The PA Lets The Secret Out - Olmert Has Already Agreed To Divide Jerusalem

The Jerusalem Post started yet another firestorm in Israeli politics by revealing publicly what most of us knew already - that Israeli PM Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni have already agreed to re-divide Israel's capitol, Jerusalem.

And they are lying through their teeth when they deny it.

The Post quoted Yasir Arafat's old spokeshole Ahmed Qurei on secret talks ongoing between the Palestinians and Livni:

"The main progress has been achieved during the secret talks, particularly on the issue of Jerusalem. Today we can say that Israel is prepared to withdraw from almost all the Arab neighborhoods and villages in Jerusalem. Israel is prepared to redivide Jerusalem and this is a positive development."

Of course, the Palestinians' definition of what constitutes 'Arab neighborhoods' in Jerusalem has an extremely liberal interpretation, if you get my drift.Especially as, unlike the Israelis in 1967 the Arabs are going to insist on ethnic cleansing and total control over the Jewish shrines like the Kotel in the Old City.

However, Qurei has a problem,in spite of the Olmert/Livni duo's suicidal willingness to uproot Jews from their homes and give the Palestinians closer range and a better platform to proceed on their plan to make the rest of Israel free of Jews...it's not going fast enough.

"The negotiations are moving too slowly," he said. "There are still too many difficulties, although one can say that some progress has been achieved."

However, the Palestinians have their friend Condi Rice due back soon and according to Qurei, the Palestinians have asked her help in getting involved to lean on the Israelis to make the whole disgraceful process go quicker and to make sure the Israelis don;t screw the deal up by actually defending their citizens in south Israel against rocket attacks...

{Qurei} said the US administration had promised to pressure Israel to refrain from carrying out a massive attack in the Gaza Strip. He said the PA believed that Israel's policy of "collective punishment" also served Hamas's interests because it drove more Palestinians into their open arms.

"When you deprive a Palestinian from gas and electricity, he will hate Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and not Hamas," he added.

Interesting, considering that the last homicide bombing attack on Dimona was not carried out by Hamas but by Fatah's own al-Aksa Martyr's Brigade!

Is Israel prepared to be sold out, Munich-like by its own farcical government? The Israeli people are going to have to make a choice, and soon.

And as far as US complicity in this travesty goes, mark my words - if Condi Rice, James Baker and yes, the current occupant of the White House have their way and Israel is marginalized as a US ally, we will all live to regret it.

John Bolton Endorses McCain

It's official - as of yesterday, ex-US Ambassador John Bolton has endorsed John McCain.

This is an important endorsement as far as I'm concerned, and I'll be interested to see if Bolton campaigns for McCain in the 2008 general. Along with the endorsement from Rudy Giuliani, it could mean a great deal, especially to foreign policy conservatives sitting on the fence.

Having John Bolton as say, NSC or Secretary of State would be the State Department's worst nightmare, and probably the best thing that's happened to US foreign policy in decades.

British Athletes Forced To KowTow To Dictators - Again

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

In the run up to the scheduled Olympics to be held in Bei-jing Britain's Olympic Committee has decided to to force the UK's olympic athletes to to sign a 32 page contract banning them from any criticism or comment on China's politics, violations of human rights or issues like the occupation of Tibet - or stay home.

Not only will public comments be banned, but remarks inprivate conversations, on blogs, and in correspondence. Violators will be shipped backed to the UK forthwith.

This isn't the first time British athletes have been forced to bow down to dictators, but it's the first time it's actually been made official and binding policy and a make or break criterion to decide who goes to the Olympics and who doesn't.

The above photo is from 1938, and it shows the British football team obeying orders and giving the Nazi salute in Berlin to `show respect' for Hitler and their hosts. This despicable action, of course, was after kristallnacht and at a time when Hitler's intentions toward the Jews was no longer in doubt.

One of the few things I respect Jimmy Carter for - and believe me, it's a tiny list - was his decision to have the US boycott the Soviet Olympics in Moscow in 1980 after its brutal invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.

Apparently the British Olympic Association is prepared to repeat 1938 all over again. If so, then it says a great deal about how much freedom is truly valued in Great Britain these days.

Winning Nights For Obama And Huckabee

Barack Obama added to his delegate total as he swept Saturday's Democratic contests, giving him a nice tailwind coming into today's Maine caucuses and three upcoming primaries February 12th.

John McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee was handed a clear message that he's going to have to do more to unite an increasingly disaffected Republican electorate, especially when it comes to self-described conservatives. Mike Huckabee won both the Kansas and Louisiana primaries, while McCain squeaked past Huckabee for a narrow victory in Washington state.

Even worse news for McCain was what I call the Kiss O' Death - a quasi-endorsement from the current occupant of the White House.

In a Fox News interview, President Bush actually offered to help McCain with conservatives if he's the nominee. "I think that if John's the nominee, he's got some convincing to do to convince people that he is a solid conservative," Bush said. "I'd be glad to help him if he's the nominee."

Of course, this assumes that President Bush has credentials among conservatives. If I were McCain, I'd be screaming `Nooooo! Don't help!' and throwing a phone at the TV after hearing that one.

As for Barack Obama, he won in Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington and the Virgin Islands yesterday, actually taking the pledged-delegate lead over Hillary Clinton for the first time. Of course, if you count superdelegates, Hillary is still ahead.

Mike Huckabee insists he has no intention of ending his campaign,even though the math isn't working in his favor. Even if he wins every remaining state by at least 50 percent of the vote to McCain's 40 percent, McCain would likely still be the GOP nominee.

"I know the pundits, and I know what they say: The math doesn't work out," Huckabee said Saturday morning at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. "Well, I didn't major in math; I majored in miracles. And I still believe in those, too."

One of those miracles Huckabee is thinking about might just be a stampeded GOP convention...something Obama may be counting on for the Democrats as well. It's happened before.

Worthwhile Reading, 2/10/08

Here's a little reading for a Sunday:

Peggy Noonan - Can Mrs. Clinton Lose -- With Grace? - Peggy Noonan sees Barack Obama as winning the Democrat race, and wonders if Mrs. Clinton will emulate Mitt Romney or bring the temple of the Phillistines down with her if she falls.

Who do Arabs want...in the White House? - - Spot On's Christopher Allbritton comes up with the obvious answer - Barack Obama.

The Archbishop's Speech and Dhimmi - Or Just Dim? A double play in the Spectator, in which Melanie Phillips eviscerates the puerile remarks of Dr. Rowan William, Archbishop of Canterbury and his call for sharia law to be recognized in Britain.

Mark Steyn: McCain can sure sound like a conservative - The latest by Mark Steyn
on McCain and conservatives..

Watcher's Council Results, 2/08/08

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 week's winner was A Short Hitch by Done With Mirrors, a piece I thought was superb on the origins, causes and historical feedback of the American Civil War.


In second place was The Most Ridiculous Story of 2008? Part 2 byCheat Seeking Missiles, Laer's fine entry disposing of a hysterical rant in favor of Barack Obama.

In the non-Council category the winner was Changing the Organizational Culture (Updated) by Small Wars Journal, an interesting piece on winning the war of ideas by a change in attitudes and the organizational culture in our Army.

In second place, we had "Mass Producers of Distortion" by EU Referendum, a nice rant by my blogpal Richard on the dinosaur media.

Hearty congratulations not only to the winners, but to the rest of the entrants.

Citizen McCain

With Mitt Romney's withdrawal from the Republican race, the nomination of Senator John McCain is all but assured.

I disagree with Senator McCain on any number of points, but I have to give him credit for the virtue of tenacity. A few months ago, his campaign was broke, he was a distant fourth in the polls and few people gave him much of a chance. He hung on, the same way the younger John McCain hung on back in the POW tiger cage in North Vietnam. I have not forgotten that he was brutally tortured for refusing to give his country's enemies what another Senator, John Kerry enthusiastically gave them willingly and for free.

That kind of tenacity and courage can take someone a long way in uncertain times.

Senator McCain today addressed the CPAC convention, right after Mitt Romney announced he was suspending his campaign, and it was obvious that he made a honest effort to appeal to the party's conservative base and appeal for unity, including having ex-Senator George Allen of Virginia introduce him.

It was a decent speech, but whether it was sincere or merely red meat rhetoric to satisfy the base remains to be seen.

I fully understand where thinkers like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Mark Steyn are coming from when they decline to support McCain. As Mark Steyn said today on Laura Ingraham's radio show, if we're going to have attempts to give 11 million illegal aliens amnesty, spend billions on global warming, impose tax hikes and mount major assaults on freedom of speech, he'd rather it was during a Hillary presidency when the Republicans in congress could attack these things as the opposition rather than during a McCain presidency when they would be compelled to go along because of party loyalty.

It's no secret that neither Senator McCain nor Mitt Romney were my choices for president.I've already given you an examination of where I think a McCain presidency would be similar to a Clinton presidency, and some important areas where they would differ.

One important area,of course is in the War on Jihad. As opposed to the anti-military and feckless attitudes posed by Hillary and Obama, a President McCain could, I think, be relied on to take this struggle to the enemy and to do what it takes to win it, unlike the present occupant of the White House. Whether he would also bring in cabinet members and advisers to provide the sagacity and the strategic dimensions necessary for victory and to deal with the economic excesses of the Bush Administration is another question, and a lot will be revealed by his choice of a running mate, his foreign policy team and his cabinet.

Those choices will reveal a great about whether Senator McCain was sincere in what he said today. If he is, he is worthy of support - especially given the alternatives.

`Sharia Is Unavoidable In Britain'

Or at least that's how the Imam Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams sees it.

Talk about embracing dhimmi status with both hands...

The good Archbishop was speaking on the Beeb's Radio 4 and said that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system. And that Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

Now, why not, Dr. Williams? are you planning on foregoing Christ's abjuration about rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar's - just for Muslims? Doesn't every other religion have to alter some of its cultural practices to abide by British law? Isn't the agreement to abide by Britain's laws and uphold them one of the prerequisites for citizenship or residence? And why shouldn't someone who's British and a Muslim owe his allegiance to his country rather than the Muslim umma?

And what about sharia itself, which mandates an inferior status for women,Jews and Christians,and the death penalty for apostates and homosexuals?


The Archbishop, amazingly, defended his views by cherry -picking sharia, saying people people needed to look at Islamic law "with a clear eye."

"They should not imagine, either, that we know exactly what we mean by Sharia and just associate it with ... Saudi Arabia, or whatever," he continued.

"Nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that has sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states: the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women."

But that's sharia, Dr. Williams. And as a matter of fact, since you mention Saudi Arabia, what about the fact that the vast majority of the mosques in Britain are controlled by the Deobandi sect, a wahabi offshoot that believes in much the same interpretation of Islam as the Saudis do?

There is a subtext to Dr. Rowan William's remarks, and it's not going to be a pleasant one for our cousins across the pond to face.

What this tired old dhimmi is saying is that Britain has imported for itself a large population that do not respect or abide by its laws and have no loyalty to the country. And that Britain had better get used to it, appease these people and hope to be left in relative peace.

I suppose it remains for the UK to decide if living on their knees is preferable to standing on their feet...

US Spy Chief Retreats From Iran NIE

The plot thickens.

First Russia's deputy foreign minister makes a 180 degree turnaround and calls Iran's launch of the Samir-1 rocket `a cause for concern' and now U.S. Spy Chief Mike McConnell is retreating from the Iran NIE, according to Eli Lake in the New York Sun.

At a hearing yesterday of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the intelligence director, Michael McConnell, said, "If I had 'til now to think about it, I probably would change a few things." He later added, "I would change the way we describe the Iranian nuclear program. I would have included that there are the component parts, that the portion of it, maybe the least significant, had halted."

Mr. McConnell was referring to the specific Iranian program to design potential nuclear warheads, which the December estimate said had halted in 2003. But in his opening testimony, Mr. McConnell noted that two other components of the nuclear program were moving ahead — the enrichment of uranium, which he said was the most difficult part of making a bomb, and the development of long-range missiles capable of hitting North Africa and Europe.

The National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear program released on December 3 distinguished Iran's enrichment of uranium at Natanz and Arak from its formal nuclear weapons program, which it said had halted in 2003 after the American invasion of Iraq.

Yesterday, Mr. McConnell struck a different tone. "Declared uranium enrichment efforts, which will enable the production of fissile material, continue. This is the most difficult challenge in nuclear production. Iran's efforts to perfect ballistic missiles that can reach North Africa and Europe also continue."

Of course, part of those efforts to perfect those ballistic missiles includes the launch of the Safir-1!

Could it be that the ostriches are finally taking their heads out of the sand?

Hat tip to Carl In Jerusalem.

Iran's Safir-1 Missile Launch Causes 'Concern' In US And Russia

Iran's launch of it's Safir-1 space rocket may have done more than just mark a milestone for Iran. It may have provided, finally grounds for the US and Russia to cooperate to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program.

The Russians and Putin have always maintained that in their opinion, Iran was not seeking to develop nuclear weapons, so yesterday's comments by deputy foreign minister Alexander Losyukov that Iran's test launch of the Safir-1 rocket earlier this week “adds to general suspicions of Iran regarding its potential desire to build nuclear weapons” marks a 180 degree turnabout from Russia's previous position in the matter.

“Long-range missiles are one of the components of such weapons. That causes concern,” Russian news agencies quoted the deputy foreign minister as saying on Wednesday. “Any movement in terms of creating such a potential weapon naturally worries us and others.”

Among those "others" are the US. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino voiced pretty much the same concerns and was quoted as saying, “Such technology is the same as that needed to deliver a nuclear bomb.”

This kind of rhetoric might just signal a new cooperation between Russia and the US, which may now be prepared to leave the farcical NIE report on Iran's nukes in the dustbin of historical follies where it belongs.

The question remains: if this is true and the Safir-1 was a wakeup call for Putin, just what is he going to demand in return for joining the US in leaning on Iran?

Perhaps a slowdown or abandonment of the planned missile interceptor bases in poland and the Czech Republic, something Russia is adamantly opposed to?

I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

Romney To Quit Race At CPAC Conference

A report by Mark Halperin at TIME has Mitt Romney ending his campaign today at the CPAC conference today...stay tuned!

UPDATE: Yep, Romney's out...

Dedicated To The City Council Of Berkeley, California

The City Council of Berkeley, California recently disgraced itself (I can think of no other more appropriate word) by issuing a diktat in the form of a city council resolution attacking the local US Marine corps recruiters, saying that they were unwelcome in Berkeley and that if they chose to stay they will "do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

The city council also voted 8-1 to allow the odious Code Pink, famous for taunting wounded soldiers at Walter Reed and giving money to our enemies in wartime with a special designated parking space in front of the recruiting office, with encouragement to Code Pink to "impede" Marine recruitment.

That 'encouragement' has led to members of the group chaining themselves to the doors of the recruiting office and deliberately interfering with the Marine's lawful duty in direct violation of federal law.

For those who wish more detail on this story, a number of my blogpals have excellent pieces on it and I recommend you check out what Ms. Bookworm, Greg at Rhymes With Right or Edwonk have to say about it.

For my part, I just thought I'd share an old favorite poem of mine with you - and dedicate to the members of the Berkeley City council and the harridans at Code Pink who besmirch our beloved Republic with their presence:

TOMMY

I went into a public-’ouse to get a pint o’beer,
The publican ‘e up an’ sez, “We serve no red-coats here.”
The girls be’ind the bar they laughed an’ giggled fit to die, I outs into the street again an’ to myself sez I:

O it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, go away”; But it’s “Thank you, Mister Atkins,'’ when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it’s “Thank you, Mr. Atkins,'’ when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but ‘adn’t none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-’alls,
But when it comes to fightin’, Lord! they’ll shove me in the stalls!

For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, wait outside”;
But it’s “Special train for Atkins” when the trooper’s on the tide,
The troopship’s on the tide, my boys, the troopship’s on the tide,
O it’s “Special train for Atkins” when the trooper’s on the tide.

Yes, makin’ mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;
An’ hustlin’ drunken soldiers when they’re goin’ large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin’ in full kit.

Then it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy how’s yer soul?”
But it’s “Thin red line of ‘eroes” when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it’s “Thin red line of ‘eroes” when the drums begin to roll.

We aren’t no thin red ‘eroes, nor we aren’t no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An’ if sometimes our conduck isn’t all your fancy paints:
Why, single men in barricks don’t grow into plaster saints;

While it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, fall be’ind,”
But it’s “Please to walk in front, sir,” when there’s trouble in the wind,
There’s trouble in the wind, my boys, there’s trouble in the wind,
O it’s “Please to walk in front, sir,” when there’s trouble in the wind.

You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires an’ all:
We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow’s Uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.

For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!” But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country,” when the guns begin to shoot;
An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
But Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool - you bet that Tommy sees!

-Rudyard Kipling

(`Tommy' is the generic British name for an infantry soldier, similar to `GI Joe' in the US)

Qassams Hit School Children In Israel

Two girls, 12 and two were injured by shrapnel by Palestinian qassam missiles at a playground near a kindergarten in the Eshkol Regional Council in the western Negev.

"Tchelet, the two-year-old, sustained shrapnel injuries to her leg, and her mother suffered from shock. Twelve-year-old Yardena was injured in the shoulder. They were both taken to the Barzilai Medical Center in Ashkelon for treatment.

Gladis Za'arur-Fishbein, Tchelet's mother, said she had just picked up her infant daughter from the children's quarters in the kibbutz when the Qassam landed.

"We were walking on the road with the playground to our left; it's usually packed with kids at this time of day," she recounted. "Suddenly I heard a whistling sound followed by an explosion and fire. I was thrown back by the force of the blast. Tchelet was also thrown back and I heard her call for my help. I picked her up and noticed that she was injured in the leg; her shoe was filled with blood."

Gladis' friend then took the mother and daughter to her home until the paramedics arrived.

"There were times in the past when we heard the 'Color Red' alert system and then quickly ran for cover," Gladis added, "but this time the rocket fell without warning; it just exploded right before my eyes."

Eshkol Regional Council head Haim Yalin, whose daughter attends the kibbutz's kindergarten, told Ynet "the rocket landed at a time when all of the children usually play outside, especially on a beautiful day like today. This is also the time of day when some parents come to pick their children up".

Another rocket barrage of 12 qassams hit Sderot as well. A 14-year-old girl was moderately injured by shrapnel and three people were lightly hurt from smoke inhalation after a rocket made a direct hit on a house.

`Moderately wounded' in Israeli parlance can mean anything from serious cuts and contusions up to blinding or losing a limb.

In response, the Israeli Air force took out a couple of the launch sites near Beit Hanoun today as their crews were preparing to launch a fresh qassam barrage, the usual limited - and ineffectual- response from the Olmert government.

I find it difficult to fathom how the Israelis continue to live like this, or why they allow a government to stay in power that is willing to allow it to happen.

Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that, for now, it's Sderot and small towns and kibbutzim in south Israel, rather than Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Call me cynical, but I have the feeling that if qassams were landing in Olmert and Livni's front yards or endangering their families, the Israeli response might be very different.

Watcher's Council Nominations, 2/06/08

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.

The majority of this week's entries focused mainly on two topics - Campaign `08 and a frankly seditious measure passed by the Berkeley City Council attempting to ban military recruiters from the city limits.


The Super Tuesday Shuffle -- And Beyond Joshuapundit - In my piece this week, written just before Super Tuesday, I examined Campaign `08, predicted the reality that John McCain would be the frontrunner and the likely GOP nominee, analyzed the hidden reason for his ascendency, what it represents, the conservative blowback, why Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter may have a point and the likely fallout, good and ill of a McCain presidency.

I'd Have To Ask?? The Colossus of Rhodey - Hube looks at a Dallas School Board policy that prohibits teachers from giving any student a grade of less than 50 - regardless of whether they do any work or not.Another symptom of our self-esteem at all costs education system,apparently, and one that perfectly reflects some disturbing trends in society at large.

Campaign Consultant Kang Speaks Soccer Dad - This week, Soccer Dad also takes on the split in the GOP among conservatives over the apparent ascendency of John McCain as the Republican nominee, and examines why Republicans should get behind him if he's the nominee.

The Anti-McCain Republicans The Glittering Eye - Dave Schuler likewise writes on the brouhaha between McCain and the GOP conservatives and examines William Kristoll's argument that McCain is a viable choice for conservatives. And BTW, Dave, kudos to you for helping out at your local polling place.

A Short Hitch Done With Mirrors - This was the piece I'd hoped Callimachus would nominate this week, a fascinating encapsulation of the background and results of the US Civil War by an author who's written much about the subject and knows what he's talking about. At a time when we seem to be once again refining what our federal government means and the nature of our Republic,it's a topic well worth revisiting.

Good Immigrant, Bad Immigrant Bookworm Room - Ms. Bookworm does something rather brave this week.Sparked by her reading the biography of Irving Berlin, she reflects on the difference between the wave of immigration that occurred in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and the more modern one occurring today.While much of her views on those differences are accurate,I would only caution her to remember the difference between legal immigrants who truly want to be part of our beloved country and those illegal aliens who do not, and to be careful not to compare apples with oranges.

Cutting Off Berkeley Rhymes With Right - Greg quite correctly supports Senator Jim DeMint's threat to draft legislation to rescind about $2.1 million in federal monies earmarked for the City of Berkeley, California in the recently passed appropriations bill to penalize their city council for their seditious attempt to obstruct lawful military recruiting in Berkeley in defiance of existing federal law. I agree with him.

The Most Ridiculous Story of 2008? Part 2 Cheat Seeking Missiles - Laer nominates another candidate for the honor, an idiotic puff piece worshiping Barack Obama by Michael Chabon in the WAPO.

Obama Disparages the Military & Gets a Pass On Iraq From Fox News Wolf Howling - GW likewise writes on the Emperor Without Any Clothes, focusing on a farcical FOX news interview with the Senator on Iraq and the military.

The reality,of course, is that Senator Obama lacks even a basic understanding of the military and what it's about. If his father had been a white millworker instead of a black Kenyan Muslim, his candidacy would have about the same constituency as John Edwards.

Expelling The U.S. Marines The Education Wonks - EdWonk likewise writes on Berkeley's attempt to run the Marines out of town, and notes the difference between the Left's mouthing of the `tolerance' mantra versus the reality.

The Debate of Almost, Mostly, Republicans Right Wing Nut House - Rick likewise writes on Campaign `08, focusing on the January 31st debate between the Republican candidates. He compares Romney, McCain and Huckabee and states why none of them come close to making him want to pull the lever for them.

Why Should We Care Whether Hillary or McCain Wins? Big Lizards - Daffyd also likes the idea of Republicans falling in line behind the candidacy of John McCain..and goes into detail as to why.

Sooper Dooper Tuesday Update

Some real surprises out there...or maybe not.

For the Democrats, Lady Macbeth has won:
New York,(232 delegates )
New Jersey,(107)
Tennessee,(68)
Massachusetts, (93)
Arizona, (56)
Oklahoma,(38)
Arkansas,( 35)

More importantly, she's been projected to win in California, with its huge 307 delegates by both NBC and CBS. She's leading Obama right now, 55%-35%.

Obama has won:
Illinois (153)
Georgia (103)
Alabama (52)
Connecticut (48)
Delaware (15)
Utah (23)
North Dakota (21)
Colorado (71)
Kansas (21)
Idaho (12)

Obama is projected to win in Minnesota (72) and Alaska (18)

Still too close to call are New Mexico (26) where Hillary leads 42% to 38% and Missouri (72) where Obama is leading by 49% to 48% with 99% of the votes counted.

Remember, with the Democrat's arcane rules, the candidates will split delegates proportionally, but Hillary has done well enough in New York, New Jersey and looks to do well enough in California so that she could get most of them in those states.

The key, of course as I've been telling you all along before the dinosaur media caught on is the Hispanic vote. CNN's exit polls gave Hillary 66% of that demographic, even in California where the largest Hispanic paper, La Opinion endorsed Obama. (I wonder how much that cost George Soros?)Another big surprise for Obama was Hillary's strong victory in Massachusetts, even after John Kerry, Teddy and a bevy of the Kennedys endorsed Obama.

For the Republicans, the big winners were McCain and Mike Huckabee.

McCain has won:
New York (87)
Illinois (57)
New Jersey (52)
Arizona (53)
Connecticut (30)
Oklahoma (41)
Delaware (18)

Even worse for Romney, McCain has a firm lead in California (170) 43% to 26% with about 22% of the vote counted.Romney pretty much has to win California to stay viable.

Romney won:
Massachusetts (43)
Minnesota (no delegates)
Utah (36)
North Dakota (26)
Colorado (46)
Montana (25)

Huckabee took:
Georgia (72)
Tennessee (39)
Alabama (48)
Arkansas (34)
West Virginia (18)

Missouri(58) is still in play - but between McCain with 33% and Huckbee 32%, and Romney bringing up the rear with 29%. 97% of the vote has been counted.

California and Missouri are the big stories for both parties.

UPDATE: Barack Obama won Missouri for the Democrats, while McCain squeaked out a victory over Mike Huckabee by a razor thin 9.000 votes or so for the Republicans.

The Real Banana With Weekend Monkey - Sooper Dooper Tuesday Edition

FF: Now it's time to creep once again through the fetid political jungle with JoshuaPundit's own political guru, my pal Weekend Monkey.

WM: Hideyho,Primates!

FF: Well, the campaign has certainly taken an interesting turn. Here we are on the eve of Super Tuesday with the field narrowed down to two candidates per party, essentially..

WM: Yeah, and they're fighting like crazed pit bulls over a chihuahua carcass!

FF: Not the image I would have chosen, exactly,but not at all inaccurate. By the way, speaking of dogfights, how did you do on the Superbowl? I know you had the Giants and five points..that must have been sweet.

WM:Hee hee hee hee! I made out like a freakin' bandit! Remember, I told you to come in with me, FF.This monkey knows a sure thing when he smells it.

FF: Well, I'm not quite as much into gambling as you are, Monkey. I take it you put a chunk of the loot you 've been making handicapping the political races on the Giants to win...

WM: Well, yee-eahh, but to tell the truth I figured the Pats to win, but only by a coupla points max or maybe a field goal. When I saw a line of Giants plus 5, I layed bigtime!

FF: Seems like a wise choice, but then you been pretty lucky all year when it comes to gambling. People still ask me how you managed to predict Hillary's win in New Hampshire.

So, let's talk a little bit about where things are now.

WM: Okey-dokey, FF. Let's start with my Democrats. Y'know you were right about Barbie dropping out. I figured he'd hang until the convention.

FF: Yeah,I was pretty sure Edwards would go right after South Carolina if he didn't do well.What did you think about George Soros getting Teddy and Kerry to shill for Obama?

WM: Well they hadda do something! The Clintons had pretty much marginalized Obama Yo' Mama as the Official Black Candidate.

FF: So you agree with me that they brought in Teddy to try and stop the hemorrhaging of the Hispanic vote towards Hillary?

WM: Yeah,like I said before I think it smells right. Pretty good politics.

FF: And a pretty sleazy way to play the race card, if you ask me.

WM: Hey, Obama Yo' Mama was stoopid enough to fall into the trap on that Martin Luther King deal of Shrillary's in the first place. They were both playing the race card. If he hadn't put his people on it, it would all have passed away like a fart in the night. That's politics FF.

FF: Anything to say about your ex-backers John Kerry and Teddy Kennedy,Monkey?

WM: They both bite the rotten banana. And I love the way they got that middle aged doofus Caroline and Patrick the drunk in on the circus parade.

FF: So, numbers, Monkey.

WM: For my Donkeys, I still see it going for Shrillary - She'll win California, New York, New Jersey, and the rest of the Northeast,although Obama will get some delegates. She'll also take Arizona and New Mexico and Texas, because of the Latino vote.Obama Yo' Mama will take Illinois,and he'll be competitive in a couple of the southern states with a higher percentage of black democrats, like Alabama and Missisippi and Georgia but that's it. Shrillery will get a big chunk of the Mountain and Midwest delegates too,enough to put her pretty well out in front but not quite enough to seal the deal. I think the so-called `Obama surge' is too little and too late.

Obama Yo' Mama's biggest screw up came from his being a freakin' amateur. He peaked too soon, read too many of his own press releases and figured he could get away with murder. Now, he's scrambling to try to play catch up but he just doesn't have enough time. Good riddance!

FF: And the Republicans?

WM: Whooo,FF! The Rethugs are goin' ape-poopy! Do you really think a lot of `em are going to sit out the election if McCain gets the nomination? Because it looks like the year of the grumpy old Rethug from where I sit..

FF: They are indeed, Monkey.And there's even some talk of bolting from the GOP and creating a whole new party for 2012.And I have to agree with you. There's a great deal about John McCain I don't care for,but he's easily the most electable Republican candidate,thanks to George W. Bush.

WM: I agree about the electable part, but how do you figure it's Bush's fault?

FF: Are you kidding Monkey? By his actions as President,Bush destroyed the Republican party, split it into warring camps.And among independents and lots of comservatives, Bush is hideously unpopular.Because McCain ran against Bush in 2000, because he was jousting with Bush on things like Gitmo and spending and because he was pushing for the surge in Iraq a long time before the Bush Administration did anything like that,McCain is seen as the anti-Bush candidate without actually coming out and criticizing the president openly. That's where a big chunk of his support is coming from - people who really, really dislike George Bush.None of the others had the guts or the foresight to run against the policies of the Bush Administration, except Ron Paul, and he has other problems.

WM: I'll say! I gotta admit,I never thought about McCain being the anti-Bush candidate,but it makes some sense. I figured it was mostly Romney and Huckabuck splitting the conservative vote.

FF: Maybe to a slight degree, but remember, a lot of Huckabee's supporters would never vote for Romney,either because they figure him as a johnny-come-lately to conservative positions or because he's a Mormon. Nah...McCain is winning based on the amount of independents and anti-Bush votes. Plus, at this point, he's been annointed by the GOP establishment,I think.And as far as I'm concerned,Romney isn't electable anyway even if he got the nomination, unless he really catches fire.

WM:Yeah, I don't see him getting the nod from the elephants anyway. He and McCain will split California, but McCain will win New York,Illinois, Jersey and most of the northeast,plus Texas and New Mexico and whatever southern delegates Huckapoo doesn't suck up. Romney looks like taking Massachusetts and Utah, and not much else.

FF: I have to admit,I prefer Romney or Huckabee, but that's reee-eal long odds.

WM: You like Huckapoo???

FF: Yeah,kind of.He sort of reminds me of the way you started out,just getting out there and talking to the people and operating his campaign with no money on a shoestring. Of course, he's been more successful at it.

WM: That's right, rub it in FF.

FF: No, no hateration,Monkey. I just feel like he was the real outsider in this campaign, I think he was a relatively honest guy and I liked a lot of what he had to say...although I didn't agree with him on everything.He just struck me as a decent human being.

WM: He was funny, I'll give you that.

FF: Out of the three Republican candidates remaining, he's the only one I'd want to have over to the house just to socialize with.Although I think I might like Romney if I had a chance to sit down with him and actually get him to open up and drop the mask. But McCain seems like the kind of guy who would sit there having a drink with you one minute and the next minute all of a sudden go bats on you and toss it in your face.Although that could be a good thing, if we're talking about folks like Iran!

WM: So we pretty much agree, I guess, after tommorow, it will pretty much be McCain and Shrillary, huh?

FF: Looks that way. But let's remember,it's politics and anything can happen..and Obama will probably take it all the way to the convention and try and stampede things.

WM: I wanna see a catfight at the Donkey Convention between Shrillery and Michelle Obama, hee hee!

FF: On that high note,I think we'll close,Monkey. Until next time.

WM: Bye, FF. See ya around, Primates!

Mike Huckabee On The Middle East And Israel

I knew there was a reason Pastor Hagee let him preach at the Crossroads Church. From today's Jerusalem Post..just for the record:

"I have had the pleasure of visiting Israel, our staunch ally, our great friend and the most exemplary democracy in the Middle East, a total of nine times. On one of those trips, I took my then 11-year-old daughter, Sarah, to Yad Vashem. As we faced the grimly surreal pictures from Dachau and Auschwitz, she confronted the horrors of the thousands of bodies stacked on top of one another like so much lumber - six million dead. At the end of our visit, Sarah went to the guest book and wrote simple words that I will never forget:"Why didn't somebody do something?"

That is all she wrote, but with those words, I knew that, in her own way, she "got it."

Unfortunately, some in America, even some running for president, don't get it. Those who don't understand that the war in Iraq is a critical part of the war on terror, don't get it. Those who pledge to withdraw our troops according to some politically-motivated rationale before this war is won, don't get it. Iraq must be stable and secure within its borders. It is not just Iraq's security that is at stake, but the security of the entire region and of the United States.

But among those who seem to want to leave as soon as possible, regardless of the strategic and humanitarian consequences, is Sen. Barack Obama, one of the two remaining Democratic candidates for the presidency.

I have another grave concern about Sen. Obama, which was well-expressed by Matt Brooks, Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition:

"We are deeply troubled by Senator Obama's desire to 'hold a summit in the Muslim world, with all heads of state' many of whom have yet to renounce terrorism or refrain from anti-Semitic incitement. ...Senator Obama said he wanted to listen to the 'concerns' of these nations. For many, their biggest concern is Israel's existence. It's worrisome that Senator Obama wants to 'listen' to those calling for Israel's destruction."

AMERICA MUST be effective in the Middle East, and we must of course listen - and learn, and safeguard. But most of all, we need to be resolute in our strength, military and moral. Specifically, we must not pay any sort of tribute to terrorist states - including the honor of "listening" in some formal setting, where every splenetic utterance will be aired worldwide. For example, what would the president do in the face of some outrageously anti-American or anti-Semitic statement: Just sit there? Get up and walk out?

We shouldn't engage in impromptu diplomacy based on a misplaced sense of "empathy." That's why I am concerned about Sen. Obama's suggestion.

I don't want to hear the "concerns" of terrorist states - but I do want them to hear me.

I want everyone in the Middle East to know that America is committed to its strategic interests in the region, including a safe and secure Israel. Does Senator Obama really want to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, for example? Sen. Obama has said he wants to, both as part of his summit, and privately. Hard to believe, but true, according to his interviews with Paris Match (January 31, 2008) and the International Herald Tribune (November 1, 2007). Iran and its partner Syria bring danger and death to Americans and Israelis on a daily basis though their support of terrorists - in Gaza, Lebanon, and of course, in Iraq.

If the annihilation of six million Jews taught us anything, it is that appeasement doesn't work; it just results in the deaths of innocents and makes the job of eradicating evil all the more difficult.

So I share Israel's concern about an aggressive unchecked Iran. And I share Israel's determination that Iran will not become a nuclear power. As president, I will not take the military option off the table. I will work to strengthen sanctions against Iran both through the United Nations and the European Union.

No one seeking the presidency in either party is more steadfastly committed to Israel's security, survival as a Jewish state, and ability to defend herself than I am. As president, I will ensure that Israel always has the state-of-the-art weaponry and technology she needs. And in addition, I will dramatically increase American defense spending. Before there can be true peace, there must be the basic recognition of Israel's right to exist and an end to anti-Semitic and anti-Israel lies and propaganda.

Together, we must prevent nuclear proliferation and defeat Islamofascism. Together, we must be the people who confront and overcome evil. We must be the people who take action now, so that future generations of Sarahs don't look back and ask "Why didn't somebody do something?"

Homicide Bomber Strikes In Israel

A pair of Palestinian homicide bombers crossed the Israeli-Egypt border into Southern Israel and set off a bomb belt among a crowd in the shopping mall of Dimona, Israel today, killing one woman and wounding 48 people one of them critically.Among the casualties were a number of women and children.

The casualty toll would undoubtedly have been greater except for the fact that the first bomber apparently detonated his bomb belt without signalling to the second bomber, who was knocked down by blast. He had gotten to this feet and was preparing to detonate the second bomb belt when he shot dead by an heroic Israeli police officer, Kobi Mor who fearlessly rushed the bomber rather than taking cover.



Fatah's al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades spokesman Abu Walid claimed responsibility for the attack and disclosed that the two terrorists came from Gaza and entered Israel through Sinai.

However, Israeli intelligence believes that the bombers actually came from Hebron.The terrorists would have been able to easily infiltrate Israeli territory from there because the security fence south of Hebron Hills has yet to be built, and there's nothing to stop an infiltration from that point to Dimona.

The last Palestinian homicide bombing was a year ago, on January 29th 2007, when a bomb was set off in a bakery in Eilat and killed three people.

Since the Gaza border breach by Hamas, all of Southern Israel has been on high alert along the unfenced Egyptian-Israeli Sinai border.

As for the Palestinians the news of a successful murder of a Jew was celebrated the same way 9/11 was...by celebrating and handing out flowers and sweets.

The Super Tuesday Shuffle - And Beyond

Is that all there is? - Peggy Lee

Even the president of the United States sometimes must walk naked
-Bob Dylan

Super Tuesday is upon us, and in a couple of days time the American people will have made a substantial statement towards picking the nominees for the`08 presidential contest. In other words, Bubba, the train is about to pull into the station, and there are a lot of people who apparently aren't planning on getting on board, especially on the Republican side of the station.

One of them is conservative diva Ann Coulter, who announced onFox's Hannity and Colmes show that if front runner John McCain ends up the Republican nominee, she's going to campaign for Hillary Clinton.





Ann Coulter frequently pulls our collective appendage just for effect, but I think she had a serious point to make here. So does Rush Limbaugh, who seems to have a similar position.

There are some major underlying economic problems with our economy, and with our foreign policy and the rot is deep..with a large part due to out of control spending, the frantic outsourcing of American manufacturing overseas, a deliberate decision to weaken the dollar to promote exports and the huge problem of our unsecured borders.If the nasty stuff is going to hit the proverbial fan, she's probably thinking that it might be better on President Hillary's watch than on another self-identified `conservative' Republican. Ann Coulter's also smart enough to realize that that the actions of the current occupant of the White House have shattered his own party and given the brand name of `conservative’ a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouths. Bush is deeply unpopular,and rightfully so. especially among those who deem themselves conservatives. And it's no good trying to deny it and rope-a-dope saying that Bush never was a conservative - he ran as one and as self-identified as one. Buy the ticket, take the ride. The mud sticks.

So I think Coulter's reasoning is that after four years of corrupt socialist government ala' Hillary or Obama, and all that it entails, The American people will once again be ready for a return to first principles.In fact,that’s exactly how Ronald Reagan was elected,following the buffoonish one term Jimmy Carter.

In Rush Limbaugh's view, McCain, Obama and Hillery would all be dangerous for America,and it's simply better for the Republicans to be in the opposition rather than be compromised by party loyalty to a dysfunctional president.

I don’t entirely agree with them, but I don’t entirely disagree either. Another Bush-style presidentcy would have the Republican party looking like the Whigs towards the end. And I give Coulter points for this much…unlike the GOP establishment and a lot of so-called conservative opinion mongers, she had the sense to figure out the one candidate in the race who actually was cast in the Reagan mold, never wavered from it and would have likely made a superb president - Duncan Hunter.

I’m bitterly amused these days to hear conservative pundits whine about there being `no real conservative leader out there’ in the race and screwing up their faces to endorse Mitt Romney as a McCain alternative like kids taking an unwanted dose of medicine. Meanwhile Duncan Hunter was in the race all along, right there in front of them and got mostly dissed and ignored for his trouble.Towards the end, Fox and the other networks didn't even bother including him in the debates, talk radio continued ignoring him and small children snickered as he walked by. Selah.

So the Republicans seem to have narrowed down their options to John McCain, Mitt Romney and dark horse Mike Huckabee, with John McCain looking more and like the GOP nominee.If the polls are even remotely correct, McCain has a 10-12 point lead over Romney, especially since Giuliani endorsed him and a lot of Rudy's pals jumped aboard McCain's bus. And Huckabee is draining off just enough of the social conservative votes from Romney to keep it that way, the way things look so far.

There's another factor at work as well, I think. McCain, because of his past mano a mano with the president in 2000 and his image as an anti-Bush maverick on things like Gitmo and pushing for the troop surge long before the White House was ready for it is seen as the anti-Bush candidate, and gets a boost from a lot of people who really, really don't like the current occupant of the White House one bit. As I wrote before, the best chance a Republican has this year to win is to run against Bush, and McCain,without having to come out openly and do it is the closest thing the Republicans have to a perceived anti-Bush candidate.

Romney, in order to be competitive is going to have to deal with that little issue in a way that resonates with the American people and especially his fellow Republicans. And even at that, it's going to be a tall order. It will be even taller if McCain does the smart thing and starts making a few conservative noises on talk radio and in his stump speeches to mollify the base, who he undoubtedly has as much contempt for as Dubbyah did.

And if he actually gets the nomination, McCain may actually have a chance at unifying at least most of the GOP if he picks the right running mate to paper over some of his negatives.

So we are likely looking at a McCain/ Hillary contest, although Obama and Romney likely have enough juice to carry themselves to the conventions. And yes, it will likely be Lady Macbeth, by the way, although now that George Soros got some of the Kennedys to come out of the woodwork and work the Hispanic vote for his boy Obama, it's going to be closer than it was before.

With either a President McCain or a President Hillary, we will likely get amnesty for the 11 million or so illegal aliens here in America, they will likely get driver's licenses and thus vote in greater numbers, thanks to the motor-voter legislation Bill Clinton passed and the country's basic fabric and culture will be substantially altered. The flow over the border will likewise probably not be halted.I mean, does anyone really take McCain's sudden reverse on immigration seriously?

You can expect either of them to raise taxes, to do nothing major regarding energy independence aside from shilling for that tired old scam,global warming. Expect them to likely take some steps to regulate free political speech,particularly ontalk radio and the internet and to play politics by 'punishing' the already stricken mortgage industry, thus worsening the housing and credit crisis.Both of them have said as much,and it's particularly funny coming out of the mouths of these two. One of them was one of the Keating Five in the Lincoln Savings scam and the other was an attorney for a bogus real estate trust who prepared fraudulent documents for them and who's only out of jail because federal prosecutors couldn't prove intent and because Web Hubbel and Susan McDougal kept their mouths shut and sat in jail until Mr. Bill could pardon them. That hammer will undoubtedly come down,with consequences neither one of them realizes.

But then, neither of them has much in the way of economic expertise either, Hillary because she instinctively dislikes entrepreneurs and wants to expand the welfare state and McCain simply because, as he cheerfully admits, economics is not his strong point.

They will likely differ in a few significant ways.

Hillary is, at the core, anti-military and opposed to the sort of national security apparatus we're going to need in the future to prevail in this war. Not only that but she will have the baggage of the Democratic party on her neck to deal with. And enough of her constituency is even further to the left than she is to make that pretty scary. Remember how Assistant Attorney General Jamie Gorelick prohibited different federal security agencies from sharing data on people like Mohamed Atta because `it could compromise their legal rights'? No kidding.

And her foreign policy advisers, members of the old Clinton team like Sandy Berger and Madeline Albright should give you a pretty good idea of what to expect in the foreign policy realm. We've been there before, and it wasn't pretty.

To add to the mix, any Supreme Court Justices she nominates will likely be as lunatic as the other Clinton judicial appointees have been.And the potential for scandal is off the charts. Lady Macbeth says she only going to appoint honest and upright people in her White House. Does this mean that Mr. Bill is going to be served with a restraining order?

John McCain, for all his craziness at least understands and respects the military and could be expected to make the tough decisions without taking a poll first. He'd doubtless be a better commander-in-chief than either Hillary or Obama.

Not being a boomer, he incorporates at least some of the old values and avoids the malignant narcissism that's so much a part of that generation.

He'd likely appoint better judges, and if he takes advantage of some of Giuliani's foreign policy team instead of the usual State Department flunkies he'd certainly have an edge in the foreign policy area.BIG ifs, but possible. And McCain might just be nuts enough to do it.

Is any of that enough to get disaffected Republicans to vote for him ? Time will tell. I still haven't made up my mind.

Barak And Labor Prolong Olmert's Folly

Israeli PM Ehud Olmert got another assist in clinging to power as Defense Minister Ehud Barak announced today that he was going stay on and keep his Labor party in the Olmert government coalition.

By doing this, he repudiated his past pledge to leave the government and bring Israel to early elections if the Winograd Report on the Lebanon War was to negative on Olmert and his government regarding their conduct during the war...which of course it was.The world “failure” only appears in the report 190 times and the word “flaws” appears in it only 213 times!

The real reason behind Barak's decision is pretty easy to see - he and Labor have abysmal poll ratings and would fare dismally if Barak and Labor brought down the government and forced new elections.

It's all about political survival at any cost, and the will of the Israeli people be damned.

Even worse is that Olmert is presenting this to the media as an `exoneration' simply because the Winogard Report did not directly call for his resignation and did not directly state that his serious errors in judgment came from criminal motives. It merely said that his judgments came from incompetency, lack of leadership and poor planning and decision making.

In fact, if one looks at how the Olmert government has been handling Gaza, it's practically Lebanon all over again, with the same lack of planning, the same inability to distinguish fact from fiction, the same kinds of half measures and lack of concerted policies, the same poor decisions and failed solutions.

Barak's decision was greeted with anger throughout Israel and throughout the full spectrum of the Israeli Right and Left, as Carl In Jerusalem relates .

It remains to be seen if this disgraceful conduct is going to be swallowed by the electorate. As the Winograd Report itself stated, it is up to the people of Israel to act on this, and I'll be interested to see what develops.

Germany And Poland Take A Turn On The Wheel Of Fortune

We have here an interesting dichotomy at work in Europe, and one that has great import for the future.

Germany rejected out of hand a NATO/US request to deploy combat troops against the Taliban in war zones in southern Afghanistan. Like many EU nations, the Germans have refused to allow their troops to be used in combat, limiting them to logistics and garrison duty.

Defense Minister Franz-Josef Jung said his country's contingent of 3,200 soldiers would stay put in the northern provinces, where they patrol some of the most secure areas of Afghanistan. "That will have to continue to be our focus," Jung said to reporters.

NATO is trying to add at least another 7,500 troops to the 40,000 troops already in Afghanistan, and what it needs are combat troops. But so far, few of the NATO nations without combat troops in Afghanistan have complied.

Even worse, some of the other members of the alliance have quite rightfully gotten resentful. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently threatened to pull his 2,500 Canadian troops out from the hot spot of Kandahar if they're not re-inforced. And the Dutch and British are reportedly facing political flak at home to reduce their troop contingents as well.

Apparently Angela Merkel's ruling Christian Democrats, a centerist conservative party are more amenable to Germany doing more in Afghanistan, but thanks to the nature of coalition politics, they govern with the leftist Social Democrats who would probably be happy to pull Germany's troops out of Afghanistan altogether.

In Poland, on the other hand, the government now says it has what it calls 'an agreement in principle' to host part of the US Missile Defense Shield in Europe on Polish territory.

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski said that he satisfied that the United States will deal with security problems that Poland wanted addressed as part of the deal..by which he meant help with Poland's air defenses.

What the Poles want is short- and mid-range air defenses—Patriot or THAAD missiles—from the United States. This is directly aimed at Russia's military presence in the region. Putin has already threatened to retarget nuclear missiles at Poland in response to what he sees as a U.S. attempt to counter Russia.

It looks like the Poles will likely get what they want.

It's interesting to contrast the attitudes of the two nations.

I can't help but think about how magnanimous the US was to Germany and the German people after Hitler's defeat, the billions we spent and the troops we stationed there to keep them free, starting with the early days of the Cold War and the Berlin Airlift. Obviously that's just a distant memory, at least among a certain contingent of the German public. Many Germans have apparently not only forgotten this history, they are actively seeking to bury it.

The Poles, on the other hand have a much more recent recollection of tyranny and thus a lot more appreciation of American efforts to free them from the Soviet yoke. And it may also just be that the Poles, unlike the Germans, finally remember the bitter lessons of their history and realize that without a powerful ally like the United States, a free Poland is doomed to be crushed between the Russians and a resurgent Germany, just as it has been four times in the past.

Both decisions are symptomatic of forces that are at play in Europe and will shape the future of the continent,NATO, and America's relationship with European nations.

Wedding Bells For Sarko And Carla

French President Nicholas Sarkozy and model-singer Carla Bruni married in a small ceremony today attended by close friends and family at the Elysee Palace, the president's official residence. He became the first French president in more than 70 years to marry while in office, less than four months after becoming the first French president to divorce while in office.

Sarkozy, when pestered almost beyond endurance by the media had predicted that they wouldn't find out about his wedding until after it was over, and he was right. Not that the media appreciated it!

Sarko reportedly met Bruni at a party in November about a month after he divorced his ex-wife, Cecilia.

Interestingly, according to the polls the French apparently don't begrude Sarkozy his love life, but are annoyed that it was so public and feel that he's been concentrating too much on his personal life and not enough on affairs on state. Now that the wedding is over, perhaps he can make up some lost ground.

Anyway, you can't fight love....

Bonne chance, M. et Mme le Président. Et félicitations de la part de JoshuaPundit!

The Economist 'The US Should Embarass Iran Out Of Nukes'!

The British publication the Economist has an editorial out that bears reading, if for no other reason than to see how skewed and bizarre the issue has become. In 'Has Iran Won?' they ask:

WHO would have thought that a friendless theocracy with a Holocaust-denying president, which hangs teenagers in public and stones women to death, could run diplomatic circles around America and its European allies? But Iran is doing just that. And it is doing so largely because of an extraordinary own goal by America's spies, the team behind the duff intelligence that brought you the Iraq war.

Actually, cousins, it was a bunch of State Department functionaries well known for already having a particular view on Iran rather than 'America's spies'that came up withthe New Intelligence Estimate on Iran, and they were hand picked by the Bush Administration for the job.And as for 'duff intelligence', the last time I checked the Brits thoroughly concurred with that intel an d still do, if you go by the Butler Commission.

The piece continues:

It doesn't take a fevered brain to assume that if Iran's ayatollahs get their hands on the bomb, the world could be in for some nasty surprises. Iran's claim that its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful is widely disbelieved. That is why Russia and China joined America, Britain, France and Germany at the UN Security Council to try to stop Iran enriching uranium. Until two months ago they seemed ready to support a third and tougher sanctions resolution against Iran. But then America's spies spoke out, and since then five painstaking years of diplomacy have abruptly unravelled (see article).

The intelligence debacle over Iraq has made spies anxious about how their findings are used. That may be why they and the White House felt it right to admit, in a National Intelligence Estimate in December, that they now think Iran halted clandestine work on nuclear warheads five years ago. As it happens, this belief is not yet shared by Israel or some of America's European allies, who see the same data. But no matter: the headline was enough to pull the rug from under the diplomacy. In Berlin last month, the Russians and Chinese made it clear that if there is a third resolution, it will be a mild slap on the wrist, not another turn of the economic screw.

At the same time, Iran is finding an ally in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Its director-general, Mohamed ElBaradei, is a Nobel peace-prize winner who is crusading to confound those he calls “the crazies” in Washington by helping Iran to set its nuclear house in order, receive a clean bill of health and so avert the possibility of another disastrous war.

Honest spies, a peace-loving nuclear watchdog. What can be wrong with that? Nothing: unless the honesty of the spies is deliberately misconstrued and the watchdog fails to do its actual job of sniffing out the details of Iran's nuclear activities.

Amazing, two faulty assertions in one short space with no justification whatever.First, that the state department flunkies who prepared the NIE were 'honest' and not ideologically motivated, which totally ignores their previous track record on the matter. And second that Inspector Clouseau Mohammed El Baradi who has always covered for Iran and has consistently been unable or unwilling to find his behind with both hands when in came to Iran's nukes thoughout his unfortunate tenure is any kind of 'watchdog'.Far from attempting to prevent a war, the Egyptian-born El Baradi has been enabling Iran's clandestine nukes program from the very beginning.

And that's a very good reason why Iran wants its violations of the non-proliferation agreement it signed dealt with by El Baradi and his flunkies at the IAEA rather than the UN Security Council.

The Economist then outlines the danger of an Iranian bomb, and proceeds to come up with exactly the sort of appeasement minded program I would expect out of the UK these days, and one that certain elements of the US State Department would apparently concur with - appease Iran by undermining Israel, and place the Saudis and Egypt under US protection..as if any agreement we made with Iran would mean anything more to them than a scrap of paper and an admission of weakness:

One obvious danger is that a nuclear-armed Iran, or one suspected of being able to weaponise at will, could set off a chain reaction that turns Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, even Turkey rapidly nuclear too. America and the Soviet Union, with mostly only their own cold war to worry about, had plenty of brushes with catastrophe. Multiplying Middle Eastern nuclear rivalries would drive up exponentially the risk that someone could miscalculate—with dreadful consequences.


For some this threat alone justifies hitting Iran's nuclear sites before it can build the bomb they fear it is after. But if Iran is bent on having a bomb, deterrence is better. Mr Bush has already said that America will keep Israel from harm. By extending its security umbrella to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, America might stifle further rivalry before the region goes critical.

This, I believe, could historically be known as Chamberlain's Folly - undermining a loyal ally with a significant military quotient while offering both Israel and other states in the region security quarantees.

Of course, those cure-all quarantees have a couple of teensy flies in the ointment - in the case of Israel, such guarantees would be worthless after they were wedged into indefensible borders with missile armed genocidal enemies on each side. And Iran could always claim plausible denial for a suitcase nuke or chemical warhead that just 'happened' to be launched by proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad into Israel. Or exploded in New York, or London, for that matter.

In the case of the Saudis and Egypt, whomever wrote this for the Economist simply hasn't been paying attention.Egypt and the Saudis have already engineered their own arrangements with Iran, and the US to all intents and purposes already has the Saudis, the UAE, Jordan and Egypt under its protective wing...for whatever little that's worth.

But never mind! The Economist has an answer if that doesn't work out...embarrass the mullahs out of their nukes!

Much better, however, to avoid a nuclear Iran altogether. Mr Bush says diplomacy can still do this. It is hard to see how. But he does have one card up his sleeve: the offer of a grand bargain to address the gamut of differences between America and Iran, from the future of Iraq to the Middle East peace process. So far Iran's leaders have brushed aside America's offer of talks “anytime, anywhere” and about “anything” by pointing to the condition attached: that Iran first suspend its uranium enrichment. Strangely enough, the best way to put pressure on Iran's rulers now is for America to drop that rider.

There would need to be a time limit or Iran could simply enrich on regardless, with what looked like the world's blessing. Similarly Russia and China would need to agree to much tougher sanctions to help concentrate minds. Iran's leaders may still say no. But the ayatollahs would have to explain to ordinary Iranians why they should pay such a high price in prosperity forgone for making a fetish out of not talking, and out of technologies that aren't even needed to keep the lights on. If Iran's leaders cannot be persuaded any other way, perhaps they can be embarrassed out of their bomb plans.

What's scary about a piece like this in a respected publication like the Economist is not just the muddled thinking, but the absolute failure to learn from history.

That, and the fact that they're by no means alone in the fallacy.

Watcher's Council Results 2/01/08

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 week the Council picked my post, Energy Independence -- What It Am And What It Ain't at Joshuapundit as the winning entry, my piece on the realities of energy independence, how to achieve it and why we haven't done so yet.Thanks, gang..I really appreciate it!

In second place there was an interesting three way tie between three posts on the same subject, the Soros funded `non-partisan' study of the Bush Administration's supposed misstatements in the lead up to the Iraq War. Sharing 2nd place honors were:

The Media, Richard Scaife, and the Never Ending Soros Connection
by Bookworm Room

About Those "Lies"
by The Colossus of Rhodey

And How to Lie About Lying
by Big Lizards

In the non-Council category the winner was ex -Council alumnus Dr. Sanity for her fine piece The Conclusion We Dare Not Face - An excellent and important examination of a topic that no one wants to discuss...is Islam compatible with a free society? And what do we do about it if it's not?

I would say that seeking an answer to those two questions comprise a major part of both the motivation and the content for this site, and I think the answer to one of them is fairly obvious to anyone who examines the subject honestly and recognizes that it's not a `one-size-fits-all' conclusion. As for the second, I think the answer lies in an insistence at home that those Muslims who want the benefit of living in a free society make certain changes in attitude and in their support for political Islam and in an insistence in our foreign policy that certain countries cease and desist trying to attack and corrupt our society by exporting political Islam here - or face the consequences.

In second place, we had another three way tie between:

A Moral Core for U.S. Foreign Policy
Hoover Institution

Be a Victim! Or Else!
Classical Values

and my own nominee, The Muslims of Europe Charter by another Council Alumnus, Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna.

Hearty congratulations not only to the winners, but to the rest of the entrants.

Egypt Thwarts Hamas Attacks On Israelis In Sinai

Egyptian security forces stopped a large group of Hamas fighters who were en route to attack Israeli tourists in the Sinai just as I predicted they would. Earlier this week, reports said Egyptian authorities had arrested five Palestinians with bomb belts who were planning to infiltrate into Israel and carry out suicide attacks.

The terrorist groups crossed over the border into Egypt after Hamas blew up the border wall.

The Egyptians are still trying to figure out how to close the border wall and are claiming that the Rafah crossing will be shut down shortly, although other crossings will remain open.

The Egyptians are still trying to work out something with Fatah and Hamas as far as a deal that would at least restore the status quo on the borders that existed before Hamas decided that the Egyptian wall was a fitting target for urban renewal. So far, they haven't succeeded.

And why should Hamas cooperate anyway? It's in no way to their advantage.

Dr. Reuven Erlich, director of the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center an dan expert in the field puts it quite bluntly:

"[Hamas] will not let anyone control the oxygen tube between Egypt and the Gaza Strip," Erlich told Cybercast News Service. It is the only crossing between the Gaza Strip and any Arab country, and through it, the Palestinians receive commodities as well as weapons and operatives.".

Hamas Leader Mahmoud Zahar agrees with Dr. Erlich, and told al-Jazeera television much the same thing: "Egypt is our gate to the Arab, Islamic and entire world," Zahar was quoted as saying. "Therefore we will not allow the crossing to be used as a tool to suffocate the Palestinian people again."

From Israel's standpoint, Egyptian control of the Gaza border and the strategic Philadelphi Corridor has been a farce and the complete opposite of what Israel agreed to in the security agreements crafted by Condi Rice that were supposed to ensure border control when Israel retreated from Gaza. Heavy weapons and fighters have always gotten past the border, and the destruction of the Egyptian border barrier simply makes that task easier and more above board for Hamas.

In an ominous note, Egypt allowed over 2,000 Palestinians who entered Rafah illegally, to travel abroad via Egyptian airports.To understand how bad that is, think for a moment on whom in Gaza would be most likely to have passports and the money for airline tickets.

Meanwhile, the entire 140 mile Egypt-Israel border is now classified by the IDF as a closed military zone, and Israeli forces on the alert for infiltration attempts and attacks emanating from Egypt by Hamas.