Watcher's Council Nominations, 12/12/07

Every week, the Watcher's Council members nominate two posts each, one from the Council members and one from outside for consideration by the whole Council. The complete list of this week's Council nominations can be found at the site of our fearless leader, the infamous Watcher of Weasels


Do take the time and check out the non-Council links..they are always rewarding.


Now, here's this week's Council lineup...

1. JOSHUAPUNDIT: Pearl Harbor...And 9/11 It pretty much went unnoticed, but December 7th was the 66th anniversary of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, an attack that took 2,403 lives and destroyed most of America's Pacific fleet. Sixty years after that terrible morning, there was another sneak attack on American soil. I have a few things to say about these two events,why they were handled so differently,and the lessons from the past for the future.


2. Done With Mirrors:How Kennedy Said It Callimachus looks at Mitt Romney's speech on faith, compares it with John Kennedy's famous address and makes some discerning comparisons between the two.

3. Soccer Dad: Making NIE This week Soccer Dad does a type of post he does exceedingly well...comparing different views on a given subject an dexamining them to allow the truth to pop up of almost of its own accord. This time his subject is the NIE, something that was on a number of minds within and without the Council this week. By this time, most of you know how I feel about the matter...

4. The Glittering Eye: What the NIE on Iran's Nuclear Weapons Development Doesn't Say Dave likewise looks at the NIE, and to his credit looks at the actual non-classified part of the report to draw his conclusions, as opposed to the public perception. he's correct in that it hedges its bets almost to irrelevancy. Bureaucrats, after all, have developed CYA into an art form, almost.

Unfortunately, the public perception is what's going to carry weight,(which is exactly what was intended, IMO) and it has already had quite a lot of fallout, especially in the Middle East.

5. Bookworm Room: Explaining Americans Jews' Love for Israel and America Ms. Bookworm takes something head on that's been bubbling under the surface for some time, but has been exacerbated by Jimmy Carter, the Angry Left, Mearshimer and Walt and their ilk- the dual loyalty American Jews supposedly feel towards Israel as opposed to loyalty for the US.

Of course, one would have to make the case that supporting an important American ally is somehow being disloyal to America or not in America's best interests. The Saudis have spent hundreds of millions of dollars in an effort to make that case, or at least buy adherents for it and have definitely met with a certain degree of success.

6. Rhymes With Right:Another Sign: Islam Is a Human Rights Violation Greg looks at the case of a British young woman who's under death threat for being an apostate from Islam, and draws some conclusions about the way the Qu'ran and Mohammed's recorded revelations, sayings and deeds (the Hadiths) are applied by a significant number of his followers.

For those interested, the Islamic notion is that we are all Muslims at birth regardless of our religion and that Islam's mission is to get the entire non-Islamic world ( dar harb, literally `the place of war') to embrace dar-Islam, Muslim practices and rule. This gives rise to a certain confusion, since many people misunderstand that when many Muslims talk about peace, they actually mean dar-Islam.

Once one has recited the shehada and accepted Islam, attempting to leave the religion is considered a capital offense, according to both the Qu'ran and sharia. And while not all Muslims feel this way, the fact that many accept this is indeed cause for concern.

7.Colossus of Rhodey:U.S. "Stingy" on Foreign Aid Hube looks at a TIME magazine piece quoting no less than ex-UN oil-for-food scamster Kofi Annan that purports to judge what would constitute a fair amount of US aid. Since part of the raison-de-etre of that aid is to make friends and influence people, I suggest that some curtailments might be in order...starting with the UN.

8. Cheat Seeking Missiles:Burying A Hate Crime Here, Laer writes a post about the hidden side of the recent Colorado church shootings, and highlights an obvious fact that was glossed over, that the shooter hated Christians. he's quite correct IMO that had it been a mosque or a synogogue and their were similar motivations, it would have been the entire focus of the media blitz.

I would also add, thank G-d for the bravery of one woman who prevented a great many deaths in this incident.

9. The Education Wonks: Babies Having Babies: Now a Generational Problem Edwonk looks at the effects of teen pregnancy and draws some obvious conclusions. And as an educator, he rightly deplores the schools being expected to deal with the resulting mess..

10. Right Wing Nuthouse: Release of Iran NIE a Remarkable Testament to American Exceptionalism Rick makes the case that the recent NIE report is a tribute to America's openness and freedom, that such a thing could be released at all. In my view, that public release was deliberate and designed as part of a foreign policy gambit, but I digress...

11. Big Lizards: Hoodwinkers and Their Codependents: In Search of Intelligent Intelligence on Iran Dafydd's take on the NIE focuses on an item I examined here on site, the views of British intelligence that the CIA had been `hoodwinked' and subjected to Iranian disinformation.

12. Wolf Howling: A Deeply Flawed NIE Changes Nothing & Everything Wolf Howling likewise looks at the NIE, and does a fine job of eviscerating it. I particularly liked the line about how the last line in the report should read "and they all lived happily ever after"!

That's this week's lineup..enjoy!

Anti-Syrian General Assassinated in Lebanon

Lebanese army operations chief General Francois al-Hajj and his bodyguard were assassinated in a Beirut car bomb attack this morning in the Christian suburb of Baabde in East Beirut, just near the Presidential Palace. The killers used a parked car as a bomb and detonated it remotely as al-Hajj's vehicle passed by.

General al-Hajj was apparently targeted because he had been named by the anti-Syrian faction to succeed the pro-Syrian and pro-Hezbollah General Michel Suleiman as army chief of staff after Suleiman is elected president.That's pretty much a done deal after Annapolis, although it will take a constitutional amendment waiving the normal waiting period for military figures to serve in political office to do it.

This is a clear signal that Iran and Syria are not going to be content with just Suleiman in the presidency. They want control of the Lebanese military, and they want anti-Syrian PM Fuad Siniora out as well, and in fairly short order, with Hezbollah, Amal and the pro-Syrian factions assuming total control of Lebanon.

This will ensure that Lebanon comes under the control of Syria and Iran, and that the UN tribunal implicating members of Basher Assad's family and other top Syrian political figures in the 2005 assassination of ex-PM Rafiq Hariri goes nowhere.

Like Israel, Lebanon's democracy is the chief casualty of the new `understanding' engineered by the Saudis between Iran and the Bush Administration

How Dhimmi-itis Works

I've written before on these pages about the dread disease of dhimmi-itis, an infection that affects large groups of people and causes them to accept the world view of Islam towards non-Muslims - or kufars , non believers to adopt the correct term of preferred contempt Muslims use.

Common symptoms include loss of self respect, self-hatred, fearfulness and anxiety and if untreated, a total loss of liberty, prosperity and free will.

We have today before us a classic case.

You may remember Democrat apparatchnick Larry O'Donnell, famous for red-faced, spittle tossing rants ( `Liar! Creepy liar) on national TV and one of the major pundits on MSNBC.

A few days ago, during a discussion of Mitt Romney's speech, this cretin exploded on `The McLaughlin Group' in a bigoted rant on Mormonism and its founder Joseph Smith, whom he referred to as anti-American, pro-slavery, and a rapist'.

Today, in a follow up on Hugh Hewitt's talk show, O'Donnell at least had the courage to admit something most dinosaur media pundits won't...that he's afriad to speak about Islam the same way he spoke about the Latter Day Saints:

HH: Would you say the same things about Mohammed as you just said about Joseph Smith?

LO’D: Oh, well, I’m afraid of what the…that’s where I’m really afraid. I would like to criticize Islam much more than I do publicly, but I’m afraid for my life if I do.

HH: Well, that’s candid.

LO’D: Mormons are the nicest people in the world. They’re not going to ever…

HH: So you can be bigoted towards Mormons, because they’ll just send you a strudel.

LO’D: They’ll never take a shot at me. Those other people, I’m not going to say a word about them.

HH: They’ll send you a strudel. The Mormons will bake you a cake and be nice to you.

LO’D: I agree.

HH: Lawrence O’Donnell, I appreciate your candor.

What a prime example of `liberal' thought and courage, eh? O'Donnell may be a bigot, but he's not crazy. This is one cockroach that has survival down pat, and a perfect example of dhimmi-itis and its effects. I won't hold my breath, but I'll be interested to see if MSNBC distances itself from his remarks on Mormonism the way it would if Mohammed and Islam were involved.

As for O'Donnell this buffoon has allowed his own cringing fear to censor himself and thus proven himself unworthy of living in a free society .

Observe, and be forewarned. Dhimmi-itis can strike anyone, anywhere and is highly infectious.

The Saudis Host Hamas' Top Brass - And Reveal The Middle East's New Order

In another sign of the changing lineup in the Middle East, our `eternal friends' the showed their contempt for `moderate' Abbas and the US and embraced Hamas by giving the Hamas top brass a red carpet reception in Riyadh.

The delegation included Hamas chief Khalid Mashaal, Musa Abu Marzuk, the No. 2 man in Hamas, Muhammad Naser and Sami Khater, members of the Hamas politburo.

The Hamas delegation met with several top Saudi officials and members of the royal family, including Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal, who no doubt gave them a detailed briefing on the Annapolis gang rape of Israel and what can be expected from the new arrangements with the Americans. From there of course, it will get back to Iran, the Hamas patrons. That's if the Saudis haven't already talked to them, which they no doubt have...probably at Doha, where Ahmadinejad was the guest of honor and he and Saudi king Abdullah strolled the grounds hand in hand.

As I've written before, it's patently obvious that the sudden `discovery' by the new NIE that Iran supposedly has ended its quest for nuclear weapons is a signal to the Iranians that the US military option is off the table. And it ties in with the humiliation of Israel at the Annapolis Conference and the UN, the embrace of the Saudi `peace' ultimatum by Condi Rice, and the recent crumbling of the March 14 anti-Syria opposition in Lebanon and the ascension to the presidency of the pro-Syrian and pro-Hezbollah candidate Michel Suleiman to the presidency.

I see this as amounting to nothing less than a budding reapproachment between Iran and the Bush Administration, with the Saudis as the middle men.

I largely agree with Saudi journalist Jihad El-Khazen in the Arab newspaper Al-Hayat. In exchange for quiet and a reduced arms and IED flow into Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration suddenly removed not only the US military option but any prospect of a third round of sanctions, something that has left France, Germany and Britain feeling silly for going along with the idea, and the Russians emboldened to resume nuclear fuel shipments to the mullahs and to send a war fleet to the Syrian port of Tartus for the first time since the Cold War.

As for China, Chinese UN Ambassador Wang Guangya, when asked if sanctions were likely simply said that the Security Council members `now have to consider that things have changed.'

The idea of sanctions never had much hope, but like the Witch in the Wizard of Oz after Dorothy's House fell on her, the sanctions are now `not only really dead but most sincerely dead.'

Another part of the deal was obviously Lebanon, where the Siniora government was sacrificed and thrown under the bus as the Bush Administration obviously agreed to cut its losses and allow Syria and Hezbollah to take over, leaving the Lebanese to their tender mercies. With Sulieman in charge, the UN tribunal on the murders of Hariri and the other Lebanese politicians,journalists and dissidents will just be another UN project that goes nowhere and does nothing.

As I've noted, the Israelis are likewise a part of the package. Like the Lebanese democracy movement and the Iranian dissidents, they've likewise been sacrificed and if I were them, I'd pretty much plan on going it alone and not relying on any security guarantees they may have gotten from the Bush Administration which will continue to use its leverage on Israel's weakest and most corrupt leader to force Israel into strategic concessions, no matter what the cost to its security

There may very well have been some additional quid pro quos from the Arabs for all this largess that we're unaware of.I've noted before the large amounts of Arab capital now moving into the US financial markets into places like CitiGroup, the NASDAQ,and the heavily Bush family invested Carlyle group, among others.

There may also be a connection with the Saudis continuing to lean on OPEC to keep oil sales pegged to the falling dollar...in effect importing US inflation and keeping the US economy out of recession, at least temporarily.

Aside from a briefing by the Saudis for their terrorist pals in Hamas on Annapolis and a coordination of strategy against Israel, there was more talk of a reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah...which of course destroys one of the chief understandings that Israel had when going into the talks in the first place.

Look for that to happen, or for Hamas to simply take over completely and push Abbas out of the way after the maximum in concessions is extracted from Israel.At that point, unless the Israelis take control of the situation and take drastic action, they will be placed in an untenable position with indefensible borders, with a united terrorist front in control of `Palestine' armed with advanced Iranian missiles within easy range of Israel's coastal plain and a rearmed Hezbollah to the north with even more advanced missiles, all aimed at Israel's civilians.

This is Peace In Our Time with a vengeance, and we will pay a huge price for it.

I seem to remember, deep in my memory a distant phrase, uttered by a ghost: "You're either with us or with the terrorists."

Whatever happened to that man, anyway?

CIA `Hoodwinked' On Iran Nukes - British Intelligence

Apparently John Bolton, numerous commentators and the Israelis aren't the only ones going public about the flawed Iran NIE.

British Intelligence apparently has similar doubts:

British spy chiefs have grave doubts that Iran has mothballed its nuclear weapons programme, as a US intelligence report claimed last week, and believe the CIA has been `hoodwinked' by Teheran.Analysts believe that Iranian staff, knowing their phones were tapped, deliberately gave misinformation

The timing of the CIA report has also provoked fury in the British Government, where officials believe it has undermined efforts to impose tough new sanctions on Iran and made an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities more likely.

The security services in London want concrete evidence to allay concerns that the Islamic state has fed disinformation to the CIA.The report used new evidence - including human sources, wireless intercepts and evidence from an Iranian defector - to conclude that Teheran suspended the bomb-making side of its nuclear programme in 2003. But British intelligence is concerned that US spy chiefs were so determined to avoid giving President Bush a reason to go to war - as their reports on Saddam Hussein's weapons programmes did in Iraq - that they got it wrong this time.

A senior British official delivered a withering assessment of US intelligence-gathering abilities in the Middle East and revealed that British spies shared the concerns of Israeli defence chiefs that Iran was still pursuing nuclear weapons.

The source said British analysts believed that Iranian nuclear staff, knowing their phones were tapped, deliberately gave misinformation. "We are sceptical. We want to know what the basis of it is, where did it come from? Was it on the basis of the defector? Was it on the basis of the intercept material? They say things on the phone because they know we are up on the phones. They say black is white. They will say anything to throw us off.

"It's not as if the American intelligence agencies are regarded as brilliant performers in that region. They got badly burned over Iraq."

A US intelligence source has revealed that some American spies share the concerns of the British and the Israelis. "Many middle- ranking CIA veterans believe Iran is still committed to producing nuclear weapons and are concerned that the agency lost a number of its best sources in Iran in 2004," the official said.

Of course, Joshua's Army members know my views on the subject.This was not something that was foisted on the Bush Administration by `rogue' intel agents, but something designed and made public by the Administration deliberately.

British PM To Iraq Troops `Your War Is Over'

Gordon Brown finally made official something that's been obvious for a long time - the Brits are leaving Iraq.

The writing's been on the wall for this ever since Brown took over and the British troops retreated to a fortified compound right near the Basra airport.

Brown visited the British troops hunkered down in Iraq and told them "Happy Christmas, your war is over."

PM Brown told the troops that combat operations in Basra will end “within two weeks”. Most if not all will be gone early in 2008, and the rest will leave no later than March.

In his speech to the troops, Brown reportedly quoted Churchill and Field Marshall Montgomery....which shows me he's not entirely devoid of a sense of humor, if nothing else.

So long, cousins...

Steyn-O-Phobia???

Writer and columnist Mark Steyn, the author of `Eye Of The Tiger' and `America Alone' is under attack in Canada by Muslim groups claiming that his writings are `Islamophobic', in another attempt to strangle free speech here in the west.

What happened is that Maclean's, the number one news magazine in Canada presented an excerpt from Steyn's best selling `America Alone' and was immediately jumped on by the Canadian Islamic Congress, their version of CAIR.

Even though Maclean’s published a total of 27 letters over two issues in response to Steyn’s piece the CIC apparently decided that wasn't good enough and demanded t a longer response, which Maclean’s was willing to consider. The CIC then insisted on a five page article, written by an author of their choice, with no editing by the magazine...plus, they wanted it to be a cover story, with art chosen by them, rather than the magazine.

At that point, Editor-in-Chief Kenneth Whyte pulled the plug on the CIC's `response' after which the CIC filed suit, and at least two of Canada’s “Human Rights Commissions” – one federal, one provincial agreed to hear their complaints that their human rights had been violated.

This is a bigger deal than it appears to be.

There has been a concerted effort by Islamist groups here in the west - largely funded by countries like Saudi Arabia - to shut down any criticism of the Islamist agenda. Some of you may remember talk show host Michael Graham, who was fired after agitation by CAIR and other Islamist groups here in America. Lately, CAIR has been sued by talkshow host Michael Savage for attempting to blackmail his sponsors and destroy him, and using copyrighted material he owns to do it.

Another aspect of this is the so-called ' libel tourism' , which uses British law and US reciprocation in a well-funded attempt to destroy writers critical of the Islamist agenda.

Maclean's and Steyn will no doubt come out just fine in the end. But it's high time we began explaining to people like CAIR the CIC and their ilk that this is a free society, and that if they're not comfortable with that there are other countries more in accord with their line of thinking.

Enough is Enough.

Israel Challenges NIE Intel On Iran

In response to the puerile NIE report claiming that Iran had stopped its quest for nuclear weapons back in 2003, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and others have been quite plain in publicly stating that Israel's evidence shows something very different.

"It’s apparently true that in 2003 Iran stopped its military nuclear program for a time. But in our opinion, since then, it has apparently continued that program," Barak told Israel army radio.

The Israelis plan to present their hard core evidence to the US when the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen lands in Israel Sunday morning for a 24-hour visit that will include a one-on-one meeting with IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, and Barak.

Mullen was in Israel with his wife two years ago when he was the commander of the Navy, but this visit will be the first time a chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has visited Israel in the past decade.

Mullen and Ashkenazi are familiar with each other; they first met at the NATO military commander conference in Brussels last month and are said to get on well.

Aside from Iran,Mullen and the Israelis are going to discuss the proposed sale of advanced JDAM missiles and other weaponry by the US to Saudi Arabia.Israel's tacit support for that had been based on US assurances that the Saudis were going to use the 20 Billion in advanced armaments to help contain Iran. Now, it appears things just might have changed slightly,in view of the Saudis' behavior at Annapolis and the new NIE.

Mullen will sit through a day of presentations by IDF generals, including Military Intelligence chief Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin and OC IDF Planning Maj.-Gen. Ido Nehushtan on these topics and others, including The presentations that Mullen will hear will be on a wide range of topics - including the Hamas buildup in the Gaza Strip, Egypt's failure to stop the smuggling of weapons into Gaza, and Hezbollah activities as well as Iran and the Saudis.

So, what does all this mean?

My friend Carl in Jerusalem at Israel Matzav voices the thought that no one in Israel truly wants to abandon the idea of the US allying itself with Israel to curtail Iran's nuclear ambitions just yet, and that President Bush sent Mullen as an envoy to try and coordinate this.

While I hope he's right, I frankly doubt it.

I think the Israelis requested a visit by Mullen to discuss iran and other topics and that the White House acceded to that request, but when it comes to Iran I can't see the Bush Administration changing directions on Iran or the Saudi arms deal based on anything the Israelis have to say. Not after Annapolis and the NIE report.

The script is set in stone as far as the Bush Administration is concerned.

They are going to go with the scenario of appeasing and arming the Arabs in the hopes they will contain Iran, and part of that involves forcing the Israelis to swallow the Saud`peace' ultimatum and give up all of Judea, Samaria and half of Jerusalem, no matter what, and to push it through before the end of Bush's term.This is a dangerous fallacy, but that's the view from Washington these days.

Not only is the US not going to attack Iran, but the Bush Administration is going to do their best to make sure Israel doesn't either...because they're invested in the mirage of an Arab `coalition' to contain Iran, and because the president wants it quiet until his retirement in a year or so.

Pearl Harbor ...And 9/11

66 years ago on this day, December 7th, Japanese pilots bombed Pearl Harbor in a sneak attack launched from a Japanese carrier force..while Japanese diplomats in Washington were still talking peace with Cordell Hull, then our Secretary of State.

They killed 2,403 Americans, mostly servicemen, and destroyed most of America's Pacific fleet.

The next day, December 8th,President Roosevelt went before Congress and asked them to declare war, and our nation took up the task of fighting not only the Japanese, but their axis allies as well.

Remarkably, that resolve came when the nation was largely unprepared for war.In fact, there was a considerable constituency for isolationism and non-involvement.

Less than 4 years later, Germany, Japan and Italy were in ruins, their militaries destroyed, their capacity for evil extinguished. And a great darkness passed from the earth.

America was hardly free from politicking or dissension during World War II, but it was kept to a minimum, within bounds...because the American people knew that to let the evil of fascism continue, to not achieve victory,would be unthinkable and a sin against their posterity.

Sixty years after that grim December morning in Hawaii, there was another sneak attack on American soil. 3,000 Americans, mostly civilians this time perished in the flaming ruins of the World Trade Center, in the Pentagon, and in a field in Pennsylvania.

It's been over six years since that happened, and we have yet to defeat these enemies who pose no less of a threat to our civilization and our freedom.

Why is that?

Our military is not less competent or less courageous, we are far richer and more powerful than we were in 1941 and our enemies are much weaker than us, compared to how strong the Nazis, Fascists and Japanese were then.

What's changed?

Leadership for one thing.

On December 8th, 1941, President Roosevelt went to Congress and asked them to declare war against specific enemies. He called on his fellow citizens for sacrifice and support, in eloquent words that expressed the shock of the country and girded it for the struggle ahead. Once Congress declared war, he immediately put the nation on a war footing. He put together bipartisan commissions to mobilize the nation's labor, industry and manufacturing for the war effort. He called on his fellow citizens for shared sacrifice and instituted rationing of food, gasoline and strategic materials.

Roosevelt, aside from incarcerating and/or deporting anyone who was a known security risk or might have potentially been one gave the FBI carte blanche to intercept all overseas phone calls and cable transmissions and to intercept any domestic mail within the US that it deemed necessary. I've personally seen a citation and medal given to one elderly woman who steamed the stamp off a domestic letter and found some microfilm under it...which resulted in the destruction of a Nazi spy ring and sent 6 spies to the gallows.

One can only imagine what the response of Congress and President Roosevelt's fellow citizens would have been if he had announced that America was now involved in The Great War On Aviation, that we should all calm down, that the creed of our enemies meant peace, that the goal of this war was `safety and security' rather than victory, and that everything would be all right if we would just go shopping.

That's essentially what we got after 9/11.

Imagine how different it might have been had President Bush had conducted himself the way FDR did after Pearl Harbor....

Another problem is the continued denial about who our enemies are. I don't think it's any coincidence that in the Harry Potter novels, JK Rowling has some of her characters refer to Voldemort as `you-know-who' or `the One we do not name.'

Many of our politicians, including the president, have been doing the same thing for six years now. It's only in the last two years or so that phrases like `Radical Islam',`Islamic Fascism' , and `Caliphate' have begun to be uttered in these circles. That has yet to be translated into a concerted war effort, even when it comes to the enemy exporting the ideology of radical Islam to our shores.

Take a hundred or so reasonably well-informed Americans into a room and ask them to write down the countries who are actively involved in waging and supporting jihad against America. Does anyone doubt that most of them would come up with pretty similar lists?

But our own government and influential elites tiptoe around this reality, and continue to spout the fiction that this is a different war, that we lack clearly defined enemies.

We are not fighting `terrorism'. That is merely a tactic used in this war. There has never been a terrorist or `insurgent' movement that has survived for long without a safe haven to train, regroup, recruit and finance. The Weathermen, the Baider-Meinhof Gang, and the IRA in its latter days are good examples of this principle. Destroy the enablers and the havens, end the terrorism.

Unlike World War II, we have put limitations on our war-making and our military that are self-imposed, and often counter-productive.After Pearl Harbor, anyone talking about `limited war' or `rules of engagement' and `exit strategies' would have been laughed out of the room at best and scorned as a coward or traitor at worst.

In that kind of climate `victory' becomes a controversial word.

Most Americans today, deep down, are not less patriotic or less unified then they were 66 years ago. Anyone who was in America after 9/11 knows that.

They were merely allowed to go back to sleep, and lulled into the idea that this was another limited war without a significant effect on their personal lives. And the nation has been deliberately and artificially divided for political purposes.

It may take another Pearl Harbor type strike on America to harness the nation's energy again, to convince people that this is the existential war that it is, and that it must be fought accordingly.

I hope not.

Pearl Harbor is thought to be a tourist attraction today, a peaceful monument to the men who died there.

It is, but it's more than that. It's a monument to the Americans who defeated the enemies of freedom, the monsters that attempted to enslave them and their Republic.

It's a monument to victory.

And something that's a living example of lessons from the past that we need to revisit and act on. By doing so, we honor not only the Americans who died at Pearl Harbor but all of our countrymen who've given to our beloved Republic what President Lincoln aptly called `the last full measure of devotion.'

Pittsburgh Kindles The Hanukah Lights

'Lighting The Chanukah Menorah' by Zalman Kleinman.


Miracles do happen...sometimes they just take more than eight days.

Way back in 1986, Chabad of Pittsburg did something they do in many localities, erected a menorah in public near City Hall. They were promptly sued by the ACLU, who claimed the menorah was too close to City Hall and thus violated the First Amendment, which in the ACLU's eyes constituted a violation of the `separation of church and state.'

I should interject at this point that both the concept and the phrase `separation of church and state' are mythical, and do not appear in our Constitution.

The case went al the way to the Supreme Court, which quite properly ruled in 1989 that the Hanukah display did not constitute government endorsement of religion.

Since then, Chabad has erected a menorah in the same place as before the suit in front of City Hall, but the City of Pittsburg had prevented Chabad from lighting the candles out of sheer peevishness or political correctness ever since.

This year, things were different.

Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl issued a special invitation to Chabad to light the menorah, and over 200 people showed up Tuesday for the festivities.

“To have the same city that once fought our menorah now choose to recognize it really brings the story full circle,” Rabbi Sruli Altein, Chabad of Pittsburgh's outreach director, told reporters.

Like I said, miracles happen. Sometimes they just take a little longer.

Watcher's Council Results, 12/07/06

The Council has spoken! A complete list of results can be found at the site of our fearless leader, the infamous Watcher of Weasels


This weeks' winner is:
Wolf Howling: Of Islamist Foxes and British Chickens In his debut piece as a Council member, Wolf Howling's excellent piece on British dhimmitude in the face of Islamism won the honors.

In second place we had:

Cheat Seeking Missiles: FBI Rebuts CAIR Scare Tactics Laer's fine piece using actual FBI stats on anti-Muslim incidents as opposed to CAIR's bloated figures.

For non-Council, the winner was:

Pierre Tristam's Middle East Issues Blog: Teddy Muhammad A neat piece with valuable background on the now infamous incident in the Sudan.

In second place for non-Council was:

Right Wing News: The 2nd Annual Worst Quotes From The Daily Kos (2007 Edition) Which is about what you would think,only worse. And, I should point out that these quotes are from the writers only , not the commenters....that would have been like shooting fish in a barrel.

Hearty Kudos to all the winners!

John Bolton Shreds The NIE On Iran

The always superb John Bolton absolutely massacres the new NIE report on Iran in a WAPO piece, The Flaws In the Iran Report:

First, the headline finding -- that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 -- is written in a way that guarantees the totality of the conclusions will be misread. In fact, there is little substantive difference between the conclusions of the 2005 NIE on Iran's nuclear capabilities and the 2007 NIE. Moreover, the distinction between "military" and "civilian" programs is highly artificial, since the enrichment of uranium, which all agree Iran is continuing, is critical to civilian and military uses. Indeed, it has always been Iran's "civilian" program that posed the main risk of a nuclear "breakout."

The real differences between the NIEs are not in the hard data but in the psychological assessment of the mullahs' motives and objectives. The current NIE freely admits to having only moderate confidence that the suspension continues and says that there are significant gaps in our intelligence and that our analysts dissent from their initial judgment on suspension. This alone should give us considerable pause.

Second, the NIE is internally contradictory and insufficiently supported. It implies that Iran is susceptible to diplomatic persuasion and pressure, yet the only event in 2003 that might have affected Iran was our invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, not exactly a diplomatic pas de deux. As undersecretary of state for arms control in 2003, I know we were nowhere near exerting any significant diplomatic pressure on Iran. Nowhere does the NIE explain its logic on this critical point. Moreover, the risks and returns of pursuing a diplomatic strategy are policy calculations, not intelligence judgments. The very public rollout in the NIE of a diplomatic strategy exposes the biases at work behind the Potemkin village of "intelligence."

Third, the risks of disinformation by Iran are real. We have lost many fruitful sources inside Iraq in recent years because of increased security and intelligence tradecraft by Iran. The sudden appearance of new sources should be taken with more than a little skepticism. In a background briefing, intelligence officials said they had concluded it was "possible" but not "likely" that the new information they were relying on was deception. These are hardly hard scientific conclusions. One contrary opinion came from -- of all places -- an unnamed International Atomic Energy Agency official, quoted in the New York Times, saying that "we are more skeptical. We don't buy the American analysis 100 percent. We are not that generous with Iran." When the IAEA is tougher than our analysts, you can bet the farm that someone is pursuing a policy agenda.....

Read the whole thing.

Well Worth Reading...

Here are a few worthwhile tidbits from the blogosphere for Joshua's Army members:

• Democracy Worked In Russia And Venezuela by Ralph Peters, someone longtime Joshua's Army members are familiar with. Peters examines the votes in Venezuela and in Russia and concludes that democracy worked in both places, even if the Russians used it to vote against their freedom. Peters also looks at why, with a superb analysis of the Russian national character ...

• The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez - A WAPO editorial on the subject by ex-SecDef Donald Rumsfeld...who still hasn't lost his touch or his common sense.

• Fjordman: Why We Should Oppose an Independent Kosovo Norway based EuroEssayist Fjordman has a superb piece on what's going on in the Balkans under the radar..and why we should be very,very wary.

• Shrinkwrapped: What Iran's `Victory ' Means My old pal Shrinks on the NIE..his usual superb analysis.

• Turkey: Still A Western Ally? Daniel Pipes looks at rising Islamism in Turkey and examines a possible course to keep Turkey in the west's camp

Enjoy...

Romney On Faith

GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney finally gave `the speech' today, addressing the controversy over his Mormon beliefs.His hand was obviously forced by Mike Huckabee's rise in the polls in Iowa,and Huckabee's sly sidestep when asked in an interview for his views on the matter.



The location of the speech was interesting in that it was given in College Station,Texas rather than in Iowa, at the George H.W.Bush Presidential library, and that Romney was introduced by the ex-president..which may possibly indicate that the Bushes (including the one currently occupying the White House) have tacitly endorsed a candidate.

The speech was well crafted, and well delivered; Romney had a few things on his mind and decided it was time to open up. It was obviously intended to imitate John F. Kennedy's famous speech on his Catholic faith.

As such, it was successful,if a bit obviously over rehearsed..but perhaps unlikely to change many preconceived minds in my view. If someone distrusts and dislikes Mormons, this speech is unlikely to reassure them.

I'll admit, myself to a bit of bias on Mormons....most of the ones I meet, I rather like.

In my particular part of the world, there happen to be a number of Mormons, who I value as friends and neighbors. I admire their community spirit, their self-reliance, their self-discipline and the importance many of them give to living their spiritual values. Having read the Book of Mormon, and explored their beliefs,I can't imagine why Romney's faith is as big an issue as it appears to be.

And Romney was entirely right to remind us that there is no test of faith to hold office in America.

More On The Iran NIE...Disinformation From Iran?

Intel and terrorism expert Kenneth Timmerman has an illuminating article that examines the background of the men who created the NIE.

His conclusion is that the report is a product of Iranian disinformation:

"..Washington has fallen for “a deliberate disinformation campaign” cooked up by the Revolutionary Guards, who laundered fake information and fed it to the United States through Revolutionary Guards intelligence officers posing as senior diplomats in Europe.

{..}The National Intelligence Council, which produced the NIE, is chaired by Thomas Fingar, “a State Department intelligence analyst with no known overseas experience who briefly headed the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research {..}

Fingar was a key partner of Senate Democrats in their successful effort to derail the confirmation of John Bolton in the spring of 2005 to become the U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations. As the head of the NIC, Fingar has gone out of his way to fire analysts “who asked the wrong questions,” and who challenged the politically-correct views held by Fingar and his former State Department colleagues, as revealed in "Shadow Warriors." ( Timmerman's book -ff).

Collaborating with Fingar on the Iran estimate, released on Monday, were Kenneth Brill, the director of the National Counterproliferation Center, and Vann H. Van Diepen, the National Intelligence officer for Weapons of Mass Destruction and Proliferation.

“Van Diepen was an enormous problem,” a former colleague of his from the State Department told me when I was fact gathering for "Shadow Warriors."

“He was insubordinate, hated WMD sanctions, and strived not to implement them,” even though it was his specific responsibility at State to do so, the former colleague told me.

Kenneth Brill, also a career foreign service officer, had been the U.S. representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna in 2003-2004 before he was forced into retirement.

"Shadow Warrior" reports, “While in Vienna, Brill consistently failed to confront Iran once its clandestine nuclear weapons program was exposed in February 2003.."

While Mr. Timmerman is undoubtedly spot on about the background and motivations of these people and that the report is highly dubious, my take is slightly different.I think the Bush Administration wanted a face saving way of backing off from a confrontation with Iran and was sending a message to Tehran that the US military option was off the table.After all, the president picked these men himself.

The president by this time has realized that he is unlikely to get significant support for a military attack on Iran from any of our allies, that the Saudis, the Gulf States and the Chinese (all of whom also have considerable leverage on our economy) oppose it, and that he was perhaps unwilling or unable to deal with the political firestorm that would develop from a war with Iran this close to his retirement.

I hope I'm wrong, but it appears that the president has decided to let Iran be the next administration's problem, while he runs out the clock letting the State Department fiddle with various diplomatic gambits.

The Israelis will likely feel like they've been hung out to dry, and with good reason, although the president may actually be calculating that the Israelis,facing an existential threat my do the job on Iran for him and spare him the political fallout.

This decision of the president's likewise makes it more difficult for any GOP candidate running in `08 to make the case to the American people on security, national defense and terrorism issues..but then, the president has never been overly concerned about the effects of his actions on his fellow Republicans.

Watcher's Council Nominations, 12/05/07

Every week, the Watcher's Council members nominate two posts each, one from the Council members and one from outside for consideration by the whole Council. The complete list of this week's Council nominations can be found at the site of our fearless leader, the infamous Watcher of Weasels


Do take the time and check out the non-Council links..they are always rewarding.

Council News: We have a new member this week, Wolf Howling. Aside from the fact that I love the name of the site ( reminds me of one of my all time fave singers) he has some killer content and will no doubt be a welcome edition to the Council. Check him out!



Now, here's this week's Council lineup....

1. JOSHUAPUNDIT: Bush Signals Iran: US Military Option Off The Table The new NIE on Iran took a lot of people by surprise, although it's been obvious to me that the president was leaning this way for some time. While many on the right are claiming `disinformation' or State Department perfidies, they forget that the president picked these men himself and chose to release it at this time...and it was obviously a direct message to Iran and others. I analyze why the `good news' on the report is highly unlikely, and what may have been behind the president's decision, and the likely fallout.


2. Done With Mirrors:The Greatest Generation Callimachus pays tribute to the Greatest generation in a frequently overlooked area..bureaucrats and administrators.To get a birds' eye view, I suggest a reading of General Eisenhower's `Crusade in Europe' or Manchester's `American Caesar' on Douglas MacArthur, with particular emphasis on his stewardship of Japan.

3. Soccer Dad: Hard Cell This week Soccer Dad has a great post on a distinctly unreported story - the advance in stem cell research that shows that the use of embryonic stem cells is unnecessary. He recalls the hoo hah over the issue during the `04 campaign, and Presidetn Bush's stand on the issue, for which he was roundly vilified.

4. The Glittering Eye: The Politics of Immigration Dave looks at the immigration issue an dhas some modest proposals. I would quibble with his take on it in a number of aspects. First of all, we are not speaking of `immigrants' but illegal aliens. That's an important distinction. And the earlier wave he sites was much less of a percentage than the flood from Mexico and points south, there were massive incentives for immigrants to learn English and assimilate that aren't being used today, and most importantly, there's a national security aspect that exists today that didn't exist when most immigration was controlled. I'm hardly anti-immigrant, but the illegal alien issue is is not something that will gradually `evolve' into a manageable problem without effective action.

5. Bookworm Room: Two Different Worlds Ah, the Red and Blue divide... Ms. Bookworm looks at it from the inside and relates how she copes, and also has some interesting things to say about how where we get our information effects our perception.

6. Rhymes With Right:Joe Biden: I Don't Know Sh!t about the Constitution Greg has a fair amount of disdain for Senator and presidential wanna-be Joe Biden and points out, quite correctly, that he doesn't know beans about the Constitution or its separation of powers...

7.Colossus of Rhodey:The Illegal Immigration Debate: Why You Can't Mix Religion With Politics Hube also looks at the illegal alien problem ( why do people refer to them as `immigrants'?) and takes to task a Franciscan priest who odiously compared them with Rosa Parks and Anne Frank.
As Hube points out, Rosa Parks was a legal citizen. And given the response of a significant number of Catholics during the Holocaust, particularly in Eastern Europe, Germany and France, I don't think a Catholic priest bringing up Anne Frank is exactly wise, aside from the fact that she and her family were hiding from genocidal murderers and not illegal aliens.

8. Cheat Seeking Missiles:FBI Rebuts CAIR Scare Tactics Here, Laer writes a fine post on the FBI 's debunking of CAIR's whining about `Islamophobia'. It seems that the numbers show that the minnions at CAIR are wildly exaggerating the number of incidents involving attacks on Muslims, just as they wildly exaggerated the number of Muslims living in America.

9. The Education Wonks:The Teddy Bear That Blasphemed EdWonk's piece this week concerns Gillian Gibbons who was jailed and threatened with lashes and execution by the practitioners of the Religion of Peace for letting her class of seven-year-olds name a teddy bear `muhammed'.

10. Right Wing Nuthouse: If The Huck Wins, The Right Loses Rick has a number of things to say about Arkansas governor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, who reminds me of no one so much as Jimmy Carter in his approach in a number of areas.

11. Big Lizards: Bored Now - Turn The Page Dafydd uses John Murtha's mea culpa over the Iraq as a springboard for a piece on how the Democrats are now trying to feverishly distance themselves from Iraq as a campaign issue. If President Bush cares to, now would be the time to relentlessly and forcibly hammer the Dems to do the right thing and stop obstructing the funding for our troops in harm's way...but I digress.

12. Wolf Howling: Of Islamist Foxes, British Chickens For Wolf Howling's debut, he has a fine post of the utter dhimmitude of Britain's Labour government in the face of Islamism at home, and an examination of the recent decision to put some Islamist foxes in charge of Britain's Muslim hen house,hence the title.

That's this week's lineup..enjoy!

The Story Of Hanukah

Several of the members of Joshua's Army have requested some background on the story of Hanukkah. Here goes...

Hanukkah celebrates one of the important miracles in Jewish history and reminds us of the triumph of faith. It takes place every year in mid to late December. While its date varies if you go by the western calendar, in the Hebrew calendar Hanukkah always falls on the 25th day of Kislev.

Hanukkah celebrates the Jewish war for independence in the second century B.C. E. The story is told in the First Book of Maccabees, and retold in the Second Book of Maccabees. A contemporary military history of the war can be found in Battles of the Bible, coauthored by Chaim Herzog and Mordechai Gichon.

After his death, Alexander the Great's empire broke into several parts, and Israel was under the control of the Seleucid empire, based in Syria. Israel had lived peacefully under the Persian Empire and under the Ptolemic empire (of Egypt), both which tolerated Judaism; but the Seleucid Emperor Antiochus Epiphanes was an arrogant, bigoted Hellenizer, who attempted to force the Jews to abandon their religion and to adopt Greek customs and worship.

There were those Jews who considered themselves `modern' and `assimilated' who were willing to go along with this, even to the extent of having surgical operations to reverse circumcision.

Others did not, and they were prosecuted vigorously and brutalized by the Greeks.

The start of the Maccabean Revolt sprang from a single spontaneous act of resistance. In the foothills village of Modiin in 167BCE, a Greek army unit set up an altar, and ordered the local Jewish rabbi, Mattathias, to sacrifice a pig and eat it. He refused, as did his five sons. When a Jewish collaborator came forward to offer the sacrifice, a furious Mattathias "ran and killed him on the spot, killed the king's officer who was forcing them to sacrifice, and tore down the altar" (1 Mac. 2:15-25).

Mattathias, his sons and their followers then headed for the Judean hills, to launch a guerilla war. They were farmers who had no military training,fighting a professional army. There had not been a Jewish army since Babylon had destroyed the Judean kingdom four centuries before. Their only weapons were farming tools and whatever simple weapons they could construct, such as maces or slings. During this first year, Mattathias died, and his middle son Judah took over command as his successor.

Nicknamed "the hammer" ("Maccabee," in Hebrew), Judah constructed a guerilla army that staged daring nighttime raids on the Greek outposts, then melted back into the countryside. His successes attracted more supporters, and the revolt spread.

The war went on for 25 years, one of the most singular wars for independence in history. The miracle, perhaps is that it was fought at all, let alone won.

The Seleucids and Antiochus sent huge, well equipped armies into Israel to subdue the Jews. They were all defeated, at odds that seem miraculous even today. Judah Maccabee turned out to be a tactical genius, using unheard of tactics, leading the Greek phalanxes into the hills where they could not maneuver and destroying them.

In 164 BCE, the Jews defeated a force comanded by the Viceroy Lysias that outnumbered them two to one. That battle took place six miles north of Hebron, near the Jewish fortress of Beth-zur. The victory allowed Judah and his army to retake Jerusalem.

When they entered Jerusalem, Judah and his followers entered the Holy Temple on the Temple Mount. The Temple had been wrecked and horribly desecrated, with profanities scrawled on the walls and the Ark by the Seleucids.

The Maccabees built a new altar. When the time came to light the N'er Tamid, the Eternal Light of the Temple, the Jews could find only one sanctified jar of oil marked with the seal of the High Priest. It was only enough to last one evening. On the 25th of Kislev, in the year 164 BCE,the lamp was lit with this small jar of oil and, miraculously, stayed lit for eight days, until more oil suitable for the temple was made. The eight days of Hanukkah celebrate that miracle, as well as the divine intervention that had led the Jews to amazing victories over well-equipped professional armies far superior in numbers. "Therefore, carrying ivy-wreathed wants and beautiful branches and also fronds of palm, they offered hymns of thanksgiving to him who had given success to the purifying of his own holy place" (2 Mac. 10:7).

The war itself continued. In 160 BCE, near modern-day Ramallah, Judah was killed, but Judah's brother Jonathan, and then his brother Simon took command of the Jewish army, finally winning complete independence in 142 BCE. At last, "All the people sat under their own vines and fig trees, and there was none to make them afraid" (1 Mac. 14:12.).

Towards the end of the war, Antiochus and the Seleucids became so obsessed with defeating the Jews that they sacked their own cities and sold their own citizens into slavery to get money to pursue the war against the Jews.

The War of the Maccabees was the first war ever fought for religious freedom. Somehow, a group of farmers with no military training who refused to bow to their oppressors defeated a mighty empire and its immense standing armies. There seems to be no plausible explanation for the victory of the Jews except that it was a miracle.

Hannukah reminds us that with G-d's help, victory over evil is assured and no miracle is impossible. Modern Israel and the survival of the Jewish people against all odds are proof of that.


Symbols in Hanukkah

Aside from the Hanukkiah (candlesticks), the other great symbol of Hanukkah are those small spinning tops known as dreidels.













The four letters which appear on the four corners of a dreidel allude to the miracle of Hanukkah. They spell out: Nes (N-miracle), Gadol (G-great), Haya (H-happened) and Sham (S-there, meaning in Israel). Or, `a great miracle happened there.'

Indeed it did.

Chag Sameach! Happy Hannukah!

Iran And The Arabs Meet N' Greet At Doha

As regular members of Joshua's Army know, my position on the Shiite-Sunni rift is that it exists, but that the two sides will always unite when it comes to jihad against the west and will pursue their differences after the infidels are defeated.

The Bush Administration has consistently tried to manipulate the Sunni Shiite divide for strategic purposes and mostly failed, as Iran has consistently gained diplomatic ground with the Arabs, especially our `eternal friends' the Saudis.

At Annapolis, the blatant appeasement of the Arabs was done under the rationale that abasing Israel and forcing them into major strategic concessions would appeal to the `moderate' Sunni Arabs and cause them to unite against Iran.

Aside from the Saudis freeing 1500 al-Qaeda terrorists from jail after they `repented' and promised not to attack the Kingdom, another indication of how mistaken this strategy is came at the recent GCC Conference of the six Gulf Cooperation Council leaders in Doha, Qatar...where Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was invited for the first time, and as the guest of honor. He's seen above strolling hand in hand with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and Sultan Qaboos of Oman, another US `ally'.

While he was there, Ahmadinejad proposed a security and economic pact to the Gulf Arab states, free of "foreign influence" and invited the Gulf leaders to come to Tehran to make what he called a "breakthrough decision."

"This will be a huge step toward reinforcing friendly relationship between the states," Ahmadinejad said. "Our cooperation will unite against any foreign influence or injustice. ... We should make every effort to have the region devoid of any tension or crisis."

According to my sources, Ahmadinejad's proposal was enthusiastically received by the attendees, especially by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

This is not the first time Iran has proposed this. The Iranians originally put this out when they were invited to the Arab league Summit In Riyadh back in April of this year, also a first time event. The guests of honor then were Iranian foreign minister Manoucher Mottaki and Iranian Chief of Staff General Hassan Fayrouz Abadi , who were there to follow up and solidify the various understandings and proposals between King Abdullah and Ahmadinejad at an earlier meeting.

Part of the carrot the Iranians are holding out to the Arabs is a united front against Israel and the west, a better consensus on oil, and freedom from any threat by Iran's developing nuclear weapons or missiles.

This new development may very well be part of what was behind the Bush Administration's sudden about face on Iran.

Bush Signals Iran: US Military Option Off The Table

The big news today was a National Intelligence estimate on Iran that suddenly magically `discovered' that Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003 , and says that even though the Iranians continue to enrich uranium, the earliest they could have enough material for a bomb is 2009, and the mullahs probably won't actually have one until between 2010 and 2015. ...well after President Bush is out of office. The report also comments that Iran seems to be less interested in developing nuclear weapons than previously believed and is more vulnerable to international sanctions.

I don't think the timing of this report is an accident. Translation? I see the Bush Administration signaling publicly that it is taking the military option against Iran off the table. There could be a number of reasons for this..a secret quid pro quo we don't know about, more appeasement of the Saudis and fallout from Annapolis, the State Department indulging in a new diplomatic gambit or simple fatigue on the part of the president and unwillingness to get involved in another firestorm so close to retirement. Or this could have something to do with it.

There will be considerable consternation in Israel over this, as their intel differs radically with this new estimate, and they will see themselves as left high and dry to deal with the Iranian threat on their own.

While the idea that the Bush Administration suddenly has no basis for a hard line with Iran and can postpone things will be pointed at with glee in certain quarters, it flies in the face of logic and all available evidence. For one thing, skeptics might ask themselves how they could acknowledge that Israel could take out a nuclear weapons facility that apparently existed for years in Syria that was unknown to both the US and the IAEA and still assume there was nothing like that in Iran. I would remind my readers that it wasn't the Bush Administration's intel or the IAEA who first busted Iran's illegal clandestine nukes program..it was Iranian dissidents, and that was four and a half years ago. And it had been going on for over a decade.

If Iran really gave up its quest for nukes back in 2003, why the expensive and advanced air defenses around `harmless' facilities? Why the secrecy and lies? Why the failure to accept huge economic incentives from the west in exchange for transparency and abandoning the development for nuclear weapons? Why the threats?

Somehow, I weigh the answers to these questions and the evidence behind them a little more heavily than an intelligence summary leaked at a particularly interesting time. And one wonders about the rationale of making this information public now, given Iran's belligerence. And the idea espoused by the new report, that the Iranians suddenly stopped their nuclear weapons program in 2003 because of `international opinion', something the Iranians have never given a pistachio nut for in the past is an insult to my intelligence.

As for the Iranians themselves, they've drawn an increasingly hard line..another little fact that isn't being reported too much here in the west, but again indicates that Iran has something to hide and is much more interested in developing nukes than this report would have you believe. There simply is no other explanation for their behavior.

Iran's new chief negotiator, Saeed Jalili was harsh and explicit with EU appeaser -in-chief foreign policy chief and head negotiator Javier Solana.After monologuing for an hour an a half about Islam, the will of the Iranians to support nuclear enrichment and several other topics, he told Solana that any understandings he had with his predecessor, Ali Larijani were irrelevant.

"Everything in the past is past, and with me, you start over. None of your proposals has any standing."

Just in case anyone had problems understanding that, Jalili said that "There is no longer an Iranian nuclear problem. The matter is closed."

Solana described that failure of the talks by telling reporters that he was “disappointed.”

The French officials were a little more candid, and described the meeting as “a disaster,” adding “Jalili essentially said, ‘Everything that Larijani has proposed is a dead letter and we have to start from zero.’” The French official was quoted as ending, “We have in front of us the real Iran.”

The hard-line position from the Iran should be a clear confirmation, if nothing else, that they have no intention of any compromise and that there's something brewing with the nuclear program that they are developing that they'd rather the west didn't find out about until it's too late.It's also important to remember that the difference between a peaceful nuclear program and a nuclear weapons program is largely one of application. The technology needed is the same, and applying to weapons technology is a matter of a few months, if that.

The Bush Administration could be merely sowing disinformation to give Iran a false sense of security before the kill, but I doubt it. Given the political climate here in the US and how the dinosaur media has made this a top story, I don't see how they could risk the political fallout.

Iran has regarded itself at war with us since 1979, and they have conducted themselves accordingly. If the Bush Administration truly is involved in what it still refers to as `the war on terror', than confronting Iran, a major supporter, financier and enabler of Islamic terrorism has to be a major part of winning that war. One can only hope that the Bush Administration has some kind of plan to achieve this beyond mere `diplomacy', which the Mullahs continue to treat with contempt.

However, if President Bush really is throwing in the towel, relying on sanctions and simply waiting out the clock, it's something we will long remember and regret in the west.

Abbas' Security Forces Strike Their First Blow For `Peace'

The man you see in the picture was Ido Zoldan. He was murdered by Abbas' Palestinian police, using weapons given to them courtesy of the US taxpayer.

They lay in wait and ambushed his car as he drove past the Palestinian village of al-Punduk.

The day after the murder, the IDF received a tip on the perpetrators and raided the village of Kfar Kadum near al-Pundak. They arrested Daper Barham and Abdullah Barahm, both 22-year-old Palestinian policemen and Fatah members. Both confessed, and told the Shin Bet that they had planned this long in advance. They said they had parked their car on the side of the road and waited for an Israeli car to pass by. Once Zoldan's car appeared, they merged onto the road, passed him, and opened fire.

A third killer, Fadi Jama, also a PA policeman, is in Palestinian custody. Which means he'll be released shortly.

The Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the murder.

Ido Zoldan (Z"l) was only 29 and a father of two, three-year-old Aharon and one-year-old Rachel. His whole life was ahead of him. He was born, lived and was buried in the Israeli town of Kedumim.It's also where he met his wife, Tehila.

Ido was a war hero, a decorated officer in Israel's Golani Brigade, who worked with his father in a construction company that built homes in nearly every part of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank.)Another of his projects involved sponsoring and mentoring a group of Ethiopian children, helping them to make the transition into daily life in Israel.

I write this for a specific reason. It's important that we remember that Ido Zoldan and others like him are not mere statistics, not simply fallout from some `cycle of violence' but real human beings, who were murdered not because of anything they might have done but simply because they were Jews.

They are the human victims of Oslo and Annapolis, sacrificed simply to massage the vanity and cowardice of politicians who think that continuing to appease Arab terrorists and their enablers leads anywhere.

After Oslo, the Israelis were told that it was necessary to `bolster' Arafat and make strategic concessions to him, so they did, because they desperately wanted peace that they didn't stop to consider the implications of what they were doing. And this is exactly what happened in Israel after Oslo and Arafat's `peace of the brave'.

There will be more of it - more terror, murder and bereaved families - until the lesson is finally learned.

Hat Tip: My friend Carl In Jerusalem at Israel Matzav who also has additional details on this.

How long, G-d? How long?

Venezuala to Chavez: `Why Don't You Just Shut Up?'

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez apparently has irritated more people than just Spanish King Juan Carlos. He had a setback this weekend when he attempted to make himself Presidente' for life, apply marxism to the economy and hijack what remains of his country's liberty.

In a referendum, the Venezuelan people defeated constitutional changes designed to place Chavez in charge of virtually every area of life and keep him in power.

That's the good news.

The bad news is that Chavez can accomplish most of this by decree,thanks to the Chavez-controlled national assembly passing the Enabling Law back in February, which gives the president the authority to issue decrees in economic and other matters that can last up to 18 months, and then be renewed.

So Chavez is still in a position to place the Venezuelan economy in a marxist mode and control most of the country's political life to consolidate his hold on power - it will just take longer and have to be done a little at a time.

`Teddy Bear' Teacher Pardoned And Kicked Out Of Sudan

Well, it appears that the Sudan has freed Gillian Gibbons, the teacher who was jailed for `insulting religion' because she let her class of seven-year-olds name a teddy bear `Muhammed' has been pardoned by Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir and freed from jail.

She was taken from her cell to the British embassy in Khartoum, has made some properly groveling public statements and will be on a plane out of the country shortly.

The teddy bear will be beheaded for blasphemy.

OK, kidding, but for a second you thought I was serious, didn't you?

As for Ms. Gibbons, I strongly doubt she was let loose simply for good public relations, which is what British PM Gordon Brown would have us believe. A price was paid, and we'll find out what it was later.

Condi Rice Attempts To Sandbag Israel At The UN

There's an amazing story behind the unprecedented U.S. withdrawal of a Security Council Resolution at the U.N. last week.

After the Annapolis gang rape of Israel last week, Condi Rice apparently decided to ramp things up even further by getting the UN Security Council involved in a closed door session to push through a resolution endorsing the Annapolis declaration of principles signed by Israel and the Palestinians and giving the UN a role in overseeing the process - without informing the Israelis.

Accordingly, American UN Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad received permission from the Security Council to present the text for approval in a closed door session.

Since Israel is the only UN member not ever allowed a seat on the Security Council, that meant that the Israelis would have no opportunity for a hearing or to dispute the language of the resolution, while Qatar, who sits on the Security Council was there to represent the Arab League and would be able to supplement the Annapolis declaration with additional clauses and language detrimental to Israel, and put it up for a Council vote...which, if it passed, would have cemented any additions with the force of a UN resolution

A Security Council endorsement would have brought the UN into the process as an overseer and arbitrator, and made the UN judge, jury and possibly executioner on compliance with `the process'...or, to put it another way, given the UN's strongly pro-Arab stance, it would have added another body on the Arab side of this particular tug of war against Israel.

It also would have set in stone the deadline of December 31st, 2008 for the end of negotiations, no matter how the Palestinians behave or comply with their part of the agreement. That's exactly what the Saudis demanded all along.

Apparently there's some nasty stuff even the Olmert government won't eat.

When Israeli Ambassador Danny Gillerman was alerted to the closed door meeting, he apparently contacted Olmert and Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni immediately and alerted them to what was going on behind their backs.

I have no information on exactly what sort of language passed between the Bush Administration and the Israelis or what was said, but I imagine it was fairly strong, because the US withdrew the draft resolution in an embarrassing about face.

Ambassador Khalilzad was recalled to Washington, and was apparently willing to fall on his sword for this faux pas until some of Condi Rice's minions at the State Department accused him of `freelancing' and not consulting with Rice, his boss. At that point the Ambassador reiterated that he had fully consulted with Secretary Rice on this.

In view of the way the Israelis were treated at the conference, I'm inclined to believe him.

A lot has come out about the way things actually went down at Annapolis, and it isn't pretty. I'm embarrassed to admit it, but at Annapolis, the Americans essentially legitimized Arab hatred for Jews. The Saudis and some of the other Arabs objected to even walking through the same door as the Israelis, let alone shaking hands with them..so the Israelis had to enter through the service entrance. And the US acquiesced to the Arabs' demand not to appear in any photos with Jews.

Frankly, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that they had bathrooms marked `Jews Only'.

Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni was reduced to asking the Arabs, during an address at the conference, Why doesn't anyone want to shake my hand? "Why doesn't anyone want to be seen speaking to me?"

"She was saying 'Stop treating me as a pariah,' " said Frans Timmermans, the Dutch Minister for European Affairs, who was there. "They shun her like she is Count Dracula's younger sister."

When the Israeli delegates spoke, not only did most of the Arabs not bother with the customary polite applause, but many of them, including the entire Saudi delegation didn't even bother to put in their headphones to hear the translation while the Israelis spoke... a gesture of deliberate contempt conveying that nothing a representative of Israel could say was worth listening to.

Meanwhile Condi Rice made speeches about how she considered the Palestinians and the Israelis pain as `equal', and obscenely compared Israelis trying to defend themselves from Palestinian terrorism that deliberately targets civilians with white supremacists victimizing blacks in the Jim Crow south.

And this, believe or not, at a conference in which she presided over that was a modern example of segregation...against Jews.

The hypocrisy is mindboggling, and one can only imagine what other humiliations and pressures are in store for Israel in the next year.

This will come back to haunt us.

The Royal Navy ` Would Struggle To Fight A War'

That's exactly what a leaked report from Britain's Ministry of Defense had to say.

The report was commissioned by Britain's Defense Secretary, Des Brown as ammunition to counter criticism in the media and from Britain's Conservative opposition...but ended up coming to a very different conclusion than Brown expected.

According to the report, after years of cuts in spending by Labour, the British Navy has an "under-resourced" fleet composed of "aging and operationally defective ships", the Navy would have problems even repeating its role in the Iraq war and is now "far more vulnerable to unexpected shocks".

The leaked report continues: "A combination of age and reduced spending on maintenance has resulted in today's ships carrying a far higher number of operational defects, which directly erode operational capacity."

"The current material state of the fleet is not good; the Royal Navy would be challenged to mount a medium-scale operation in accordance with current policy against a technologically capable adversary."

The report also refers to the British Navy as "thinly stretched", says its fighting capability is being "eroded" and the fleet's ability to influence events at the strategic level is "under threat".

Of course, the point man on this is none other than the present British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown...who as Chancellor of the Exchequer under Tony Blair was the one who controlled the fleet's funding.

The report was created by one of the UK's most prominent sailors, Rear-Admiral Alan Massey, CBE, the assistant chief of the naval staff.

To show how badly the British navy has eroded, the report cites the following:

• The entire naval fleet has been reduced from a fleet of 136 in 1987 to only 75 ship today, a reduction of around 44%.
  

• The navy's destroyers and frigates have been cut by over half, from 54 ships to a mere 25, and those ships have an average age of 17 years. Submarines have fallen by 66%, from 38 to 13 and the navy's manpower has been cut from 66,500 in 1987 to a mere 38,860, a reduction of around 44%.

• Britain's home fleet, its first line of defense had 35 ships operating in the UK's home waters in 1987...in 2007, there are only 10.

The report has one positive bit, when it comments on Britain's building program for new aircraft carriers and what it calls joint combat aircraft. It doesn't mention, however, how these ships are going to be protected without sufficient destroyer and submarine cover.

Of course, the Royal Navy's not the only casualty of Labour's defence cuts. Just two weeks ago, British army chief General Sir Richard Dannatt complained to the British government that it was "mortgaging" the goodwill of the Army, referring to the huge cuts in spending and in personnel forced on it by the Labour government.

This, by the way, is why Britain has to crawl to repulsive regimes when its citizens or sailors are kidnapped or abused.

Cousins, you had better pray for peace...it certainly doesn't seem like you're prepared to do much to be able to defend yourselves.

Lebanon, Another Victim Of Annapolis

The Israelis weren't the only ones who were gang raped at Annapolis.

Lebanese democracy has apparently become another victim.

Apparently the Saudis and the Syrians used Annapolis to conduct a little meeting of their own on the subject behind the back of the US and came up with the latest `compromise' candidate for Lebanon's presidency..General Michel Suleiman, head of the Lebanese Army and a Syrian puppet.

A little background...Suleiman was hand picked by the Syrians to head the Lebanese army back in 1999 when Lebanon was still occupied by Syria's Army, and he reportedly has personal connections with the Assad regime. During the 2006 war with Israel, Suleiman ordered the Lebanese army to cooperate with Hezbollah and allowed Hezbollah to use the army’s facilities, including a coastal radar station used to aim and fire the missiles which hit and damaged an Israeli ship on July 15.

Since the war, General Suleiman has been covering for Hezbollah during their rearmament in direct violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, and has refused to use the Lebanese Army to cooperate with UNIFIL to patrol the borders or stop Hezbollah from moving back into its old positions in south Lebanon.

Not surprisingly, Suleiman is Syria's number one pick for Lebanon's presidency . Michel Aoun , a prominent Syrian tool who wanted the office is backing him, now that it's clear the Syrians aren't supporting Aoun for the job. And Hezbollah is also now supporting this man. This should tell you something about whom he is.

Saad al-Hariri, Druse leader Walid Jumblatt and the rest of the March 14 democratic anti-Syrian majority had been opposing Suleiman as a presidential candidate ever since the Lebanese political crisis began. Yet right after Annapolis, they agreed to a constitutional amendment that would allow Suleiman to be elected president. The leader of the Christian Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea also signed on to the deal.

This took place almost solely because the Bush Administration invited Syria to Annapolis, and the March 14 leaders aren't fools. They saw that Syria being invited to Annapolis was a clear sign that Washington was very likely going to cut a deal with Syria over Lebanon, so they made their own bargain with Hezbollah and Syria to protect themselves.

Saudi Foreign Minister Saudi al-Feisal announcing his support for Suleiman's candidacy as well was another clear sign to the March 14 anti-Syrian bloc to make their own deal with Hezbollah and the Syrians while they could.

This means that Suleiman will almost certainly be elected, the Syrians and Hezbollah ( an dthus, Iran) will be back in control and the UN tribunal on the assassinations of ex-Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and other Lebanese politicians that points directly at the top ranks of the Assad regime as the perpetrators will be stonewalled and blocked, just as it was under the last President Emil Lahoud, who was `elected' literally under the guns of the occupying Syrian army.

The odd thing is that there may not even be a US-Syrian deal on Lebanon, but simply a deal between Syria and the Saudis.The Annapolis event was pushed through by Condi Rice for one reason only...to placate the Saudis by backing the Saudi `peace' ultimatum, creating a second Arab Palestinian state no matter what the cost, and laying the groundwork for pushing Israel into major concessions. So of course the Syrians were bribed to attend, and promised that the strategic Golan Heights would be on the agenda, per the Saudis.

To the Lebanese, this was a deja vu experience, since this is exactly what happened to them back in the 1990's under the first President Bush, who allowed Syria to `handle' Lebanon as it's personal fiefdom. They have absolutely no reason to think they aren't on the block as part of Syria's `price' for going along with Rice's Middle East agenda.

The Assad regime supports terrorism, allows al Qaeda fighters across its borders into Iraq to kill Americans and has whittled down the March 14 majority in Lebanon by murdering its members one by one, along with anyone else who got in their way, but aside from rhetoric, the US has done absolutely nothing about it.

So those Lebanese who risked their lives to try to put together an Arab democracy in the Middle East and resisted a terrorist regime end up betrayed, in the end. And the Lebanese journalists, politicians, and dissidents who were killed and maimed by Hezbollah and the Syrians and who died for that dream will have died in vain.

If part of the the Bush Administration's rationale of the Annapolis meeting was to pry Syria away from Iran and safeguard Lebanon's fragile democratic government, it failed - miserably.