analysis of the ISG report over at The Corner. This Andy McCarthy observation rings ominously:

The soon-to-be chairman of the Armed Services Committee said (italics mine):

We have failed, so far, to secure the country and defeat the insurgency, and we have failed to disarm the militias and create a viable Iraqi military or police force. And we have failed to rebuild the economic infrastructure of the country and provide employment for the majority of Iraqis. The next secretary of Defense will have to deal with the consequences of those failures.

It's our job to provide employment for the majority of Iraqis? Do the Iraqis have any responsibilities for themselves in all this? If we finally decided our security required doing something meaningful about Iran and Syria, should we also factor in that we'll need to be providing employment for all Iranians and Syrians?

And what about the minimum wage? And I'll bet there are even Iraqis without health care. And those restaurants in the Sunni Triangle? Trans-fats in every damn one! Failure, failure, failure.

Man, this is gonna be a long couple of years ...

Thanks to Senator Levin for enlightening me. I finally understand why the idiot left so loves the word "fail" and its variants: it's code for "anything American".

Gates says US is not winning Iraq war
Gates says US is not winning Iraq war
Gates says US is not winning Iraq war
Gates says US is not winning Iraq war
Gates says US is not winning Iraq war
Gates says US is not winning Iraq war
Gates says US is not winning Iraq war

Satisfied?

From NRO's The Corner:

Wow. Just Wow. [John Podhoretz]
Kenneth Stein, a professor of history at Emory University, has been associated with Jimmy Carter's Carter Center from its founding. He was its first executive director, and its first academic fellow. He has just terminated his association with the Center because of Carter's shameful new book, Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid. The guys at Powerline have the whole story, but here's the money quote from Stein's own account of his resignation:
President Carter's book on the Middle East, a title too inflammatory to even print, is not based on unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments. Aside from the one-sided nature of the book, meant to provoke, there are recollections cited from meetings where I was the third person in the room, and my notes of those meetings show little similarity to points claimed in the book. Being a former President does not give one a unique privilege to invent information or to unpack it with cuts, deftly slanted to provide a particular outlook.

Nor does being a former Vice President.

Just for the record.

Power Line asks, Who's The Enemy? The answer:

Many liberals say it's Bushitler. Of course, they can say that without fear of being drawn and quartered. As can happen to those who cross our real enemy in places like Afghanistan:

The gunmen came at night to drag Mohammed Halim away from his home, in front of his crying children and his wife begging for mercy.

The 46-year-old schoolteacher tried to reassure his family that he would return safely. But his life was over, he was part-disembowelled and then torn apart with his arms and legs tied to motorbikes, the remains put on display as a warning to others against defying Taliban orders to stop educating girls.

These people are evil incarnate. It is disturbing that so many Americans have apparently lost interest in fighting them.

And more disturbing that some would never have fought them at all.

Because Bush is the real terrorist.

UPDATED
Power Line points to the Boston Herald's Jules Crittenden, who undresses the AP for fabricating war crimes.

The blogosphere got this story absolutely right; the AP has been exposed as a bunch of anti-Bush partisan shills. AP might as well stand for "Associated Propagandists".

UPDATE:
The New York Times gets it wrong again, and lies about the story for good measure.
HT: Ace

The truth about the Faking Imams is there for all to see at Pajamas Media, including the police report and the "Pauline" letter.



My Brother's Keepers, Part 62,974: Free Speech For Me, But Not For Thee



Via Power Line: The Claremont Institute features an article by Thomas Joscelyn on The New Know-Nothings, who hold the "realist" view that Iran is some kind of natural ally of the U.S. in the Middle East. Actually, these know-nothings aren't new; at the the core of "realism" is the same self-destructive madness from the same idiots that brought you the Islamic Revolution in Iran.



Be Careful What You Ask For Dept.

When Israel launched its retaliatory war in Lebanon this summer, some in Lebanon shouted: "We are all Hizbullah."...On Friday, Syria and Iran will launch an attack on Lebanon.

Don't get up- we'll let ourselves in!
Lots more at Gateway Pundit



Also At Gateway Pundit:
Iraqi Government to AP, other pro-terror propaganda organs: The Jig Is Up.



Hell Freezes Over