Aug 24, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
From FoxNews: Have the Swift Boat Ads Hurt Kerry's Image?HUME: We got something on our screen now that shows this was. Before the [first Swift Boat Veterans] ad we had 42 percent [of surveyed Independents] leaning toward voting for Kerry. After the ad, it came to 29 percent.
KESSLER: That's correct.
HUME: And so you had a decline. Measurable decline, would you say, in support for Kerry?
KESSLER: Yes. The first Swift Boat ad definitely had an impact.
Read the whole interview, which also says that Kerry's counter ad didn't help him and that the second Swift Boat ad hurt Bush among Independents.
From FoxNews: Negative Attacks Often Prove Effective.Some political advisers have suggested the Massachusetts senator waited too long to respond forcefully. If nothing else, the issue has thrown Kerry offstride during a between-conventions period when he had hoped to focus on the economy and other issues.
Polls suggest that the Democrat's support has been slipping.
A CBS poll said independent voters were split on whether the allegations were believable, and noted a shift in veterans toward Bush.
A survey by the University of Pennsylvania's National Annenberg Public Policy Center said more than half of those surveyed had seen or knew about the ad, even though it ran only in a few markets.
From FoxNews: Swift Boat Vets Vow to Press On.
Not only has the Kerry campaign backtracked on the Christmas in Cambodia claims, but the Swift Boat group now says that the Kerry campaign has backtracked on statements about Kerry's first Purple Heart. (Via LGF)
UPDATE August 30: This cartoon appears in the Monday Special edition of Investor's Business Daily. It is also being linked by Mark Steyn (see "Taking A Bath" on right side bar).
UPDATE II -- August 31: This headline on CNN's home page seemed to reflect our cartoon: • Sources: Dems fear Kerry campaign adrift.The concern, according to these sources, is that Kerry has failed to effectively respond to attacks from Republicans and criticism of his military service in Vietnam, particular ads from a group calling itself Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
Aug 23, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
From Iran Focus: Girl, 16, hanged in public in Iran. (Via Little Green Footballs)On Sunday, August 15, a 16-year-old girl in the town of Neka, northern Iran, was executed. Ateqeh Sahaleh was hanged in public on Simetry Street off Rah Ahan Street at the city center. The sentence was issued by the head of Neka's Justice Department and subsequently upheld by the mullahs' Supreme Court and carried out with the approval of Judiciary Chief Mahmoud Shahroudi. In her summary trial, the teenage victim did not have any lawyer and efforts by her family to recruit a lawyer was to no avail. Ateqeh personally defended herself. She told the religious judge, Haji Rezaii, that he should punish the main perpetrators of moral corruption not the victims. The judge personally pursued Ateqeh's death sentence, beyond all normal procedures and finally gained the approval of the Supreme Court. After her execution Rezai said her punishment was not execution but he had her executed for her "sharp tongue".
'Free Iran' News has translated from Farsi another article:The animosity and anger of [local judge] Haji Reza was so strong that he personally put the rope around the girl's delicate neck and personally gave the signal to the crane operator, by raising his hand, to begin pulling the rope.
Update: Also from Iran Focus:
The shock of Atefeh's execution has gone far beyond this town. Even in a country that has the highest number of executions in the world and routinely executes minors, Iranians across the nation have been bewildered by accounts of the hanging of a 16-year-old girl. The fact that the religious judge himself put the rope around her neck and the letters of "congratulations" from the town's governor to the judge, commending him for his "firm approach" have only added to the torment and pain many say they have felt.
"Atefeh was not a well-behaved girl, that's for sure. But do you hang a girl for having sex with an unmarried man?" asked Fariba, a girl in Atefeh's neighborhood, who like many others did not want to be identified.
According to judicial records, by the time Atefeh was 16, she had been convicted five times of having sex with unmarried men. Each time she spent some time in jail and was given 100 lashes (Under Iran's law, punishment for having sex with a married man would have been far heavier.)
Atefeh's father is an unemployed drug addict whose whereabouts are not known. Her mother died when Atefeh was still a child and she was left in the care of her octogenarian grandparents, which meant no care at all.
"She was abused by a close relative," says Mina, one of the few girls in Neka who identify themselves as Atefeh's friends. "But she never dared even to talk about it to anyone. Tell your teachers? They'll call you a whore. Tell the police? They lock you up and rape you. Better keep your mouth shut."
Mina sobs as she recalls her friend's tormented life, but many of these horrendous experiences are everyday facts of life for girls being brought up under a rigid theocratic regime that has institutionalized misogyny in its laws and practices.
"She sometimes talked about what these ‘Islamic moral policemen' did to her while she was in jail. She still had nightmares about that. She said Behshahr Prison was the Hell itself." [August 31, 2004]
Aug 19, 2004 | Politics
By Mark Da CunhaAfter three out of six rotations in the Men's All-around Olympic Gymnastics, American gymnast Paul Hamm was ranked first place in the standings. His next event was the vault. Hamm's vault was to be a Tsukahara--named after Japanese gymnast Mitsuo Tsukahara. It was ranked a 9.9 out of 10 for difficulty, in part because of its' two and a half twists leading into a blind landing. No easy feat. But Hamm had never missed a vault landing in competition. Ever.The expectation that Paul Hamm--the reigning world champion in Men's gymnastics--was going to win the gold medal in the Men's All-around Olympic Gymnastics was more than halfway to becoming a reality.That expectation was shattered as Hamm crashed into the Judge's table while stumbling during the landing on the vault. Hamm dropped from 1st to 12th place as he finished 22nd on the vault (out of 23 competitors) with a score of 9.137.With only two events left to go, a depressed American crowd in the Olympic Hall looked on in silence. Surely Hamm's dream of being the first American to win the Olympic all-around gold medal was over.Or was it?As least I thought so as I watched Hamm--the reigning world champion gymnast--ever the perfectionist, stumble as he tried to stick a landing that could have perhaps been partly saved with a small adjustment step. But Hamm is a perfectionist. He is the kind of man who pushes himself not merely to victory, but to greatness. A great gymnast does not take small adjustment steps, but sticks their landings. So rather than take a small step to prevent his fall, Hamm consciously held his feet in place in order to make a perfect landing. Unfortunately, in this one instance, the price of failing to take that small adjustment step was an even larger fall, as Hamm's body did not obey his mental directions. Or in the gymnast's own words, "In the air I felt fine, and then when I landed I felt weak in my legs and just lost control..."I walked away from my television unable to watch. I do not mind seeing great athletes lose because their competitors achieved something greater. But, I hate to see an athlete lose because of the kind of mistake that an athlete of Hamm's caliber performed. It's like watching Pete Sampras crash out in the second round of Wimbledon to a low-ranked journeyman. That kind of stuff is not supposed to happen.Ever since he was a young child, Hamm had "day-dreamed about winning the Olympics thousands of times." How would you feel in such a situation? Hamm felt a huge wave of depression as he struggled to fight back tears. "I was really depressed because I thought I ruined everything with the vault" said Hamm of his psychological state after the fall.Many a mortal at this point would have folded. But not Hamm. Rather then blaming the Athenian Gods, or complaining about the malevolence of the universe, or crying foul at being a puppet to The Fates, Hamm chose an alternate course of action: he chose to think. Hamm realized that he was the master of his destiny. The results of that philosophy brought on a new set of possibilities: he could salvage his Olympics by performing greatly in the next two rotations; he could achieve a strong finish; he could win a third-place medal. Or, in Hamm's words, "At that point in time I decided I was going to go after the bronze medal." (NBC)In the face of embarrassment and failure, with the flick of a mental switch, the young American gymnast's dreams were reborn from the ashes.The next event for Hamm, was the parallel bars. His goal was to give it the best performance of his life. He did. With little left to lose, Hamm achieved his best score of the night on the parallel bars--a 9.837. This score moved Hamm into fourth place. Commented Hamm later, "I realized that I had brought it back from a point where I felt I had no chance...I brought it back to a point where I was thinking, 'Wow, I'm going up on high bar, I have a chance to win an Olympic medal here, I'm going after it.' That's the mindset I went into that event with." (NBC)It was in the last event of the rotation--the high bar--that Hamm left the crowd, and I, nearly speechless. Where the previous gymnast spun around the bar with both hands, Hamm circled it even faster as he held on with one. The American flew through the air, effortlessly spinning around the bar while precariously attached to it by five small fingers. He was like a large planet orbiting a long cylindrical moon held to it by a string. Hamm followed the one-arm maneuver with an even more difficult one of three blind release moves as he let go of the bar only to come back and catch it as he spun around it. This time there was no string to hold the orbiting planet in place--only the laws of physics and Paul Hamm's ability to use his mind and body to demonstrate them. All that was left was his dismount--and landing. And then--unlike the vault--Hamm stuck his landing with both arms raised proudly in the air. The crowd roared in approval.Hamm needed a score of 9.825 to achieve gold--he scored a 9.837 in the high bar for a total score of total score of 57.823-- a mere 12-thousandths of a point ahead of his closest competitor (South Korea's Kim Dae Eun whose total score was 57.811) in the closest finish ever in Olympic Men's Gymnastics history. Paul Hamm had pulled off one of the greatest comebacks in Olympic history.Said Hamm of his victory,"I think I probably day-dreamed about winning the Olympics thousands of times...I did not every picture myself having a mistake and then winning. I would have loved to have finished the competition flawlessly, but at the same time it shows how strong my character was. I wasn't going to let it go. I really had to fight for what I wanted." (NBC)
In a world where to be "only" human is to be a "Hero" defeated by a "tragic flaw", or a "sovereign" dictator that murders innocents, or a moocher seeking welfare off the backs of others, Paul Hamm's quest for gold is an example of what makes a human being human: the ability to apply ones' mind in concentrated physical effort over an extended period of time to achieve a long-range goal in the face of obstacles. Thank you Mr. Hamm for proudly demonstrating the actuality of the human potential in all of us. Be proud of your achievements--you earned them.
Update (August 21, 2004):According to the BBC:Three gymnastics judges were suspended on Saturday for a key scoring error which resulted in American Paul Hamm winning the men's all-round gold. The mistake on Wednesday cost South Korean bronze medallist Yang Tae-young a tenth of a point needed to win. The International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) upheld the South Korea's protest but said Hamm would keep his medal. After reviewing the results, FIG officials confirmed he should have been awarded a start value of 10. He scored a 9.712 on the event, but with the extra .1, he would have finished with 57.874 points and defeated Hamm by .051....Yang finished third, another .037 behind Kim. [BBC]
However, MSNBC reports:
The Los Angeles Times reported that U.S. Olympic officials said they would consider supporting South Korean officials in a bid to award duplicate gold medals to Hamm and Yang. The International Gymnastics Federation suspended the two judges who determined the start values -- Benjamin Bango of Spain and Oscar Buitrago Reyes of Colombia -- along with the judge who oversaw the panel, George Beckstead of the United States. But the federation said the results will not be changed. Hamm believes the problem started when FIG decided to review the videotapes of the event after the South Koreans complained. Reviewing tapes to handle protests is not allowed in international gymnastics.
...USA Gymnastics president Bob Colarossi said he wasn't taking a stand on whether Hamm should share the gold medal with Yang. He did, however, reiterate that he didn't think the result should be changed. "In a sport where things are decided by thousandths of points, there are zillions of places for little mistakes," Colarossi said. "I'm proud of Paul. I stand behind Paul." Hamm and his coach, Miles Avery, said they looked at Yang's routine and saw a place where he should have received a 0.2-point deduction that the judges didn't take.
As NBC's gymnastics commentator Tim Daggett--who reviewed the tape of Tae-Young's parallel bar routine--showed, Tae-Young made four holds on his parallel routine as opposed to the maximum allowed: three. For this mistake, Yang Tae-Young should have received a mandatory 0.2 deduction. So even with the adjustment for the 0.1 added to his starting score, Paul Hamm would still remain the Olympic Gold medalist. Yang Tae-Young does not deserve the gold medal, Paul Hamm does.-- Mark Da Cunha is a photographer who admires heroes and seeks to learn from them.
Aug 19, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From the World Trade Center II Design:
Within this site plan, the Yamasaki Twin Towers return, with several enhancements and modifications over the originals. The Twin Towers of the New Millennium would differ from their predecessors... [Hat Tip: J. Swanik]
The safety features include a double exterior skin for each tower, and six well-fireproofed stairwells.
Writes Nicole Gelinas, in "World Trade sellouts," New York Post, May 18, 2004:
Osama bin Laden gave the order to destroy the World Trade Center - but Gov. Pataki & Co. are paying for the funeral. New York's leaders refuse to heal our city's mutilated skyline. In Washington, the horror of 9/11 was met with resolve: The feds rebuilt the Pentagon within a year. In New York, horror was met by bureaucratic flaccidity.
...The governor has chosen architect Daniel Libeskind to erect a "Freedom" Tower that will be a half-hollowed monument to cowardice. The top floors of the Freedom Tower are designed for bin Laden. They'll be empty. The tower is to be built with just 70 occupied stories - 40 floors shy of each of the destroyed Twin Towers. Pataki wants to break ground on the Freedom Tower on the Fourth of July - but all the fireworks in the world won't mask the fact that the Freedom Tower is no World Trade Center.
It is shocking - almost inconceivable - that we haven't snatched back from our enemies what belongs to us. Americans always understood the Twin Towers. They were us: stark capitalism, power and beauty without explanation or apology.
Recommended Reading:
Reflecting America: World Trade Center Memorial Should Celebrate America's Producers
The people who worked at the World Trade Center (WTC) were all productive people: they were there to do a job and earn money. They died on September 11 because they symbolized that productivity, not just to millions around the world who aspire to live like Americans, but also to the terrorists who despise all that America stands for.
Rebuilding the WTC: Anything Less Is Suicide
All of Manhattan is sacred ground--not because people died there, but because its bridges and skyscrapers are monuments to human life. They are monuments to the human aspiration to build and to create. This is what was attacked on September 11: our wealth, our success, the global reach of our commerce and culture. The best way to commemorate those achievements is through a new skyscraper, bigger, better, and more beautiful than the ones we have lost.
Rebuilding the WTC: The Greatest Tribute Possible
Those who wish to rebuild the WTC face an uphill battle against those who are opposed to using the site for commerce and against those who have called for the site to become a memorial park.Aug 18, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
Washington, D.C.—Seven years into the Afghanistan war, America faces resurgent Taliban and Islamist forces carrying out more daring and increasingly deadly attacks on U.S. troops. Suicide bombings, once rare, are a commonplace in Afghanistan. According to news reports, the number of roadside bombs has been climbing (from 1,931 in 2006 to 2,615 last year). More Americans died in Afghanistan this year, so far, than did in the first three years of the war, combined.
Appearing before Congress, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reported, with signal understatement, that he’s “not convinced we’re winning in Afghanistan.”
Why has this war—once thought of as the right war—gone so wrong?
U.S. military and intelligence officials have pointed to the tribal belt along the Afghan-Pakistan border as a source of the problem. The region is a safe haven for Islamists, where they train, plot and launch attacks on Western forces in Afghanistan (and on targets in the West). Many officials suspect Pakistan’s intelligence service, ISI, of colluding with the Islamists and allowing them sanctuary, and complain that Pakistan’s government—a supposed U.S. ally—has failed to do enough to root out the Islamists. The remedy now being pushed in Washington involves sending U.S. Special Operations forces on raids in the tribal areas (as recently happened) and deploying several thousand more troops in Afghanistan.
But while there’s reason to believe Islamists enjoy the support of Pakistan’s intelligence services and military, this is far from the fundamental reason why, despite a U.S. war against them, the Islamists are resurgent in Afghanistan. This nightmare is yet another result of Washington’s broader “compassionate” war.
From the beginning, our military was ordered to pursue Taliban fighters only if it simultaneously showed “compassion” to the Afghans. The U.S. military dropped bombs—but instead of ruthlessly pounding key targets, it was ordered gingerly to avoid hitting holy shrines and mosques (known to be Taliban hideouts) and to shower the country with food packages. And even more so today, according to a report by the New York Times, “vast numbers of public, religious and historic sites make up a computer database of no-strike zones” while Air Force lawyers vet all air strikes. The U.S. deployed ground forces—but instead of focusing exclusively on capturing or killing the enemy, they were also diverted to “reconstruction” projects for the sake of the Afghan population.
The Bush administration allowed the enablers of bin Laden to flee and find a welcome home in Pakistan’s tribal region, where they regrouped. Washington then passed off to Pakistan the dirty work of rooting them out. Given that Pakistan had helped create and put the Taliban in power, it should be no surprise that the Islamists there have grown stronger. (They feel themselves so safe that they hold press conferences and give interviews by cell phone.)
The half-hearted war in Afghanistan failed to smash the Taliban and al Qaeda. Instead of defeating them, Washington’s timid war scattered the Islamist forces and left them with the moral fortitude to regroup and launch a brazen comeback. What we need is a war policy that proudly places America’s interests as its exclusive moral concern and ruthlessly destroys our enemies.Aug 17, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
From the BBC: Taiwan-China row reaches Olympics.Taiwan's government says it has been told to remove adverts for the island from hundreds of airport baggage carts and buses in Athens. A spokesman said he suspected the order was a result of China lobbying the Athens organising committee. [...]
Under pressure from China, Taiwan participates in the Olympics under the name of Chinese Taipei, and its national flag and anthem cannot be used when its athletes win medals.[Emphasis added]
What a gross injustice. And apparently it's all sanctioned by the Olympic authorities.
CNN has more: China pushes for Taiwan poster ban."Communist China's pressure on us is constant," Lin [Chia-lung, head of the Government Information Office,] told a news conference.
Aug 16, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
Back in July, the New York Sun ran an op-ed describing the perverse effects of the Section 8 housing voucher program, invented by Republicans as a 'market-based' alternative to public housing projects.
Howard Husock's op-ed on the disaster of Section 8 housing should make The New York Sun rethink its stand on school vouchers ['A Better Housing Reform,' Opinion, July 22, 2004]. In both cases, the misguided focus on 'competition' obscures the essential issue: Seeking unearned benefits via government coercion destroys the production of those benefits, whether done 'competitively' or not.
If we must have publicly funded competition with the public school system, let it be through charter schools.
Vouchers would only serve to co-opt and corrupt the private schools, eliminating the last remnant of freedom in education. With those schools no longer providing a contrast,a constant reproach, and a means of escape, the system's stranglehold on the intellect would be complete.
It would be one big, inescapable, government-funded system of health maintenance organizations for the mind.Aug 16, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
From The Australian today: Sadr told: drop your guns and join us.IRAQ'S national conference, charged with charting a course to democracy, yesterday urged rebel Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr to disband his Mehdi Army militia and join the mainstream political process. The conference voted to send a delegation to meet Sadr in the besieged holy city of Najaf as Iraq's hostage crisis worsened with the kidnapping of an American journalist.
Participants approved a proposal by a Sadr relative, Baghdad Shi'ite cleric Sheikh Hussein al-Sadr, who said: "There are inviolable conditions in civilised countries ... there is no place for armed militias. ... We must work together to convince Moqtada Sadr and the dear brothers in the Mehdi Army to transform (the militia) into a political party, whatever its leaning."
From a weekend AP report (via LGF):[Iraq's chief negotiator, Mouwaffaq] Al-Rubaie said he had proposed that al-Sadr's militia be disbanded and become a political movement.
And from a report last week:But as [Iraqi interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi] demanded that al-Sadr disarm his militia, Allawi left maneuvering room for the cleric himself. He repeated a longstanding invitation to al-Sadr to take part in elections due by the end of January.
It's bad enough that al-Sadr -- an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist -- is being treated as a reasonable being, but to offer him political power? Our soldiers are not supposed to be getting killed for al-Sadr's appeasement. This is the danger that came from quickly handing over sovereignty to the Iraqis. The handover did not appease al-Sadr and his thugs, who still consider us "occupiers" and the interim Iraqi government "U.S. puppets."
Worse still, we no longer have ultimate authority to pursue our security interests in Iraq. We have to ask permission of the Iraqis. Maybe they will let us; maybe they won't. It should never have been left up to them to decide, as evidence by how al-Sadr is now being treated (though it must be noted that Bush also pursued an appeasing tack in April). A glimmer of hope that the Iraqis will allow (!) us to take out al-Sadr appeared in the first article:Sporadic fighting continued in Najaf last night as US-led forces prepared for another offensive on the city. "A major assault by forces will be launched quickly to bring the Najaf fight to an end," Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman Sabah Kadhim said.
Then again, we've heard that before.
In today's TIA Daily, Robert Tracinski commented on the broader issue, "Democracy vs. Liberty in Iraq":Recent events in Iraq show the folly of promoting "democracy" -- in the form of unlimited mob rule -- as the ideal political system for Iraq. At a conference gathered to decide on election rules, a mob of al-Sadr's sympathizers have demanded an end to military action against the Mahdi Army and seem to have succeeded in forcing yet another delay of Sadr's long-overdue demise. This kind of "democracy" will only serve to deliver Iraq to a new variant of tyranny: al-Sadr's Iranian-backed theocracy.
Aug 15, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:

From FoxNews: Saudi Royal Family Faces TroublesBehind a façade of control, the ruling family of Saudi Arabia is in tough shape and teetering on the brink of collapse, a victim of its own corruption and a violent Islamic insurgency at its door, some U.S. experts warn.
"It is a pretty fragile royal family, it's pretty corrupt and it's sitting on some pretty weak legs," S. Enders Winbush, director of the Center for Future Security Strategies with the Hudson Institute, told FOXNews.com. [...]
[Author Stephen] Schwartz said he does not buy into the theory that the government's fall is imminent, but he does call the situation there "a crisis." He said a large middle class is repressed by the strictest of religious law, which bars women from an education and gives them no rights; men are whipped publicly if they don't get to daily prayers on time and people accused of crimes are beheaded in the public square.
Aug 12, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
Presidential candidate Senator John Kerry recently claimed he would fight "a more sensitive war on terror". In the abstract, that's a frightening prospect. Because in reality, President Bush is already taking too sensitive an approach. Right now in Iraq, we're allowing the cultural and religious aspects of the Imam Ali shrine to protect murderous cleric al-Sadr from our full powers. It's said we're doing so to avoid "alienating" the dominant, Iraqi Shiite population. But how much will we alienate the population from respecting us if we keep handling killers like al-Sadr with kid gloves?
It's possible that our "sensitive war" approach will change today now that the assault on al-Sadr has been launched. We would love to be wrong in this regard. But the articles below don't provide much hope.
Please, Mr. President: Treat the Imam Ali shrine for what it is -- a hostile enemy position -- and let the Marines do their job.
From The Washington Post yesterday: Showdown Looms in Najaf.U.S. Marines and soldiers prepared on Wednesday for what was expected to be a decisive battle for the holiest city in Iraq, but as darkness fell the sense of imminence receded abruptly. An armored column idling at the main gate turned back, and commanders said preparations for the offensive were being extended.
The American-led force may have been awaiting final approval from Iraq's political leader for a combat operation [...]
But military planners were also vexed by intelligence reports that the militiamen, who have fought U.S. and Iraqi security forces here for a week, had rigged explosives in the shrine of Imam Ali, the most sacred site in the Shiite branch of Islam. The reports indicated that the insurgents, who have been using the shrine as a refuge and staging area, would wait until advancing U.S. forces drew near, then detonate the charges and blame the resulting destruction on the Americans.
Military officials said the reports had not been confirmed. "The fear is that the intelligence might not be right in fact, but in effect -- that he has something catastrophic planned for the mosque that he will blame on the U.S.," one commander said, referring to Moqtada Sadr, the radical cleric who leads the loosely formed Mahdi Army militia.
The sensitivity of any U.S. military action here was underscored by a warning from the supreme leader of neighboring Iran, who called American operations in Najaf "one of the darkest crimes of humanity."
And from CNN today: U.S. launches offensive in Najaf.Calling the operation a critical test for the interim government, Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman Sabah Kadhim said fierce fighting is taking place around the sacred Imam Ali Mosque in the city center, with Iraqi forces taking the lead in that area.
"There is intensive fighting going on, surrounding holy places in Najaf. The Iraqi forces -- that is, the police and the national guard -- are heading this operation supported by multinational forces aircraft," Kadhim said. "They are under strict instruction that only Iraqi forces will enter the holy places."
"We want to disarm the militias inside [the mosque], who are preventing ordinary visitors from going to the holy places," he said. [...]
[CNN's Matthew] Chance reported that Mehdi Army members were firing mortars from the grounds of the mosque, hitting and heavily damaging a police station. [...]
Earlier in the week, U.S. forces fought insurgents in the sprawling Wadi al-Salam cemetery, near the sacred Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf.
Najaf Gov. Adnan al-Zurufi cleared the way for military operations at the previously restricted area where armed militants are holed up. U.S. forces have been careful when firing on militia positions in the cemetery and the mosque -- aware that they could alienate many if they stepped foot in the sacred compound.
One of the options being discussed: sending Iraqi forces rather than Americans into the compound in an effort to quell the crisis.
(More cartoons on this topic here and here.)
UPDATE: CNN reports: Forces raid al-Sadr home in Najaf.U.S. Marines battling militants in Najaf conducted a raid on Muqtada al-Sadr's house Thursday, but the renegade cleric was not there, CNN has learned. Authorities believe he could be holed up in the Imam Ali Shrine compound with other militia fighters. The compound is surrounded by Iraqi forces, but there is no plan to storm the site. Great caution and care is being taken not to disturb that site, one of the holiest in Islam.[Emphasis added]
UPDATE II: Here comes the "alienation." AP reports: Iraqi Shiites Angry at Fighting in Najaf .Iraqi Shiites expressed anger Thursday at a major U.S.-led assault on a rebel militia in the holy city of Najaf, warning the violence could spread to other parts of the country and damage the political process.
Fighters loyal to rebel cleric Muqtada al-Sadr have been holed up in and around the Imam Ali shrine, which holds the remains of Ali, the most exalted Shia saint and the son-in-law and cousin of Islam's prophet Muhammad. Damage to the shrine could anger Shiites and Muslims worldwide. [...]
In an effort to avoid a Shiite backlash, Iraqi and U.S. military officials said any assault near the militants' refuge in the shrine would be led by Iraqi forces. The shrine has suffered slight damage in previous clashes, and some Shiites were appalled the violence has brought foreign troops within sight of the holy place.[Emphasis added]
Did you get that? Muslims are "appalled" that foreign troops are simply "within sight" of the shrine? Talk about ultra-sensitive... If we allow that attitude to dictate our military tactics in Najaf, we're doomed. And notice the outcry from the mere fact that we're fighting in the holy city of Najaf -- it's not even about the shrine any more. Why? Because it's us, the infidels, whom they hate.
Blogger Timothy Perry summed up the issue nicely: "Our enemies will still hate us in the morning no matter what we do. Lives depend on our capture of Al-Sadr, we cannot stand by and let this drag on."
UPDATE III: Looks like we've chosen the "stand by and let this drag on" option. The New York Times reports: U.S. Switches Tactic in Najaf, Trying Isolation.Only days after the new Iraqi prime minister, Ayad Allawi, flew into Najaf on an American military helicopter and announced that there would be "no negotiations or truce," he and the American officials in Baghdad who are his indispensable partners in power appear, for now, to have backed away from a showdown. Instead, they are pursuing a combination of negotiations and a tightening blockade around the mosque.[...]
The situation in Najaf was redolent of events in April , when American commanders, confronted then as now by an uprising stirred by Mr. Sadr, built up a powerful strike force around Najaf with a vow to uproot the cleric and his fighters from the Imam Ali mosque, then decided that the political costs of attacking or damaging the shrine compelled an accommodation.
Then, Mr. Sadr won agreement to a wide "exclusion zone" in the center of Najaf that left him free to build his militia force and advance himself as the authentic leader of Shiite resistance to American military occupation.
This time, senior American officials in Baghdad said, the aim will be to constrict Mr. Sadr and his black-uniformed followers much more tightly, moving in from the initial cordon, set about a mile from the mosque at the closest point on Thursday, to a blockade line closer in, with Iraqi police and national guardsmen moving farther forward.
The officials said the aim would be to halt the flow of men, weapons and ammunition, as well as food and other supplies, into the militia-controlled area around the mosque, and to prevent any fighters from leaving until they have surrendered their weapons. [Emphasis added]
UPDATE IV -- August 13: Remember a few days ago when officials announced that there would be "no negotiations or truce" with al-Sadr? AP now reports: U.S. forces suspend offensive in Najaf for talks."We are allowed to engage the enemy only in self defense and long enough to break contact," said Maj. Bob Pizzateli, executive officer for the 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment of the 1st Cavalry Division. "That was a blanket order for everybody."
He said the militia appeared to have stopped most attacks as well, and the city appeared quieter Friday, a day after the U.S. military announced it had begun a major offensive to rout the militants.
"Hopefully the talks will go well and everything will be resolved peacefully," Pizzateli said.[...]
"Multinational forces are operating under firm instructions not to pursue Muqtada and not to conduct operations within the exclusion zone surrounding the Imam Ali and Kufa Mosques," [Brig. Gen. Erv Lessel, deputy director for operations for the coalition forces] said in a statement.
It appears that al-Sadr has won again. He regroups while are troops are paralyzed by politics. Want to lose the election, Mr. President? Keep up your "sensitive war." Maybe you should listen to your Vice President:"A sensitive war will not destroy the evil men who killed 3,000 Americans and who seek the chemical, nuclear and biological weapons to kill hundreds of thousands more. The men who beheaded Daniel Pearl and Paul Johnson will not be impressed by our sensitivity."
I wonder if the men who have kidnapped a journalist and threated to kill him if we don't pull our troops out of Najaf will be impressed by our sensitivity.
UPDATE V: If al-Sadr remains alive and free, he has won -- regardless of the fact that he is wounded and has lost hundreds of men. And there are indications that Iraqi interim Prime Minister Ayad "no negotiations or truce" Allawi would except such an outcome. Consider this report from earlier this week:After meeting with U.S. Marine commanders, Allawi vowed that there would be "no negotiation with any militia that bears arms against Iraq" and demanded gunmen leave the Shi'a shrine city. [...] But as he demanded that al-Sadr disarm his militia, Allawi left maneuvering room for the cleric himself. He repeated a longstanding invitation to al-Sadr to take part in elections due by the end of January. [Emphasis added]
It's been about politics from the beginning, instead of being about capturing or eliminating an Islamist terrorist supported by one of our worst enemies, Iran.
As Robert Tracinski at TIA Daily recently observed, Allawi has become our "de facto secretary of defense for Iraqi."
Belmont Club has more.
UPDATE VI: The latest. The good news: Kidnapped journalist released. The bad news:A Sadr spokesman said the cleric would pull his forces out of Najaf if U.S. forces also withdrew and religious authorities agreed to administer the city's sacred Shi'ite sites. Sheikh Ali Smeisim also said Sadr was demanding the release of his captive guerrillas and an amnesty for his fighters, who should be allowed to participate in Iraq's political process.
"Sayyed Moqtada [al-Sadr] will not be touched if he leaves the shrine peacefully," Interior Minister Falah al-Naqib said.[Emphasis added]
UPDATE VII: Al-Sadr is now making demands. So much for the "decisive battle" -- we're basically back to where we started, only it's worse for us. After this and Falluajah, we've made it clear to the enemy how to defeat America in Iraq.
Robert Tracinski at TIA Daily had another good observation about what has become "The Never-Ending Battle for Najaf":It has been said that a coward dies a thousand deaths, while the brave man dies but once. The same goes for a pragmatist, who suffers through a thousand political upheavals because he is afraid to take just one controversial action. We could have stormed the Imam Ali shrine in April, taken the political heat for it, and then moved on. Instead, we're enduring yet another cycle of attack, retreat, and bogus "truce."
Aug 7, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
Jihad TV Shut Down in Iraq (For Now)
An AP piece notes that the "The Iraqi government closed the Iraqi offices of the Arab television station Al-Jazeera for 30 days, accusing it Saturday of inciting violence."
A spokesman for Al-Jazeera called the closure "unwise" and said it restrained freedom of the press...Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi said the government convened an independent commission a month ago to monitor Al-Jazeera's daily coverage "to see what kind of violence they are advocating, inciting hatred and problems and racial tension."
Based on the commission's finding, the National Security Committee ordered the month long closure, Allawi said. Iraqi Interior Minister Falah al-Naqib said the closure was intended to give the station "a chance to readjust their policy against Iraq." "They have been showing a lot of crimes and criminals on TV, and they transfer a bad picture about Iraq and about Iraqis and encourage criminals to increase their activities," he said.
"We want to protect our people." ["Iraqi Government Shuts Al-Jazeera Station"]
Aug 5, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Fox News:
Evil -- a word usually reserved for the likes of Adolph Hitler or Usama bin Laden -- is now being used by more than a third of Canadian teens to describe the United States. In a recent poll, 40 percent of Canadian teens said the United States is a force for evil in the world, with 50 percent saying it's a force for good and 10 percent reporting they were undecided on the subject. French-Canadians were even harsher, with 64 percent of them calling America a force for evil....former Canadian diplomat Martin Collacot says the teens are responding to cues from their government, the media and their teachers...In one incident, hockey fans in Montreal booed during the playing of the American national anthem. Then-Prime Minister Jean Chretien's spokesman was caught on mike calling President Bush a moron. And while the streets of Quebec were filled with war protesters, a member of Parliament from the ruling Liberal Party was quoted as saying: "Damn Americans. I hate those bastards."
From the Fox News O'Reilly Factor:
O'Reilly: On July 6th, I reported that a poll taken in Canada found that 40 percent of teenagers there thought America was a force for evil in the world. The number rose to 64 percent among French-Canadian teenagers. ["Canadian Youth Taught America is Evil?"]
Wonder why?
O'Reilly: I'm going to have to come up there [to Canada] because you won't take the Fox News Channel, because your government is afraid of it.
On the plus side (for terrorists), the Canadian government did approve Al-Jazeera (which the U.S. government allows both Fox and Al-Jazeera).Aug 5, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Peikoff.com:
This 19 minute statement presents Dr. Peikoff's view of the upcoming Presidential election, explaining why he intends to vote for Kerry, and why he condemns not only Bush, but also those who abstain from voting on the grounds that both candidates are no good.
The statement is taken from Dr. Peikoff's recent course on The DIM Hypothesis. It was excerpted from Lecture 15, given on June 3, 2004. For purposes of this excerpt, listeners unfamiliar with DIM can equate 'D1' with the advocate of a mixed economy, and 'M2' with the advocate of totalitarianism.
The link to the op-ed by Dr. John Lewis that Dr. Peikoff recommends is:
The Threat of a Faith-Based Defense of America (June 6, 2004)
In the war between reason and religion, declared by militant Islamic fundamentalists, President Bush is firmly on the side of religion.
Aug 3, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
It's a good thing that Gov. Pataki vetoed the proposed state minimum wage hike, but his call for a hike at the federal level shows that he doesn't really get it either ["Governor Vetoes Minimum-Wage Hike," William F. Hammond, Jr., July 30, 2004].
If the defenders of the minimum wage really believe their own propaganda, then why are they being so stingy?
If wealth can be commanded into existence by the legislature, then why stop at a measly $7.15 per hour? Why not $25 per hour? Why not $100? Think about it.
What is "an outrageous slap in the face to thousands of hardworking men and women" is Sheldon Silver's assumption that they are too stupid to see this legislation for the pernicious demagoguery it is.
[Sheldon Silver is the Democratic speaker of the Assembly in New York; the quote is his assessment of the veto.]
Aug 3, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From an account in today's New York Sun of the funeral of Columbia philosophy professor Sidney Morgenbesser:
Columbia University sociology professor Allan Silver... recalled Morgenbesser as a man with moral intelligence of the highest order.
"He taught by example without seeking to be exemplary." He said despite sometimes rough manners, Morgenbesser was "selfless in the sense that he was always aware of how others saw the world."
Mr. Silver told how at a gathering in Morgenbesser's apartment, the latter admired Mr. Silver's shirt. Mr. Silver took it off, and went shirtless during the party. "He accepted my gift quietly, and did not later speak of it. Gradually, I became irritated, indeed annoyed. I had performed a prototypic act of generosity, of love--without a calculative or selfish impulse in mind or heart--and I got no moral credit for it."
After many years, Morgenbesser said he had not spoken of it lest Mr. Silver feel offended that he rewarded Mr. Silver with gratitude for so selfless an act. Mr. Silver said Morgenbesser thereby taught him something about self-regard and self-absorption.
Aug 2, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
A column in the New York Sun reports on Nicolas Sarkozy, a popular French politician whose star is rising:
Mr.Sarkozy's popularity is evidence that the French have had enough of Chirac and everything he represents--good news for France, good news for America. Mr. Chirac is of the neo-Gaullist school that conflates French nationalism with anti-Americanism.
Mr. Sarkozy adores America and has declared himself proud that critics call him more American than French. Mr. Chirac believes in the primacy of the Franco-German relationship. Mr. Sarkozy is indifferent to Germany, instead favoring alliances with Britain, Spain, and America.
Mr. Chirac opposes a referendum on the European constitution; Mr. Sarkozy insists upon it. Mr. Chirac delivers patronizing lecture to the new European Union member states of Eastern Europe--"badly brought up," he called them for their support of America's policy in Iraq--but Mr. Sarkozy, with his Hungarian background, gets along with them splendidly.
Mr. Sarkozy is said to have opposed Chirac's stance on the Iraq war.
Mr. Chirac courts the Arabs. Mr. Sarkozy prefers the Israelis. Mr. Sarkozy, unlike Mr. Chirac, is not a graduate of the Ecole Nationale d'Administration...
Aug 2, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
The worst outcome of the war in Iraq is that the Bush Administration seems to be completely helpless in the face of much more serious threats. This from a news story on Monday:
Iran has broken the seals on nuclear equipment monitored by United Nations inspectors and is once again building and testing machines that could make fissile material for nuclear weapons...Western sources said Iranian officials last month reclaimed equipment for uranium enrichment centrifuges sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The centrifuges separate the fissile isotope U235. In what may be a further escalation, some Western sources said Iran was carrying out its threat to begin producing uranium hexafluoride, the gas fed into the centrifuges, but the claim could not immediately be corroborated. [NYSun]
From Cox and Forkum:
Aug 1, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2
This talk confronts claims that the real meaning of jihad is a benign "inner struggle," and not war for the expansion of Islamic rule. Such claims are contrary to history; even mystical orthodox philosophers such as Al-Ghazali confirmed the meaning of jihad as war. Claims that jihad is an "inner struggle" are best seen either as the apologetics of those who do not want to face the fact that jihad means war, or who wish to cover up this fact in order to achieve the ends of Islamic rule. What the claimants call an "inner jihad" is a process of internal intellectual evasion, in which facts and conclusions contrary to support for Islam are suppressed. The outward political manifestations of such deception are censorship and propaganda, which are used to further Islamic rule. Islamic totalitarianism remains an active, and dangerous, force in the world, which must be confronted intellectually and defeated militarily.
Who: Dr. John Lewis, Senior Research Scholar in History and Classics, Social Philosophy and Policy Center
What: A talk explaining the real meaning of jihad: a war for the expansion of Islamic rule. A Q & A will follow.
Where: Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, Tel Aviv University , Israel
When: June 2, 2008, from 6 to 8 PM
Admission is FREE. The lecture will be open to the public and the media.
Dr. John Lewis is a research scholar in history and classics at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center , Bowling Green State University , and a visiting scholar for the year 2007-2008. He has been an associate professor of history at Ashland University . He holds a PhD in classics from the University of Cambridge , a BA in history from the University of Rhode Island He has taught at the University of London , and was a visiting scholar at Rice University. Dr. Lewis has published in classical journals such as Polis and Dikç . He is consulting editor of The Objective Standard, and writes for Capitalism Magazine. He is the author of Solon the Thinker: Political Thought in Archaic Athens and Early Greek Lawgivers. His book on military history, Nothing Less Than Victory: Military Offense and the Lessons of History, is in production with Princeton University Press.