From Of All Places, Al-Jazeera

I give you excerpts of the excerpts, of an interview conducted on Al-Jazeera...or so says the article.

[Edit - Whoa... I was way off the mark before. All text on Dr. Wafa Sultan's identity is now corrected]

While I don't totally agree with her secular end game (where her thoughts lead), I do think she brutally nails it with respect to the conflict between radical Muslims and the Free World.

...excerpts from an interview with Arab-American psychologist Wafa Sultan. The interview was aired on Al-Jazeera TV on February 21, 2006

Wafa Sultan: The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations. It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings. What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations do not clash, but compete.

[...]

Host: I understand from your words that what is happening today is a clash between the culture of the West, and the backwardness and ignorance of the Muslims?

Wafa Sultan: Yes, that is what I mean.

[...]

Host: Who came up with the concept of a clash of civilizations? Was it not Samuel Huntington? It was not Bin Laden. I would like to discuss this issue, if you don't mind...

Wafa Sultan: The Muslims are the ones who began using this expression. The Muslims are the ones who began the clash of civilizations. The Prophet of Islam said: "I was ordered to fight the people until they believe in Allah and His Messenger." When the Muslims divided the people into Muslims and non-Muslims, and called to fight the others until they believe in what they themselves believe, they started this clash, and began this war. In order to start this war, they must reexamine their Islamic books and curricula, which are full of calls for takfir and fighting the infidels.

My colleague has said that he never offends other people's beliefs. What civilization on the face of this earth allows him to call other people by names that they did not choose for themselves? Once, he calls them Ahl Al-Dhimma, another time he calls them the "People of the Book," and yet another time he compares them to apes and pigs, or he calls the Christians "those who incur Allah's wrath." Who told you that they are "People of the Book"? They are not the People of the Book, they are people of many books. All the useful scientific books that you have today are theirs, the fruit of their free and creative thinking. What gives you the right to call them "those who incur Allah's wrath," or "those who have gone astray," and then come here and say that your religion commands you to refrain from offending the beliefs of others?

I am not a Christian, a Muslim, or a Jew. I am a secular human being. I do not believe in the supernatural, but I respect others' right to believe in it.

Dr. Ibrahim Al-Khouli: Are you a heretic?

Wafa Sultan: You can say whatever you like. I am a secular human being who does not believe in the supernatural...

Dr. Ibrahim Al-Khouli: If you are a heretic, there is no point in rebuking you, since you have blasphemed against Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran...

Wafa Sultan: These are personal matters that do not concern you.

[...]

Wafa Sultan: Brother, you can believe in stones, as long as you don't throw them at me. You are free to worship whoever you want, but other people's beliefs are not your concern, whether they believe that the Messiah is God, son of Mary, or that Satan is God, son of Mary. Let people have their beliefs.

[...]

Wafa Sultan: The Jews have came from the tragedy (of the Holocaust), and forced the world to respect them, with their knowledge, not with their terror, with their work, not their crying and yelling. Humanity owes most of the discoveries and science of the 19th and 20th centuries to Jewish scientists. 15 million people, scattered throughout the world, united and won their rights through work and knowledge. We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant. We have not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people. The Muslims have turned three Buddha statues into rubble. We have not seen a single Buddhist burn down a Mosque, kill a Muslim, or burn down an embassy. Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people, and destroying embassies. This path will not yield any results. The Muslims must ask themselves what they can do for humankind, before they demand that humankind respect them.

The Shotgun Taser

Good thing Jack Bauer didn't get his with this last night.

The nation's largest stun-gun manufacturer is working on a new way to deliver electricity to the human body: through 12-gauge shotgun shells.

Though it's still being developed, Taser International Inc. says the new product will allow police officers and U.S. troops to hit someone from a much greater distance than its current line of Tasers' range of 25 feet.

The eXtended Range Electro-Muscular Projectile is designed to combine the blunt-force trauma of a fast-moving baseball with the shock of a stun gun.

"It will truly cause incapacitation," company spokesman Steve Tuttle said.

Still, he's already died twice on the show, so maybe he really doesn't have much to fear. Of course, Kim returns next week, if you can trust the Fox previews, so...his nine lives may run out with her around.

The Ferrari Driving School

It's here.

Well, sort of here. Ferrari does 90% of it's North American business in the United States, yet they built their racing school in Canada.

It’s not just a Ferrari driving school, it’s a Ferrari experience.

That’s how Ferrari is pitching its first factory-backed driving school outside of Italy, located at the Mt. Tremblant race track, or officially Le Circuit de Mt. Tremblant, about 90 miles north of Montreal, Quebec. The school will give participants access to 12 factory-owned Ferrari F430 coupes for 2.5 days and an open race track — which just may be about as inspiring an automotive opportunity as there is for true tifosi, the rabid fans of the brand that always dominate the crowd at Formula One races.

But Ferrari is promising more than just fast cars on a nice race track, said Marco Mattiacci, Ferrari North America’s vice president of marketing.

"The driver’s school is to really get to know the history, technology and how to learn to drive these amazing products,” said Mattiacci at the 2006 Canadian International AutoShow in Toronto. “The common line throughout the experience is exclusivity."

The fact that the driving school costs U.S. $8,200 is enough to make it exclusive on its own and doesn’t cover the cost of getting to the Montreal or Mt. Tremblant airport or heliport. Adding to the exclusivity factor is that the school is officially meant for Ferrari owners only, of which there are 18,000 in North America, said Mattiacci. Still, when pressed, Mattiacci conceded there might be a small window of opportunity for non-owners as well, but only those contemplating Ferrari ownership. “We would consider a serious prospect."

I'm assuming that a "serious prospect" is someone who's only decision left is "what color?"So yeah, 8200 dollars plus you really need to be prepared to purchase a Ferrari after the drive. I don't think I qualify...yet.

They'd Do It For Nixon

Clamor - that is - for his tape recorded conversations with all those juicy bits and pieces about the Watergate break-in and cover-up. Yet put out some tapes of Saddam Hussein, spanning from the mid-90's to as recently as 2000, talking with his relatives, scientists, and officials who were unknown to the U.N. inspectors about his ongoing biological, chemical and nuclear programs, and suddenly it's "What?", "Huh?", "What was the question again?", "Tapes? Don't they have a podcast?".

One wonders, where the heck is the national media?! Because all I'm hearing are crickets. And Investor's Business Daily is wondering as well.

...Saddam made tapes in his version of the Oval Office. These tapes landed in the hands of American intelligence and were recently aired publicly.

The first 12 hours of the tapes — there are hundreds more waiting to be translated — are damning, to say the least. They show conclusively that Bush didn't lie when he cited Saddam's WMD plans as one of the big reasons for taking the dictator out.

Nobody disputes the tapes' authenticity. On them, Saddam talks openly of programs involving biological, chemical and, yes, nuclear weapons.

War foes have long asserted that Saddam halted his WMD programs in the wake of his defeat in the first Gulf War in 1991. Saddam's abandonment of WMD programs was confirmed by subsequent U.N. inspections.

Again, not true. In a tape dating to April 1995, Saddam and several aides discuss the fact that U.N. inspectors had found traces of Iraq's biological weapons program. On the tape, Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law, is heard gloating about fooling the inspectors.

"We did not reveal all that we have," he says. "Not the type of weapons, not the volume of the materials we imported, not the volume of the production we told them about, not the volume of use. None of this was correct."

There's more. Indeed, as late as 2000, Saddam can be heard in his office talking with Iraqi scientists about his ongoing plans to build a nuclear device. At one point, he discusses Iraq's plasma uranium program — something that was missed entirely by U.N. weapons inspectors combing Iraq for WMD.

This is particularly troubling, since it indicates an active, ongoing attempt by Saddam to build an Iraqi nuclear bomb.

"What was most disturbing," said John Tierney, the ex- FBI agent who translated the tapes, "was the fact that the individuals briefing Saddam were totally unknown to the U.N. Special Commission (or UNSCOM, the group set up to look into Iraq's WMD programs)."

Perhaps most chillingly, the tapes record Iraq Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz talking about how easy it would be to set off a WMD in Washington. The comments come shortly after Saddam muses about using "proxies" in a terror attack.

9-11, anyone?

This story needs a full vetting by the press. It should be front page coverage, with all the intensity and wherewithal that the press devoted to the careful and painstaking explanations about missing WMD, Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame, Niger, Yellowcake, the "rush to war", the "sixteen words", on both the hard news and editorial pages...for months on end.

But no. I have a feeling that they're not going to do that. Cheney and the Ports are more interesting. And the lack of WMD has been a boon for Democrats.

Why go and ruin a good thing?

Amazing Story

But what does this say about hospital care?

A man from Handforth, near Wilmslow, Cheshire, woke from a coma after his life support was switched off - and ten days later gave his daughter away at her wedding.

Uh Oh...The Bandit Strikes Again!

And it's not even Coors this time.

Thousands of cans and bottles of Miller Genuine Draft and Miller Light, valued at $26,380, were removed from a semi-trailer found abandoned at an Oak Creek truck stop earlier this week, authorities said today.

In a daring nighttime caper that started Friday evening in Richfield, someone backed a truck up to a beer-filled semi-trailer from the Millis Transfer Inc. yard, 3001 Highway 167, Washington County Sheriff Brian Rahn said.

Not a single bottle or can remained in the semi-trailer when it was found Monday at the Pilot Travel Center truck stop at 2031 W. Ryan Road, Rahn said. Thieves left only a few pieces of shrink wrap and several wooden pallets behind.

Does anybody even drink Miller anymore? I mean, with the new Hamas non-alcoholic beer that's coming out in Gaza...who would want to drink - let alone steal - any other beer?!

Like any good entrepreneur, Palestinian beermaker Nadim Khoury knew that adaptation would be key to his brewery's survival under a government led by the Islamists of Hamas.

So anticipating the hardliners' rise to power in January's general election, Khoury decided to develop a new product - a non-alcoholic microbrew brandished with a label that coordinates perfectly with Hamas's trademark color.

"I figured why not have a green label so it will match?" said Khoury, who runs the Taybeh Brewing Company, the only brewery in the Palestinian territories. "All customers will notice the green for the Hamas flag."

You know, even without alcohol, I bet that stuff's got some kick. Can't you just see the commercial for it? (well...the Saturday Night Live commercial maybe...)

The green label says it all: the flag, the fight, the 'near-beer' delight. It's fresh, and cold, and primed to explode! It's 'Hamas' beer!

Every bottle's a blast! Pick up a case today!

Yes, that was wrong. But honestly, the idea of naming a beer after a terrorist group is the real travesty. Hamas is not going to govern, they are going to use the mandate from the people - who approve of their methods and strength - and keep on their path of violence and destruction. And everyone knows it.

Now Only 399...

For those of you from California, who are linked to money laundering and European prisons, who are also thinking about buying a million dollar Ferrari Enzo, using money from your financially strapped handheld video game company, then driving said vehicle in a country (the U.S.) that doesn't know you imported it, letting some stranger - "...a mysterious German man whom he knew only as Dietrich..." - drive the car, race a Mercedes SLR, and then wreck it while traveling over 120 mph, crash it into an electrical pole, split the car in half, throw the engine and transmission out into the street, creating a 1200 foot trail of debris, and then watch said "mysterious man" flee on foot...I think you might be in need of a better story.

Eriksson, 44, declined to be interviewed Wednesday, according to a security officer posted in front of his gated Bel-Air mansion.

But he had told authorities that he was a passenger in the car driven by a mysterious German man whom he knew only as Dietrich when the Ferrari Enzo lost control and crashed Tuesday on Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu. He said Dietrich fled on foot up a canyon and disappeared.

But detectives are skeptical of that explanation and said Wednesday that they were going to re-interview Eriksson. Witnesses told detectives the Ferrari was drag racing with a Mercedes-Benz SLR.

"His story has inconsistencies that need to be cleared up," Sheriff's Sgt. Phillip Brooks said.

The investigation has also centered on exactly how the Enzo got into the United States and how Eriksson came to possess it, Brooks said.

"We have quite a few new leads on that," Brooks said, but he declined to elaborate.

The crash occurred about 6 a.m. west of Decker Road when the Ferrari, traveling at 120 mph in the northbound lane, crested a hill and slammed into a power pole.

The car split in two, sending the engine flying and creating a 1,200-foot trail of debris, sheriff's deputies said.

The power pole was snapped about halfway up and suspended by power lines like a half-chopped corn stalk.

The Enzo is one of the most exclusive cars in the world, with only 400 ever made.

If you love automobiles, and Ferraris, shield your eyes. These images are ghastly.




I. Could. Cry.

Fear The Telescope

Yet another bugaboo for the fringe: fearing telescopes that get partial funding from the U.S. military.

SIERRA NEGRA, Mexico (AP) -- In the biggest joint Mexico-U.S. scientific venture ever, builders are finishing a monster telescope on top of a volcano that will let astronomers look back 13 billion years and uncover secrets about the creation of the universe.

President Vicente Fox and Mexico's scientific community have championed the telescope, the largest of its kind in the world, saying it shows how a developing country can play a major role in cutting-edge technology.

Yet the fact that most of the U.S. funding comes from the Defense Department has worried some Mexicans who are leery of any military connections with their powerful northern neighbor.

"We want Mexico to be in the vanguard of scientific advance, but it would be better if all the money came from non-military sources," said Rosa Maria Aviles, a federal lawmaker on the lower house of Congress' Science and Technology Committee. "We are a pacifist nation."

U.S. and Mexican scientists say the Pentagon often funds scientific projects so it can use the technology, but the actual telescope will have no direct military use.

Yeah, I'm not sure Mexico quite qualifies as pacifist. In fact I don't think any nation except Switzerland could even claim the word - and that's pushing it. Nor am I really certain exactly why a country riddled with corruption would lament that funds for a project creating tons of jobs - in their own country, for once - came from the U.S. military. It's not like we're going to use the thing to start monitoring the border between Mexico and Texas or anything (not that that's a bad idea).

But the funny thing is, in spite of their uncontrollable urge to bash the U.S. military funding, they still took the money.

Couldn't Spare A Square

We all know the value of toilet paper...but this seems a bit harsh.

A man has been arrested for fatally beating his roommate with a sledgehammer and a claw hammer because there was no toilet tissue in the home, authorities said.

I mean obviously shortages are to be expected right now.

It Was Inevitable

First the bizarre copy-cat quail shooting stories. Now the Cheney quail hunt game.

And yes, it is so so wrong...

(h/t Dave Barry)

"24" Liveblogging

Over at Dave Barry's Blog...

It's To Be Expected

Everytime there is a national incident, or phenomenon, for weeks afterwards the media seems to just "find" stories exactly like the original.

It's happening.

Two Beauregard Parish motorists were accidentally shot in the face on Saturday by a quail hunter near Dry Creek.

A group of three men were hunting quail southeast of Dry Creek around 4 p.m. Saturday when a pickup truck with two men inside stopped to watch the hunters' birding dogs.

A bird flushed out of the brush and flew toward the truck. One of the hunters swung around and shot at the bird, hitting both driver and passenger with pellets through the truck's open window.

Freaky.

The Imperial Vice Presidency?

I saw the revelation on Drudge the other day, about how the news outlets and magazines were planning yet another full week on the Cheney hunting accident - yes, the story that ended days ago when Cheney accepted both the responsibility and the horror of shooting his friend, and Mr. Whittington finally recovered sufficiently to leave the hospital, saying:

"We all assume certain risks in whatever we do. Regardless of how experienced, careful and dedicated we are, accidents do and will happen. And that's what happened last Friday," Whittington said, meaning on Saturday.

I wasn't going to blog on this, because, as everyone can plainly see, aside from Mr. Whittington having the memory of a normal 78 year old man, this story is over. Heck, even David Gregory apologized for his conduct...sort of. I was content to let the rest of the print press run around in their orange clown suits and wear out their jokes and charade of indignance, like you'd let a child pout it out about having only ten more minutes in the pool.

But then I saw the Newsweek headlines:

"The Shot Heard Round The World"

Dick Cheney has never been your normal politician. He has never seemed as eager to please, as needy for votes and approval and headlines as, say, Bill Clinton. Cheney can seem taciturn, self-contained, a little gloomy; in recent years, his manner has been not just unwelcoming but stand-offish. This is not to say, however, that he is entirely modest and self-effacing, or that he does not crave power as much as or more than any office-seeker. This, after all, is a man who, in conducting a search for George W. Bush's vice president, picked himself. Indeed, since 9/11, Cheney has struck a pose more familiar to readers of Greek tragedies than the daily Hotline. At times, he appears to be the lonely leader, brooding in his tent, knowing that doom may be inevitable, but that the battle must be fought, and that glory can be eternal.

"He Lost Control Of His Emotions"

Like Dick Cheney, veteran hunter John Freck knows the feeling of raising a shotgun to a covey of quail. "You get a huge adrenaline rush when the birds flush," says Freck, who regularly pursues quail with his German shorthaired pointer, Gunnar. That rush is one of the reasons hunters love the sport. But it's also the cause of accidents. No matter what else they may think of Cheney, hunters around the country agreed last week that the vice president, known as a careful sportsman and a good shot, broke a cardinal rule: in that exhilarating moment when the birds scattered up all around him, he didn't check to make sure his line of fire was clear before he pulled the trigger. "He lost control of his emotions," Freck says. "In a split second, you have to decide all these things at once."

and my favorite, (parenthesis in original)

"The Imperial (Vice) Presidency"

Fox News's exclusive interview with Vice President Dick Cheney was, as CNN's Jack Cafferty sniped, "like Bonnie interviewing Clyde," but Brit Hume posed some good questions. When asked if he still thinks after everything that happened that he handled the story the right way, Cheney replied, "I still do." To me, this was the most revealing part of the whole episode. Cheney believes in what might be called partisan accountability - you answer only to your own side, on your own terms, not to the jackals of the mainstream media.

The "Imperial (Vice) Presidency"...riiight...

I have to say, I think that they've lost their minds. No really, I mean it this time. Sure, we on the right have joked about this before, but I think we need to blow the lifeguard whistle and call Adult Swim, or hold an Intervention, or something, and then have medical tests, the ones with long needles and a treadmill. This is insane.

The Imperial Vice Presidency? Think about it. It doesn't even make any sense. What, Cheney's the Emperor? - ruling the country with impunity from within his Vice Presidential office? He has now trumped Bush and Rove? Cheney is Kizer Soze? And here I thought Rove was the heart of evil...

Besides, isn't the Vice President in charge of his own office anyway, and therefore the decision-making for his office? Didn't we elect him to that office? And as I recall, Mr. Cheney has taken full responsibility for the accident, and for the initial moments afterwards - when he was more concerned with the care of his friend than his thoughts to quickly alert the media. So in light of that, is Mr. Alter implying that Dick Cheney, by allowing the ranch owner the option of what paper to call - while he and others were more concerned about the friend who had been shot - is now revealed as a cold-hearted and calculating bastard who is also secretly running the entire government like a king?

Have you seen the timeline for the incident? If you haven't, here it is, complete with ready-made snark from the Wall Street Journal.

- 5:30 p.m., Saturday (all times Central Standard Time). Mr. Cheney sprays Harry Whittington with birdshot, and the Secret Service immediately informs local police. Who is Harry Whittington and whom does he lobby for? Does he know Scooter Libby?

- 6:30 p.m. White House Chief of Staff Andy Card informs President Bush that there's been a hunting accident involving the Vice President's party. Did Mr. Bush ask followup questions? Was he intellectually curious?

- 7 p.m. Karl Rove tells Mr. Bush that it is Mr. Cheney who did the shooting. Why was this detail withheld for a full 30 minutes from the President? Who else did Mr. Rove talk to about this in the interim? Was Valerie Plame ever mentioned?

- 5 a.m., Sunday. White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan learns that Mr. Cheney is the shooter. He also fails to alert the media. Did he rush to write talking points or fall back to sleep?

- 11 a.m. Katharine Armstrong, owner of the ranch where the shooting took place, blows the story sky-high by giving the news to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times. According to Ms. Armstrong, Mr. Cheney told her to do what she thought made sense. Has Ms. Armstrong ever worked for Halliburton?

- 1:30 p.m. The Texas paper posts the story on its Web site, after calling the Veep's office for confirmation. Everyone involved confirms more or less everything, or so the official line goes. Their agreement is very suspicious.

- 1:27 p.m., Monday. Mr. McClellan finally holds a press conference and gets grilled. One reporter actually asks (and we're not making this one up), "Would this be much more serious if the man had died?"

There it is, ladies and gentlemen - Watergate II! The national media did not find out about an incident at 5pm on Saturday until after noon on Sunday. I know, you can just imagine all manner of nefarious motives for this. It's an unconscionable act, letting a local paper scoop the White House press corps.

But the larger media has made up for it. They've reported,


and reported,


and reported some more,


and they've whined (you really need this link?), they've talked about secrecy, they've worried, they've made fun, they prayed for criminal charges, they've analyzed, they've analyzed the victim - who doesn't want to be a victim, so then they analyzed themselves (pick a channel on TV, any channel), and now that the public clearly still does not care beyond the fact that they know it was an accident and a terrible thing to have to go through...the media refuses to let it die.

In fact, they are ratcheting it up a notch. Of course, all this while real imperial behavior is on display for all the world to see.

The priorities of the press boggles the mind. So much so, that I don't even want the last word on this. That I cede to Mark Steyn.

NBC's David Gregory, the George Clooney of the press corps, was yelling truth to power about why the Elmer-Fudd-in-gun-rampage story was released to "a local Corpus Christi newspaper, not the White House press corps at large." I know how he feels. I remember, like, four or five years ago -- early September, maybe second week -- there was this building collapse in New York and I had to learn about it from the TV because this notoriously secretive paranoid administration couldn't even e-mail me a timely press release. For an NBC guy discovering that some hicksville-nowhere-burg-one-stop-light-feed-price sheet got tipped off before he did is like a dowager duchess turning up at the royal banquet to discover the scullery maid's been seated next to the Queen.

So anyway David Gregory's going bananas and yelling "I will yell" and "Don't be a jerk" at the White House press secretary, and there's more smoke coming out of his ears than from Ronald McDonald in Lahore, and I'm thinking, you know, maybe Karl's latest range of Rovebots that he planted in American media corporations are just a wee bit too parodically self-absorbed to be plausible. And then this lady pipes up and asks, "Would this be much more serious if the man had died?"

Well, maybe. And maybe it would be even ever so much more serious still if, after peppering him with birdshot, Mr. Cheney had dragged him into a safe house in the Sunni Triangle and decapitated him with a rusty scimitar while shouting "Allahu Ahkbar" and then sold the video to Al Jazeera.

Fortunately, The Washington Post had that wise old bird David Ignatius to put it in the proper historical context: "This incident," he mused, "reminds me a bit of Sen. Edward Kennedy's delay in informing Massachusetts authorities about his role in the fatal automobile accident at Chappaquiddick in 1969."

Hmm. Let's see. On the one hand, the guy leaves the gal at the bottom of the river struggling for breath, pressed up against the window in some small air pocket, while he pulls himself out of the briny, staggers home, sleeps it off and saunters in to inform the cops the following day that, oh yeah, there was some broad down there. And, on the other hand, the guy calls 911, has the other fellow taken to the hospital, lets the sheriff know promptly but neglects to fax David Gregory's make-up girl.

One can only hope others agree with Mr. Ignatius' insightful analogy, and that the reprehensible Mr. Cheney will be hounded from public life the way Mr. Kennedy was all those years ago. One would hate to think folks would just let it slide and three decades from now this Dick Cheney guy will be sitting on some committee picking Supreme Court justices and whatnot.

Okay, I lied. I want the last word.

You know, the press - egged on by the fringe Democrats - throws the word "imperial" around like it's some carefree assertion, a banal contributer to your everyday vocal lexicon. Are they winking as they say it, perhaps a bit of salacious rhetoric, or do they really mean it? Because really, do they even know what the word means? If this were really an imperial nation, there'd be no blogs like this one, criticizing Newsweek or any other establishment. We'd all be found, beaten, jailed, and probably shot. But yet, we're not. We're all still here, ranting away. And Newsweek is still spinning away.

And why? Because there is no Imperial Vice Presidency. There is no BushHitler, or Halliburton conspiracy, or Rovian plot, or whatever else they can cook up to sow doubt and dismay towards Republican leaders and their stewardship of this country.

Am I advocating some type of self-censorship on the media's part? Not at all. I am advocating that the media grow up, stand up, and print something of actual substance. That's what their mandate is - to print and investigate things that are newsworthy, and not to cook up a scandal for their own desperate ideology.

For The "24" Obsessed

Kim "Danger Prone" Bauer was a no-show for her announced return to "24" last week (okay, so it was speculation, but it was based on actual production photos). Nobody knows what happened, except it was obviously a blessing for the characters on the show, who will get to hang on to all their body parts, and their lives, for at least one more hour.

But now she's been found, er...sort of. I guess not so much found, more like the "girl next door" is now our online neighbor. Apparently, the actress who plays "Kim", Elisha Cuthbert, has been cooped up for the past few months blogging for the NHL.


And I have to tell you, I'm a bit worried that the "Kim Chaos" might be following her in real life now. I mean look she blogged about her Wayne Gretzky sighting and then all of a sudden he...well, you read the news.

I Wonder What Caused The Accident?

File this away under: The next time you reach for the cell phone while driving.

A Letcher County woman suffered a horrible injury early Thursday when her arm was severed in a car crash on the Mountain Parkway in Clark County.

Jacqueline Dotson and her six-year-old daughter had to be cut out of their vehicle after the accident in which Dotson veered into the median and over-corrected, rolling her truck over the guardrail and landing upside down after flipping several times.

Several people stopped to help, and it turns out, the good samaritans may very well have saved Dotson's life. Sheila Vice, a nurse's aide, and an off-duty EMT from another county stopped to help, and put a tourniquet on Dotson's arm to stop the bleeding. Her arm was found near the accident still clutching a cell phone.

(h/t Gizmodo)

The Port Deal

So what's the story here? Dubai Ports World, a company wholly owned by the Dubai government, a member of the United Arab Emirates and famous waypoint and financial haven for the 9-11 terrorists, is rigging up to take over port management of six major U.S. cities.

Are we headed for a security disaster of the largest order? - or is this port deal actually an international business smack-down and a security scare that's much ado about nothing?

My gut reaction is to say yes, it's absolutely insane; there's no way a country that recognized the Taliban should ever gain control of U.S. ports. I mean come on, we've all seen the Sum of All Fears, we just know there's a nuclear bomb in a vending machine somewhere waiting to get shipped to America. Granted, in the movie they were Nazi throwbacks, and not Arabs, and ultimately that bomb came from Israel, but if you've read the book you know the "religion of peace" does not escape unscathed.

Of course in real life we have stuff like this and this, and this going on in the world, and we're kind of in the middle of a war against terrorists. So the fear is certainly not unfounded. It's more than prudent.

And this fear is exactly what's driving Senator Chuck Schumer, Senator Rick Santorum and Senator Hillary Clinton in their protests of this sale. Though of course I think Hillary called it the evil Republican "culture of fear" last week, and now suddenly she is embracing it. But her flopping around for electoral platforms aside, the really scary part is that I found myself agreeing with them. Hillary even stepped up yesterday to say she'll co-sponser legislation to stop not just this port deal, but any further port deals.

Sens. Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Hillary Clinton of New York, both Democrats, said they would offer legislation to ban companies owned or controlled by foreign governments from acquiring U.S. port operations, targeting the $6.8 billion purchase of P&O by Dubai Ports World.

So how did it even come to this point where we're turning over the keys? Don't we have like, Customs, and a navy, or something, to stop them? Are we going to have a whole boatload of terrorists showing up, greeted only by our newly deputized frontline defenders, the longshoremen at the docks?

Well actually, as it turns out...no, we're not. And the more I research this, the more it's bothering me that a lot of media, and bloggers, are not explaining the whole story. I can understand the need to sound the siren, by all means do so. But honestly, after researching this deal I haven't made my mind up one way or the other on this issue yet. Here's why.

First, as you might know, this is not the sale of an American company to the government of Dubai. It is the sale of a British company, the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, the fourth largest container-port company, to the Dubai Ports World company, the seventh largest container-port company. Now P&O is one of those really old businesses, their history reads like a James Clavell novel (seriously, tell me it doesn't):

In 1822 Brodie McGhie Wilcox, a London ship broker, and Arthur Anderson, a Scottish sailor, went into partnership to operate a shipping line, primarily operating routes between England and Spain and Portugal. In 1835 a Dublin shipowner named Captain Richard Bourne joined the business and the three men started a regular steamer service between London and Spain and Portugal - the Iberian Peninsula - using the name Peninsular Steam Navigation Company, with services to Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon and Cadiz.

In 1837 the business won a contract from the British Admiralty to deliver mail to the Iberian Peninsula and in 1840 they acquired a contract to deliver mail to Alexandria in Egypt. The present company, the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company was incorporated in that year by a Royal Charter, and its name therefore includes neither "Plc" nor "Limited".

And their charter - "is an antique scroll that hangs on the wall in P&O's corporate office on Pall Mall, a historic London street near Buckingham Palace."

So yeah, they've been around the block. And this "surprise deal" that everyone keeps moaning about, has actually been in the public eye, that I could find, since last November.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. is close to an agreement to be bought by Dubai Ports World of the United Arab Emirates for more than £3 billion, or about $5.1 billion, creating a new global ports powerhouse and ending the storied history of one of Britain's oldest companies.

P&O, as the London firm is known, operates container ports in 30 cities around the world and is considered to have many of the premier sites across Asia, North America and Europe. With P&O's business, Dubai Ports World, which is controlled by the U.A.E., would become the world's third-largest port operator from seventh in terms of capacity.

The deal is expected to be announced as soon as Tuesday, with Dubai Ports World paying about 440 pence a share, people familiar with the matter said. P&O's shares closed in London Monday at 435 pence. A spokeswoman for P&O declined to comment, and a spokesman at Dubai Ports World wasn't available.

It is expected that global port operators in Hong Kong, Singapore, Denmark and elsewhere may consider a rival bid for P&O, people close to the matter said.

And bid they did. This deal started turning into an international brawl, because the number two player, Singapore owned PSA International, jumped into the fray to make it's own bid.

Smelling a battle between a pair of rich bidders amid a boom in cargo volume, investors pushed shares of port operator Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co. of Britain up 6.3% Wednesday after PSA International Pte. Ltd. of Singapore said it might make a bid for it at as much as £3.54 billion ($6.25 billion).

PSA, a unit of Singapore's state-owned investment company Temasek Holdings Pte. Ltd., said after the London market closed Tuesday that it could pay as much as 470 pence a share for P&O, as the company is known. That would trump a bid of 443 pence a share, or £3.3 billion, that Dubai Ports World, of the United Arab Emirates, made in November and that P&O's board then recommended to its shareholders.

The original bid from DP World was 5.1 billion (American), then trumped by soaring stock and the PSA bid of 6.25 billion. The titans battled it out for a bit more, and then DP World delivered the knock-out punch of 6.79 billion on the table. A stunning fight, and a bit of amazing maneuvering by DP World. And it is interesting to note the corporate rankings again, because DP World has been on the rampage for a while now, increasing it's size through acquisitions like this, the most recent addition to it's portfolio being the international terminals business of CSX Corporation. With P&O they now jump to the number three container-port company.

But why all the fuss over P&O? Why up the ante over 30% higher than the initial offering? Because according to analysts, P&O is the ultimate prize.

...Fitch notes that though P&O occupies a slightly distant fourth position in the throughput league tables, its portfolio surpasses higher-ranked peers in terms of geographical diversification.

Meaning they have choice port spots across the entire world. And in the virtually closed market of port operation, this is an historical coup.

What is at stake is much bigger than a £3.3 billion company. Port holdings have become crucial assets in global trade.

As the manufacturing of low-cost goods in Asia has boomed and China has emerged as an economic power, the race is on to control the ports that launch the goods made in Asia, and receive them in the U.S., Western Europe and elsewhere. As global industrialization continues, container shipping of nearly every variety of manufactured good is expected to expand strongly.

P&O's 29 ports around the world are among the last available for sale. The rest are state-owned or in the hands of big port operators with no interest in selling. Because there is so much infrastructure involved in container ports, not many new ones are built. And when they are, it takes many years.

"In big-picture terms, P&O ports would be very attractive to add in its entirety," says Neil Davidson, head of the ports practice at Drewry Shipping Consultants in London. He added that P&O's operations in Asia and North America and a new U.K. port are key assets.

"You buy P&O and you get a big chunk of the Indian port market," he said, adding that a buyer would also get the "potential to build in the U.K., which is a pretty rare thing to have."

This is global, not just about six U.S. ports. And as most of the port operators are non-U.S. companies anyway, chances are somebody foreign would be taking over where P&O left off.

Of course now we come to it - terrorism, and the threat to America.

Are we signing our own death warrants by allowing this sale to go through? The evidence against the UAE, in spite of the confidence of the Bush administration and their help in the war on terror, is substantial. (via Captain's Quarters)

...In fact, the 9/11 Commission notes UAE involvement in Islamist terrorism in several spots.

Page 138: "Even after Bin Ladin's departure from the area, CIA officers hoped he might return, seeing the camp as a magnet that could draw him for as long as it was still set up.The military maintained readiness for another strike opportunity.160 On March 7, 1999, [Richard] Clarke called a UAE official to express his concerns about possible associations between Emirati officials and Bin Ladin.Clarke later wrote in a memorandum of this conversation that the call had been approved at an interagency meeting and cleared with the CIA." [This involved Clarke blowing a cover on a covert operation.]

Page 167: "In early 2000,Atta, Jarrah, and Binalshibh returned to Hamburg. Jarrah arrived first, on January 31, 2000.97 According to Binalshibh, he and Atta left Kandahar together and proceeded first to Karachi, where they met KSM and were instructed by him on security and on living in the United States. Shehhi apparently had already met with KSM before returning to the UAE.Atta returned to Hamburg in late February, and Binalshibh arrived shortly thereafter. Shehhi'’s travels took him to the UAE (where he acquired a new passport and a U.S. visa), Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and one or more other destinations."

Page 171: "Bin Ladin relied on the established hawala networks operating in Pakistan, in Dubai, and throughout the Middle East to transfer funds efficiently."

Page 216: "On June 20, Hanjour returned home to Saudi Arabia. He obtained a U.S. student visa on September 25 and told his family he was returning to his job in the UAE. Hanjour did go to the UAE, but to meet facilitator Ali Abdul Aziz Ali.62"

Page 224: "The Hamburg operatives paid for their flight training primarily with funds wired from Dubai by KSM'’s nephew,Ali Abdul Aziz Ali. Between June 29 and September 17, 2000,Ali sent Shehhi and Atta a total of $114,500 in five transfers ranging from $5,000 to $70,000."

Page 236: "After training in Afghanistan, the operatives went to a safehouse maintained by KSM in Karachi and stayed there temporarily before being deployed to the United States via the UAE. ... Ali apparently assisted nine future hijackers between April and June 2001 as they came through Dubai. He helped them with plane tickets, traveler'’s checks, and hotel reservations; he also taught them about everyday aspects of life in the West, such as purchasing clothes and ordering food. Dubai, a modern city with easy access to a major airport, travel agencies, hotels, and Western commercial establishments,was an ideal transit point."

In fact, many of the 9/11 hijackers transited through the UAE, and a significant amount of al-Qaeda cash came through UAE-based accounts. If they run their own country's borders so poorly, why would we trust them to run ours? The White House needs to deep-six this deal, or cancel the contracts and re-bid them. Putting our ports in the hands of Arab authoritarians isn't just putting the fox in charge of the henhouse, it's tantamount to cooking him eggs for breakfast every morning and bringing him KFC for supper every night.

And it's a point well taken. But it is worthy to note that one of the reasons the hijackers used the UAE is because it is so connected to the West. Note from the report - "Dubai, a modern city with easy access to a major airport, travel agencies, hotels, and Western commercial establishments,was an ideal transit point." That speaks to the Westernized nature of the UAE. And it is true that the UAE has been helpful in the war on terror, as the Bush administration contends.

"We have worked very closely with the United States on a number of issues relating to the combat of terrorism, prior to and post Sept. 11," Al Nahyan said in answer to questions submitted through the Information Ministry.

"We have recently concluded joint task force agreements with the United States on drying up the funding for terrorist groups and also on nonproliferation," Al Nahyan added, without giving specifics on the agreements.

"It is no secret now that we have handed over in recent years a number of suspects linked to terrorism, either wanted in their home countries or in the United States," he said.

One of the suspects that the U.A.E. caught and handed to the U.S. was wanted for the 2000 bombing of the destroyer USS Cole in Yemen, Al Nayhan said.

The United Arab Emirates, where Dubai is one of seven emirates, is a major U.S. ally in the Arab world. It has allowed the U.S. Air Force to operate from several bases in the country, including flying U-2 spy planes and unmanned craft with intelligence-gathering sensors.

And that's a big deal. It's not perfect, by any means, but do we now return the favor by saying "sorry, you're Arab, and some of the terrorists came from your country, so no ports for you"? I'm asking, seriously, because I haven't made up my mind either. Remember, we've also recently sold the UAE F-16 fighters and related equipment. This is a real U.S. partner, not Iran.

But of course this speaks to the larger issue of exactly who our allies really are in the Middle East, and why. Pakistan, a nuclear power, who aided in the rule of the Taliban, is now a major ally. Why? Because al Qaeda wants Musharaff dead, and has attempted to kill him numerous times. The Saudis are a major ally, helped us stage for Iraq, let us use their bases, attempted to (along with Kuwait) stabilize the price of oil by dumping millions more barrals a day onto the market, and they are also under threat from al Qaeda; yet they also foment oppressive society and some sheiks held a telethon for suicide bomber families. So where do we draw the line for friend or foe? Obviously our ally today could be our foe tomorrow - or visa versa. But unfortunately all I've heard from our politicians on this matter is a lot of rhetoric.

The UAE is an interesting place, because they've been making strides towards modernity (despite their abysmal record in the sex trade, second only to the United Nations I think - though John Bolton is going to start knocking heads over there soon enough), moreso than other Middle Eastern nations. It's actually a premier tourist spot on the Persian Gulf. And their oil won't last forever. Many analysts see this port move as a means to secure other industries for the future. Sort of like how Phillip Morris diversified into things like Kraft foods and such.

But about that terrorism... Are our ports in danger? Absolutely, they always were. Is the transfer of management to DP World going to increase that danger? Possibly...but many people in the business are saying no.

...some maritime and security experts said the DP World deal posed no particular risks and called the pushback political.

''We've worked with Dubai Ports, and their management company is committed to improved security at all of their acquired ports,'' said Kim Petersen, president of Fort Lauderdale-based SeaSecure, a consultant. "The vast majority of their managers are ex-pats. It's not like you will find Dubai nationals running security or even managing the operation at an American port.''

P&O Ports owns 50 percent of the Port of Miami Terminal Operating Co., which handles about half the cargo containers at the Port of Miami-Dade. There are two other terminals at the port.

''It's a nonissue,'' said Harlan Ullman, a senior advisor on national security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "If someone is going to infiltrate, you can infiltrate an American company as well as anyone else.''

They noted DP World will have an American board of directors for its American operations and must comply with new, tougher worldwide security standards promoted by the U.S. Coast Guard.
....

To protect the country against weapons of mass destruction being imported in a cargo container, U.S. Customs and Border Protection established programs to flag suspect containers for inspection and has sent teams of inspectors to dozens of ports worldwide to review manifests before ships leave.

But it's estimated only 3-to-5 percent of containers entering the country are scanned, prompting criticism of gaping security holes. [And this is a problem outside the scope of DP World or P&O --ZP]
....

It's believed that most of P&O's employees will remain with DP World, and that little will change at the American ports, said Rick Eyerdam, editor of The Florida Shipper.

Port of Miami-Dade executives aren't concerned.

"They are not buying the Port of Miami," said Deputy Port Director Khalid Salahuddin. "They are buying part of one of the operators at the port."

And this move to globalization is part of the Bush administration's own initiative for pushing freer trade and capitalism in the Arab world.

The Bush administration has proposed a Middle East Free Trade Area (MEFTA), which would link 22 Arab nations, Israel and the United States by 2013.

A free trade agreement between the U.S. and Morocco went into effect on Jan. 1, and a similar agreement with Bahrain was approved by Congress in December and is expected to take force this March. Other trade agreements now exist between the United States and Israel and Jordan.

I am greatly concerned about our port security, but honestly I don't know if stopping the sale is the answer - or even if we could stop the sale. At the most I think the government could cancel the port contracts, or maybe the city governments would have to find DP World deficient in the lease somehow. That might kill the deal. But as the Miami Herald notes:

...the tiny emirate has become one of the few places in the Middle East where freewheeling capitalism has taken root and been successful.

Do we want to kill this as well? This is a lot bigger deal than it's made out to be. And so I think because of security concerns we need an investigation, we need to look at this very carefully. But our strategy for winning the war on terror is both military action and societal change. We need to find the balance, and ditch the rhetoric.

Let's hope that in this situation we can do that, whatever the outcome.



Technorati Tags: Dubai, Ports, UAE, Terrorism, P&O, Bush

The War On Pastries, Part II

The "Freedom Fries" copy-cat game, covered here and here previously, is apparently firming up. Michelle Malkin notes that the AP is now reporting that bakeries all across Iran are in fact renaming their Danish pastries in retaliation for the 12 cartoons.

Iranians love Danish pastries, but when they look for the flaky dessert at the bakery they now have to ask for "Roses of the Prophet Muhammad."

Bakeries across the capital were covering up their ads for Danish pastries Thursday after the confectioners' union ordered the name change in retaliation for caricatures of the Muslim prophet published in a Danish newspaper.

"Given the insults by Danish newspapers against the prophet, as of now the name of Danish pastries will give way to 'Rose of Muhammad' pastries," the union said in its order.

"This is a punishment for those who started misusing freedom of expression to insult the sanctities of Islam," said Ahmad Mahmoudi, a cake shop owner in northern Tehran.

One of Tehran's most popular bakeries, "Danish Pastries," covered up the word "Danish" on its sign with a black banner emblazoned "Oh Hussein," a reference to a martyred saint of Shiite Islam. The banner is a traditional sign of mourning.

So we have a group of people who tacitly approve of radicals from their culture burning down a McDonalds (and a poor KFC, among other things) over "offensive" cartoons, who then turn around and adopt a protest in the same image of that which epitomizes said fast food establishment - the french fry (a la "Freedom Fries").

And, not that I've ever heard Muslims really claim to take much offense to every suicide bomber or terrorist named Muhammed (the "religion of peace" being defiled by the radicals and all), but the American Princess makes another good point - "Perhaps this is a question best written off with a reference to what we've witnessed over the last several weeks, but why is it that they get their shorts in a knot over Muhammed cartoons, but have no qualms about eating him as a pastry? Isn't that just as blasphemous?"

I'd say this was the height of irony, but it's really just sad. The war nobody wanted just keeps on going.

Iran Wants To Send Nuclear Technology To Venezuela

Oh sure...excellent... What could possibly be wrong with that?

An Iranian lawmaker has suggested that Iran might consider help Venezuela develop nuclear technology to generate energy for peaceful purposes.

The speaker of the Iranian parliament, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel,, said during a trip to Caracas that Iran and Venezuela had not discussed nuclear cooperation, but said Iran would be willing to study the possibility.

He said that any cooperation would be "according to the rules of the International Atomic Energy Agency," the UN's nuclear watchdog, which on 4 February referred Iran to the UN Security Council over concerns that Iran may be pursuing a nuclear program for military purposes.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, a critic of the U.S. government, has backed Iran's right to develop nuclear fuel despite such international concerns. Iran and Venezuela are both members of the oil cartel OPEC.

Yeah, and Iran has been so good at following the IAEA rules, now haven't they? After all, their entire desire to shrug off the second largest known oil-reserves for the financially suicidal drive to develop nuclear energy is completely for peaceful purposes, and to work in the spirit of Kyoto, of course...

This is like a big freaking train wreck, in slow motion. One that even France has apparently decided to mention.

...French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy's bold statement appeared to reflect mounting exasperation and a tougher stance than European negotiators had previously maintained in their efforts to persuade Iran to suspend nuclear activities.

"No civilian nuclear program can explain the Iranian nuclear program. It is a clandestine military nuclear program," Douste-Blazy said on France-2 television.

Thank you, Minister Obvious. Now can we please get this Security Council thing moving?

You Have Got To Be Kidding Me...

After decades of groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL ratcheting up the panic level - that should evil conservatives ever win back the Supreme Court and overturn Roe v. Wade, women the world over would be forever consigned to coat-hangers, "back-alley" abortions and the shame of a private ordeal - it seems that over in Europe (the model for all liberal world social policy) they have now progressed to the idea of...wait for it...home abortions.

And no, this is not the Morning After pill or a doctor's call. This is women performing their own abortions.

Women who are less than nine weeks pregnant can safely have medical abortions at home, according to the head of a government-backed pilot project.

Abortion services for the 20,000 women who seek a chemically induced abortion every year could be transformed should the Department of Health's official evaluation of the pilot confirm initial findings. But it is also likely to provoke controversy from anti-abortion campaigners who will claim that home abortions would make the procedure easier and therefore lead to more women having terminations.

Shirley Butler, the project manager of one pilot which has tested the abortions with 172 women patients since 2004, told the Guardian: "We haven't had any significant problems apart from one woman who had a slightly heavy bleed. In my opinion medical abortions outside of acute hospitals seem to be safe." She added that women who took part in the trial were positive about it.

Ms Butler stressed that the results were preliminary and were now being officially evaluated. She also asked for her hospital not to be named for fear of reprisal attacks from pro-life campaigners. St Mary's hospital in London confirmed that it is undertaking the second trial.

Chemical abortions are available before the 12th week of pregnancy. Women who request it take one tablet of mifepristone at a hospital then return two days later to take four doses of misoprostol which causes a termination within hours. Usually women remain in hospital after taking the second pills until the abortion is complete. Under the trials they took both sets of pills within local community clinics to test the theory that it is safe to be outside hospital, and therefore at home.

Note how the media seemed more concerned with the "anti-abortion" campaigners making trouble than with any type of medical problems resulting from this. But I suppose they have their priorities.

Honestly, I find this a disgusting gesture, not only the callous disregard for the life of the baby, but in also throwing the mother out as well. I think all this serves to do is dehumanize two people now instead of one.

Parting thought by Kathryn Lopez, of National Review.

Let's put aside for a moment the issue of the life that is ending in an abortion because I will assume if you're heralding at-home abortions that's not an issue for you. I'll continue to ask: Where are the feminists? Having a supposedly clean and quiet abortion at home is not progress for women, who often walk into abortion completely unprepared for its emotional consequences. If the National Organization for Women were [sic] really gave a fig about women and not legal abortion now and always, they would be outraged at every prospect of abortion becoming easier, so to speak, easier to do without professional support. Being left to yourself at home with the remains of your "termination" isn't a good thing, even if you contend life begins at middle age

Putting It In Perspective

Proving that they are indeed the most useless group of professional journalists this side of the sphere, the White House press corp has been headlining the rather striking hysteria the mainstream media has been fomenting over Dick Cheney's accidental shooting incident.

I mean obviously, this is a big story. Indeed, it's huge. But I have to say, the press going ballistic to the tune of "Why didn't you tell me?! Mmmeeeeee! What nefarious deeds have you been doing?! Ahhhhhh! is actually kind of scary.

It was an accident, and a terrible one. And in the midst of it, with the medics racing, the secret service swarming, and the poor ranch hosts and family members worried for Whittington, somehow they still, when there was time, alerted the local media to the incident. Remember that. The property owner alerted the local paper. In other words, they informed the public...but they didn't inform David Gregory.

Which is apparently an impeachable offense.

The utterly crazed behavior Gregory exhibited, flailing away at Scott McClellen, because he had not been informed, speaks to the moral authority and righteousness the national media feel that they own. Though sadly, instead, all it serves to illustrate is their utter contempt for this administration, and the office they occupy.

This afternoon, Cheney is going to give a interview on Fox. I suspect he will be candid and express a deep regret, which he no doubt feels. And I'm glad he is going to speak on it. Hopefully, as Tony Blankley explains, this will provide a bit of realism and a break from the hysteria.

But the Washington press corp, and particularly the White House press corp, has developed, as an institution, a grossly dilated view of itself. Most of us can tolerate arrogance if it is accompanied by extraordinary capacity and virtuosity. The brilliant scientist, the war-winning general, the great artists are entitled to their pride.

But the hallmark of the Washington Press corp these days is mediocrity, groupthink, a lack of curiosity and rampant careerism. These attributes were all on show in the shooting party incident. But this is just a trivial incident -- except for the poor, shot gentleman who suffered a heart attack, may he recover fully and quickly.

We live at a moment of revolutionary change in the international order. The rise and violence of radical, possibly caliphate-forming Islam and the huge, culture-changing, unexamined consequences of rampant globalization make the present one of the least predictable moments to be alive.

Both government officials and citizens are in desperate need of a national press corp that is alive to the change and digging to find factual hints of the near future. We need the kind of future-oriented intellectual vigor, curiosity and genuine iconoclasm that typified American reporters in the first half of the last century.

Instead, as the shooting party incident exemplified, we have in the White House at the most elite level of American journalism, self-absorbed, self-important men and women who stand on their prerogatives even over marginal and inconsequential matters.

In other words, don't be a jerk, David.

Bad News For Europe?

All burning and rioting aside, Fareed Zakaria makes the case that Europe's economy is on a downward spiral, one that he's not sure they can stop.

Talk to top-level scientists and educators about the future of scientific research, and they will rarely even mention Europe. There are areas in which it is world-class, but they are fewer than they once were. In the biomedical sciences, for example, Europe is not on the map, and it might well be surpassed by much poorer Asian countries. The CEO of a large pharmaceutical company told me that in 10 years, the three most important countries for his industry would be the United States, China and India.

And I haven't even gotten to the demographics. In 25 years, the number of working-age Europeans will decline by 7 percent, while those over 65 will increase by 50 percent. One solution: let older people work. But Europe's employment rate for people over 60 is low: 7 percent in France and 12 percent in Germany (compared with 27 percent in the U.S.). Modest efforts to allow people to retire later have been met with the usual avalanche of protests. And while economists and the European Commission keep proposing that Europe take in more immigrants to expand its labor force, it won't. The cartoon controversy has powerfully highlighted the difficulties Europe is having with its existing immigrants.

What does all this add up to? Less European influence in the world. Europe's position in institutions like the World Bank and the IMF relates to its share of world GDP. Its dwindling defense spending weakens its ability to be a military partner of the U.S., or to project military power abroad even for peacekeeping purposes. Its cramped, increasingly protectionist outlook will further sap its vitality.

The decline of Europe means a world with a greater diffusion of power and a lessened ability to create international norms and rules of the road. It also means that America's superpower status will linger.

This article is just the latest in a long line of dire predictions for Europe, and it's a good read. The countries of Europe would do well to listen.

You Know...

...it's one thing to criticize -

The White House was bombarded with questions on Monday about why it failed to go public with news that Vice President Dick Cheney shot a fellow quail hunter until the day after the accident.

The victim, Harry Whittington, 78, took pellets in his cheek, neck and chest when Cheney fired his shotgun while aiming for a bird during a hunt in southern Texas on Saturday, and was in stable condition at a Corpus Christi hospital.

Whittington was moved out of intensive care on Monday afternoon but Peter Banko, administrator of Christus Spohn Hospital, said he did not know when Whittington would be discharged.

"His condition continues to be stable ... it's not critical, it's not serious. He's in stable condition, doing extremely well," Banko said.

The accident happened about 5:30 p.m. on a private ranch about 200 miles south of San Antonio, where the vice president has hunted previously. Whittington was treated on the scene by Cheney's traveling medical detail before being taken by helicopter to the hospital.

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department said on Monday that Cheney would receive a warning citation for not having a special bird-hunting stamp on a Texas hunting license he bought earlier.

or make fun of the Vice President for having bad judgment, a bad license, and bad aim -

"The Tonight Show with Jay Leno," NBC:

_ "Although it is beautiful here in California, the weather back East has been atrocious. There was so much snow in Washington, D.C., Dick Cheney accidentally shot a fat guy thinking it was a polar bear.

_ "That's the big story over the weekend. ... Dick Cheney accidentally shot a fellow hunter, a 78-year-old lawyer. In fact, when people found out he shot a lawyer, his popularity is now at 92 percent."

_ "I think Cheney is starting to lose it. After he shot the guy he screamed, 'Anyone else want to call domestic wire tapping illegal?'"

_ "Dick Cheney is capitalizing on this for Valentine's Day. It's the new Dick Cheney cologne. It's called Duck!"

- but it's something else entirely when you seriously imply that he did it intentionally to deflect from the Valerie Plame scandal -

Foreign media were having a field day with the story of Cheney's hunting accident.

One Australian paper suggested Cheney was trying to draw attention from an investigation into his possible role in leaking national-security information to reporters. His indicted ex-aide, I. Lewis Libby, reportedly told a grand jury that he was authorized by his "superiors" to release parts of the classified National Intelligence Estimate. "With both Republican and Democrat members of Congress calling for an investigation into Libby's claim, Mr. Cheney was under some political pressure," said the Sydney Morning Herald. "Perhaps he was thinking about how he should respond when he aimed his shotgun at the quail and instead sprayed Mr. Whittington with shotgun pellets." The online news blog for the Guardian in London headlines its account of the mishap, "Duck Cheney."

To the conspiracy theory fanatics: give it a rest. Yes, the Vice President's office handled it poorly, but it was a hunting accident, not a plot. And to anybody who bemoans the reaction to alert the press, don't kid yourselves - the White House press corps is just mad because they got scooped by the Corpus Christi Caller-Times.

After an indecipherable blur of shouted questions, [David] Gregory's voice rose over those of his competitors.

"Let's just be clear here," Gregory said. "The vice president of the United States accidentally shoots a man, and he feels that it's appropriate for a ranch owner who witnessed this to tell the local Corpus Christi newspaper and not the White House press corps at large or notify the public in a national way?"

Pompus reporters aside, I'm glad to see Mr Wittington is improving, and that's the most important story in all of this.

Guys...I Don't Mean To Alarm You...

But USAToday says it's official...Kim Bauer returns to "24" tonight.

It's official. The magnet for mishaps is returning to 24.

Though actress Elisha Cuthbert took a season off to star in big-screen flicks (House of Wax, The Girl Next Door), her character, Kim, will be back to complicate matters for her dad, Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland). In past seasons she has been tormented by, among other terrors, a wild cougar and a weapon-wielding weirdo in an underground bunker.

Yes, not to mention that every boyfriend - nay - every human being, she has ever come into contact with has either been arrested, attacked, beaten, drugged, car wrecked, stabbed, shot, maimed, dismembered (lots), raped, and killed.

Yes, every human being.

Danger-prone doesn't even come close. So let's just prepare for the Apocalypse, and hope that the producers and writers know what they're doing.

Update: It appears that cooler heads have prevailed - and they've postponed the Apocalypse. Everyone carry on...for now.

Paris Hilton Is Going To Play Who?

Just when you thought it was safe to sip a beverage while reading the headlines...

It seems Paris Hilton is on the short list to play Mother Teresa in a new movie about her life. No really.

Well known Malayalam director T. Rajeevnath, scouting for a suitable actress to play the title role in his film on Nobel Peace laureate Mother Teresa, has sent feelers to American actress Paris Hilton.

"My agents in California have contacted Paris Hilton," Rajeevnath told IANS.

The director said he was impressed when he read a report sometime ago in which the hotel heiress said she had refused to pose nude in Playboy magazine and decided then to shortlist her.

Yes, apparently he hasn't heard about her "straight-to-video" release, sampled her acting prowess from The Simple Life, or noticed that she tends to walk around pretty much naked anyway.

But they've said they are going to thoroughly research any actress selected, so I'm assuming this director will get wise. Or at least I hope he does.

Rajeevnath expects to get the blessings of the Pope for the film and also hopes to sign in sitar maestro Pandit Ravi Shankar as music director.

I'd be rather curious to hear what the Pope would say, perhaps after he stopped laughing.

If You're Going To Bemoan Leak Investigations...

...perhaps it would be best to not have cheerleaded for the new "Plame precedent" in the first place.

Fitzmas fizzled for the New York Times, and now they're upset that the government, in light of actual national security damage to our country and our ability to fight the war on terror, because of leaks they reported on, is actually going to do something about it.

Federal agents have interviewed officials at several of the country's law enforcement and national security agencies in a rapidly expanding criminal investigation into the circumstances surrounding a New York Times article published in December that disclosed the existence of a highly classified domestic eavesdropping program, according to government officials.

The investigation, which appears to cover the case from 2004, when the newspaper began reporting the story, is being closely coordinated with criminal prosecutors at the Justice Department, the officials said. People who have been interviewed and others in the government who have been briefed on the interviews said the investigation seemed to lay the groundwork for a grand jury inquiry that could lead to criminal charges.

Take'em all to jail, I say. Honestly, I don't care if their source for the NSA program information was Rockefeller, Rove, or the lady putting pink snowballs into the vending machine at the food court (anyone having anything to do with a pink snowball should be locked up, it's obviously radioactive). This epidemic of leaking every national security secret under the sun just because, as the New York Times says, their reporting - "...set off an intense national debate about the proper balance between security and liberty..." - has got to stop.

Now I know what you're thinking - civil rights! You'll yell "He's spying on Americans!" and "He's violating the Constitution!" and "Imperial Presidency!" and "Stop the program!" and then possibly scream or cry and then have an aneurysm.

Don't worry, the ACLU has filed your lawsuit. But perhaps I should mention though that on "Meet the Press" this morning, former Democratic Senator Tom Daschle and Democratic Rep. Jane Harmon, who were in the briefings about the program, when specifically asked by Tim Russert if the program should be stopped, said "No."

Try not to have the aneurysm.

The truth of the matter is, most Americans have a more pragmatic view, than the Times does, of their rights and the rights of terrorists and security precautions during wartime. Does the program square away with past court decisions? Will the Supreme Court find it legal? I've heard arguments passionately debated, but what most polls are showing is the public doesn't much care about that once you get down to the meat of it. They want the President to get the job done, first and foremost, however it needs to happen - and that's really where he's getting the backing for his war powers. Congress may kick around for a bit more, but they know they've lost. In fact Congress may find themselves having to update FISA so it mates up even better with the NSA program.

Surveys dating as far back as the Joseph McCarthy era in the 1950s show consistently that while most Americans support the Bill of Rights as an abstract proposition, far fewer support those specific rights for all Americans all the time. This is particularly the case when the Bill of Rights is applied so as to protect various categories of despised people - communists in the 1950s, criminals since the early 1960s and terrorists today.

When you consider how many Americans still view the protections afforded to those accused of crimes as technicalities that merely guarantee "rights for criminals" - even though the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of these protections - it is not surprising that there is no groundswell of support for assuring the rights of people who might be planning to fly jet planes into office buildings.

This is true even if they are U.S. citizens or legal residents in telephone or e-mail conversations with people that the National Security Agency believes might be terrorists.

Bush is hardly known for his eloquence, but the idea embodied in his simple statement "If somebody from al-Qaida is calling you, we'd like to know why" will, in all likelihood, prove persuasive to enough Americans to keep the program alive.

With Iraq, the press thought they had to go re-fight Vietnam. With the NSA program, they think they're reliving Watergate. But the groundswell of support for the New York Times latest and greatest has been less than swell, and that is because for all their huffing and puffing, the Times has not one shred of proof that George Bush isn't using the program for the exact reason he stated. Indeed, they seem pleased to announce that he is, in fact, actually spying on terrorists, and Americans are only getting caught in that net because - shocker here - they're talking to terrorists.

To further bury the Times, I'd be willing to bet that Bush, and probably his entire national security staff, have not laid a finger on the operational aspect of the program at all. The NSA runs it for the expressed purpose of preventing attacks - to quickly disseminate information and leads to the other intelligence agencies. They're not building a case, they're trying to stop a bombing, or worse.

The point is, we're kind of in the middle of a war here, and apparently the NSA program is a big part of it. And if the press could stop re-living high school for five minutes they might figure that out. But five minutes is just too long for them, and a lot of Democrats (and sadly some Republicans) for that matter. In fact, I'll just throw the entire Congress into the pot too, because as Vice President Cheney so aptly put it the other day:

"I presided over most of those briefings," he said. "There was no great concern expressed that somehow we needed to come get additional legislative authority."

"Well, I think a lot of people decided after it became public that they wanted to take a different position than they had in private," Cheney said. "We've had some members head for the hill, so to speak, and forget perhaps that they were in the briefings and fully informed of the program."

He defended the select briefings. "You can't take 535 members of Congress and tell them everything and protect the nation's secrets."

Exactly. And yet, that's where we are now. And sure enough, as predicted, the local politics of individual representatives, as illuminated by Daniel Henninger, is now driving the operational aspects of the NSA program.

...GOP Rep. Heather Wilson suddenly became famous for presumably dissenting from the White House line and demanding a "complete review" of the surveillance program. Rep. Wilson, who chairs a House intelligence oversight subcommittee, is rightly regarded as one of the House's savvier and more serious members on national security issues. But . . .

Rep. Wilson is in a neck-and-neck re-election fight back in her New Mexico district with state Attorney General Patricia Madrid. Rep. Wilson is under pressure because her district is heavily Democratic; the opposition's primary line of attack has been that Rep. Wilson isn't sufficiently "independent" of the Bush White House. Right after her highly publicized NSA declaration this week, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee got out a statement that "Rep. Wilson is now and has always been a rubber stamp for the policies of the Bush-Cheney administration."

What this means is that the local politics of Albuquerque is now setting national security policy. Why them? Why not accord the same overweighted political status to the Third District in North Carolina, which happens to house Camp Lejeune? The primary argument against letting Albuquerque set national security policy through Rep. Wilson's political problems back home is found in that earlier statement from the 9/11 Commission: You simply cannot disperse policy formation in this area across all branches of government in the guise of checks and balances and then expect efficient management in, say, stopping terrorists.

Mr. Henninger goes on to argue, unfortunately, that the NSA program is about dead. And both Republicans on "Meet the Press" lamented the same thing.

Think about it, if you're al Qaeda are you going to use the phone anymore? If they can produce and release home movies, they obviously have access to TVs, so they've seen the explosion of hysterical coverage. Heck, we're all in trouble if Bush is spying on Americans! Right? I mean according to the Times the FBI is standing outside everybody's door just waiting for you to use the word "terrorist" in a sentence. They'll lock you away and decide later if you actually meant anything by it.

But that's just it, isn't it, what the Times reported versus what's actually going on. And as it turns out, that little congressional briefing the other day revealed something else not widely reported.

At least one Democrat left saying he had a better understanding of legal and operational aspects of the anti-terrorist surveillance program. But he said he still had a number of questions.

"It's a different program than I was beginning to let myself believe," said Alabama Rep. Bud Cramer, the senior Democrat on the Intelligence Committee's oversight subcommittee.

Gee, I wonder why? Could it be because the New York Times and their army of leakers has decided that they are the new gatekeepers for what security programs are proper and which are not? Could it be because the Times has it's own way of categorizing when a leak is good, and when it is bad? Don't forget, the Times, while championing the Plame leak investigation in the hopes of snaring Karl Rove, was fighting tooth and nail behind the scenes to reserve their right to keep secrets - or publish them - as they saw fit, by arguing that no crime had even been committed.

The double-mindedness of the Times is numbing. But yet they're going to cry "whistleblower" now with the NSA leak, probably to try to shore up the newspapers they've taped to their windows so the DOJ can't start peeking in.

Good luck.

First He Thought He Was Jesus...

Then he must have read about Madonna upstaging him, and then perhaps read my blog, because as if answering my question --

"If singers and actors want to start emulating Christian, or any Biblical figures, for that matter, maybe we should tell them who they really remind us of? The people of Sodom and Gomorrah? The Pharisees? Anyone have any ideas?"

-- now Kanye West has stated that he wants to be in the actual Bible.

No, really. He does.

Cocky rap star KANYE WEST is calling for a revised edition of THE BIBLE, because he thinks he should be a character in it.

The JESUS WALKS hitmaker, who picked up three Grammy Awards last night (08FEB06), feels sure he'd be "a griot" (West African storyteller) in a modern Bible.

He says, "I bring up historical subjects in a way that makes kids want to learn about them. I'm an inspirational speaker.

"I changed the sound of music more than one time... For all those reasons, I'd be a part of the Bible. I'm definitely in the history books already."

hmm...I wonder if he's read that part in the current Bible about pride?

* "You want me to be great, but you don't ever want me to say I'm great?"

West also says his hit song "Gold Digger" was the best song last year and that it should have been nominated for the Grammy's best rap song category: "That's a gimme Grammy."

Guess not.

Remember North Korea?

Yeah, I had forgotten too. But apparently that regime is still kicking around over there, making more demands, this time for fertilizer. I'm not sure if they've given up on the whole nuke thing and have moved on to fertilizer bombs now, or if they're going to attempt to make their citizens grow their own food? - after starving them for years.

They claim it's for growing things, but I mean this is the government that lied to that strategic diplomacy ace Jimmy Carter. And if they can pull the wool over his eyes...

South Korea has periodically sent the North rice and fertilizer. Last year, it sent 500,000 tons of rice and 350,000 tons of fertilizer. From 1999 through 2005, South Korea sent nearly 2 million tons of fertilizer to the North, Rhee said.

The appeal for aid comes after the North said its food situation had improved and demanded an end to international food aid, instead requesting long-term development assistance.

North Korea has relied on foreign handouts to feed its 23 million people since disclosing in the mid-1990s that state-run farms had collapsed after the loss of Soviet assistance and decades of mismanagement. A resulting famine is believed to have killed 2 million people.

I like the whole "decades of mismanagement" soft-peddling the AP does. Perhaps they could have wrote that the 2 million people died because of an oppressive, dictatorial regime, who's leader, the "repressed and frustrated movie director" was so obsessed with gaining nuclear weapons that he let millions of people die. Oh, but he has a couple of nice shiney ones in his backyard now.

hmm...Maybe he needs the fertilizer for the garden around the nukes? Maybe the people really are going to grow food? Or perhaps this is just North Korea's way of saying, "We've got our nukes, thanks, now just give us what we want or else..."

Do we really want Iran to start saying this?

Secrets And Trust

CIA Director, Porter Goss, has an op-ed in today's New York Times. It's possibly most ironic in terms of publication, as the subject is about secrecy leaks, something the Times knows a lot about, yet low and behold, the Times is printing the editorial.

Interestingly enough, Mr. Goss starts out by laying out the case for and clarifying the role of the whistleblower, even drawing attention to the (possibly) little-known fact that he - while in Congress - was one of the sponsers for the whistleblower protection legislation.

As a member of Congress in 1998, I sponsored the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act to ensure that current or former employees could petition Congress, after raising concerns within their respective agency, consistent with the need to protect classified information.

Exercising one's rights under this act is an appropriate and responsible way to bring questionable practices to the attention of those in Congress charged with oversight of intelligence agencies. And it works. Government employees have used statutory procedures — including internal channels at their agencies — on countless occasions to correct abuses without risk of retribution and while protecting information critical to our national defense.

On the other hand, those who choose to bypass the law and go straight to the press are not noble, honorable or patriotic. Nor are they whistleblowers. Instead they are committing a criminal act that potentially places American lives at risk. It is unconscionable to compromise national security information and then seek protection as a whistleblower to forestall punishment.

They're not noble, but the press loves them. Gives them red meat to publish. What did the Times care for national security, or the public's civil liberties when they published the NSA story? They sat on the story for a year.

The good news though is the President is winning this one. Notice how the calls for impeachment have all but died, or been relegated to John Conyers office? In fact a lot of Congressman and Senators are now taking the "wait and see" approach as they get briefed on the program, and some are even taking the opportunity to call for re-writing FISA (though personally I would favor abolishing it).

All fine and dandy though. Yea. Congress likes it. But how about our allies? How pleased are they with all these leaks?

As it turns out, not very.

Such leaks also cause our intelligence partners around the globe to question our professionalism and credibility. Too many of my counterparts from other countries have told me, "You Americans can't keep a secret." And because of the number of recent news reports discussing our relationships with other intelligence services, some of these critical partners have even informed the C.I.A. that they are reconsidering their participation in some of our most important antiterrorism ventures. They fear that exposure of their cooperation could subject their citizens to terrorist retaliation.

For all their accusations of Bush unilateralism, the Democrats are surprisingly silent on the issue of the leakers and the press stabbing our allies in the back. And this to me is perhaps the most important issue. Like it or not, al Qaeda has already changed their tactics and made adjustments for the NSA program, along with the whole host of other leaked secrets. The leakers and the press have aided the enemy, no doubt about it. And we have caused our allies to rethink what they tell us, if our blabbermouths are going to drag them down with the ship.

It's about trust. And if these leaks keep up, we may lose it entirely.

Now She Wants To Be Like The Virgin

Because apparently now Madonna (the singer) thinks she's the Virgin Mary... (via Michelle Malkin)

In Poland, Machina magazine published cover art of pop celebrity Madonna's face superimposed on the Virgin Mary this week.

Here it comes...Oh, she's so brave! Oh, she's so artistic! Oh, she's so smart and gifted! Oh, she named herself Madonna! Oh, she's the Virgin Mary! Wait...

No...she's not the Virgin Mary. She's not even a virgin. She's not the Mother of God. She's not any type of a role model at all actually. She's the Material Girl. She wears her underwear outside of her clothes, when she's wearing underwear. She published a book of nothing but nude photos of herself. She was married briefly to that Iranian reporter and boat-bailer Sean Penn.

She did pretend to be Evita for a while, but that didn't last. She has tried and tried and tried to re-invent herself as a singer every few years, to some success, but the years are gaining on her. And no amount of photo airbrushing and plastic surgery - and religion bashing - is going to stop that.

Shall we riot or burn her CDs? nah...She's too pathetic to waste that much energy on. Though I wholeheartedly endorse laughing at her. Celebrities and singers don't like being laughed at. Because magazines like this tell them they're being bold and daring, and not stupid or boring.

Anyway, I think the Cathoic Church should avoid any calls for Holy War with it's response. Maybe a direct question from the Pope would be cool. Or perhaps a couple of the Vatican nuns could pay her a visit, for tea or something.

Besides, others are probably going to take up this fight. It seems the magazine also pasted one of Madonna's children's faces over the face of the baby Jesus. So I'm sure Kanye West is going to have something to say about that. I mean I thought he was Jesus?


Though I wonder... If singers and actors want to start emulating Christian, or any Biblical figures, for that matter, maybe we should tell them who they really remind us of? The people of Sodom and Gomorrah? The Pharisees? Anyone have any ideas? Or a copy of Photoshop? I'm just asking.

European Union Prepared To Give Away The Sudetenland Their Media

Apparently the European Union has had enough of the riots, and are now prepared to tell the media to give up and censor themselves. It's all voluntary, of course...

"The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression," he [EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini] told the newspaper. "We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right."

The cartoons, which first appeared in a Danish newspaper last September before being reprinted across Europe, sparked a wave of protests around the world.

Newspapers which have published them say they are exercising their right to freedom of speech, while critics say the cartoons are deliberately offensive. Depicting the Prophet Mohammad is prohibited by Islam.

Frattini, a former Italian foreign minister, said millions of Muslims in Europe felt "humiliated" by the cartoons.

His proposed voluntary code would urge the media to respect all religious sensibilities but would not offer privileged status to any one faith.

The code would be drawn up by the European Commission, the EU executive body, and European media outlets, he said. It would not have legal status.

They are "prepared and ready" to give up that right. Amazing. And that was just over cartoons.

No word yet on the European media response, but I'm sure somebody's drawing a cartoon of Franco Frattini right now.

It Seems The Yahoo! Search Worked

Not to be outdone in the "don't be evil" hypocrisy category, it seems Yahoo! has upstaged Google. Yet another dissident jailed in China, thanks to Yahoo!

Yahoo Inc. provided evidence to Chinese authorities that led to the imprisonment of an Internet writer, lawyers and activists said on Thursday, the second such case involving the U.S. Internet giant.

The company cooperated with Chinese police in a case that led to the 2003 arrest of Li Zhi, who was charged with subverting state power and sentenced to eight years in prison after trying to join the dissident China Democracy Party, writer Liu Xiaobo said.

The Committee to Protect Journalists and media watchdog Reporters Without Borders called on Yahoo to disclose information on all Internet journalists and writers whose identities it has revealed to Chinese authorities.

"The firm says it simply responds to requests from the authorities for data without ever knowing what it will be used for," Reporters Without Borders said in a statement.

"But this argument no long holds water. Yahoo certainly knew it was helping to arrest political dissidents and journalists, not just ordinary criminals," it said.

Look at the charge, "subverting state power". It's disgraceful.

Who Are They Hoping Identifies With This?

Hoping to capitalize on Western sympathy for lunatics, Iran's mullahs have apparently decided to (vis-a-vis Freedom Fries) change the name of Danish pastries to "Mohammedan" pastries.

Iran has decided to rename Danish pastries "Mohammedan" pastry - a new twist in the crisis which has triggered protest by Muslims throughout the world against cartoons of Mohammed first published in Denmark. The name change recalls when some Americans started calling French fries, "Freedom fries" to protest France's opposition to the United States-led invasion of Iraq.

Considering that the gesture of Freedom Fries was the extent of American protest towards France (I don't seem to recall the American rabble that burned the French embassy to the ground and chanted "Death to France!", do you?), and not even a very popular one, I have to say I think the mullahs have flipped. I mean who are they hoping identifies with this? Conservatives in America? Congress? George Bush?

The only people on the entire planet who are holding back the squadron of American stealth bombers and Israeli commandos from taking out Iranian nuclear sites, because of their fleeting hope for peace, are liberals and Europeans - the very people who the Freedom Fries offended the most! And Iran is going to adopt this strategy?

How much more of this before Europe just rolls it's eyes and waves a hand at Israel and says "Fine, go ahead. Get it over with."

Iran has situated itself at the near center of this protest about the cartoons, hoping to garner support. But I think they've miscalculated badly on this one. Thank God.

Update: The news link appears to be down right now. While looking for a replacement I managed to find this alternate reference to the same story by the New York Times (Registration req'd):

The Iranian Student News Agency reported that the Commerce Ministry d called for changing the name of Danish pastry to the name of a flower that is named after Prophet Muhammad. The idea was proposed in a letter to the ministry, the news agency said.

I'm rather curious how far Iran will even take this. It seems to me they're scrambling for a protest that works.

Update II: The New York Times article (Registration req'd) has been freshened, also with new wording in the relevant portion of the article.

In a twist on the way some Americans renamed French fries "freedom fries," the Commerce Ministry called for changing the name of Danish pastry to that of a flower named after Muhammad, according to the Iranian Student News Agency. The idea was proposed in a letter to the ministry, the press agency said.

The original link above (via Adnkronos International) is still down, in fact the entire news agency appears dead right now.

I have not yet seen this story over the AP or Reuters wires, but the New York Times seems to keep updating, so I'll check back with them periodically.

As with anything coming out of Iran, I have to wonder exactly what their motive is - to sow more controversy or cling to hope for sympathy? Because as I said, changing the name of a pastry, or threatening to, after you've already threatened nations with Holy War, burned embassies, rioted and boycotted over cartoons seems downright stupid if you ask me. More updates to follow as this story continues.

Update III: The AKI link is working again.



Welcome Michelle Malkin readers! Thanks for stopping by. Feel free to look around for a bit. Click the top graphic and it'll take you to the main page.

"It Was A Pleasure To Burn."

Burning embassies, burning effigies, burning flags - it's become the standard recipe for a protest against freedom or the latest Western bugaboo. And now Denmark, Norway, heck all the EU must bow to the might of the mob over a bunch of stupid cartoons.

We've had calls for boycotts, and beheadings, marches and riots, ambassadors recalled, embassies stormed, burned...Lots of burning. And lots and lots of Danish flags being burned (along with American, French, Norwegian, and apparently one unfortunate Swiss flag that looked Danish).

And that got me curious. Where the heck do you get a Danish flag to burn in the middle of Gaza, or Lebanon, or Iran, or even in France? Mark Steyn was wondering too, as were many around the blogosphere.

Even if you were overcome with a sudden urge to burn the Danish flag, where do you get one in a hurry in Gaza? Well, OK, that's easy: the nearest European Union Humanitarian Aid and Intifada-Funding Branch Office. But where do you get one in an obscure town on the Punjabi plain on a Thursday afternoon? If I had a sudden yen to burn the Yemeni or Sudanese flag on my village green, I haven't a clue how I'd get hold of one in this part of New Hampshire. Say what you like about the Islamic world, but they show tremendous initiative and energy and inventiveness, at least when it comes to threatening death to the infidels every 48 hours for one perceived offense or another. If only it could be channeled into, say, a small software company, what an economy they'd have.

So where'd they all come from? It get's back to that "inventiveness and initiative." Because as it turns out, the culprit might just be the strange market such extremism creates.

When entrepreneur Ahmed Abu Dayya first heard that Danish caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad were being reprinted across Europe, he knew exactly what his customers in Gaza would want: flags to burn.

Abu Dayya ordered 100 hard-to-find Danish and Norwegian flags for his Gaza City shop and has been doing a swift trade.

"I do not take political stands. It is all business," he said in an interview. "But this time I was offended by the assault on the Prophet Mohammad."
....

"I knew there would be a demand for the flags because of the angry reaction of people over the offence to Prophet Mohammad," said Abu Dayya, whose PLO Flag Shop also sells souvenirs and presents.

He sells his Danish and Norwegian flags for $11 a piece -- a price he acknowledged might be dampening sales. Many protesters prefer to save money and make the flags themselves from scraps of fabric, he said.

Abu Dayya sources some of his flags from suppliers in Taiwan, but he buys Israeli flags from a merchant in Israel, even though he sells them to be burnt at anti-Israeli rallies.

Flag-making has been a growth business for Abu Dayya for years, thanks to orders by Palestinian militant groups for national flags and banners bearing the symbols of armed factions.

Last year, he said the Palestinian Authority ordered 60,000 flags ahead of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza. Workers at one factory stitched some 3,000 pennants a day.

What I find amazing is that there's even an economic price point chart for flag burning - making the flag yourself vs. buying it.

It seems that in all things, the power of the free market prevails.

Google's Net

After monopolizing the search engine market, establishing itself as the gatekeeper of free speech and suppression of speech in China, fighting the Justice Department over aggregate data that your cell phone company sells like it's going out of style and Yahoo! gives away for free, and chastising Europe for internet censorship, Internet giant "don't be evil - unless money is involved" Google is making a play for the Net itself. It's own Net, that is.

Google is working on a project to create its own global internet protocol (IP) network, a private alternative to the internet controlled by the search giant, according to sources who are in commercial negotiation with the company.

Last month, Google placed job advertisements in America and the British national press for "Strategic Negotiator candidates with experience in...identification, selection, and negotiation of dark fibre contracts both in metropolitan areas and over long distances as part of development of a global backbone network".

Dark fibre is the remnants of late 1990s internet boom where American web companies laid down fibre optic cables in preparation for high speed internet delivery. Following the downturn in the technology sector during the early 2000s, the installation process for many of these networks was left incomplete. This has resulted in a usable network of cables spread across the United States that have never been switched on. By purchasing the dark fibre, Google would in effect be able to acquire a ready made internet network that they could control.

Eat your heart out SkyNet - "Google became self-aware at 15:45 Zulu; in a panic they tried to pull the plug..."

Ha.

But this is cool, really. I mean it's not like they're towing the line of any hard-line totalitarian regimes or banning world class companies that piss them off. This is going to be great!...

Riiiight...

Ready For The Fireworks?

Cartoons may be all the rage in Europe and the Middle East, but another battle is getting ready to start in Washington today: hearings on the NSA terrorist surveillance program.

The discussion is sure to be heated, adversarial, and will probably serve no one's interests save al Qaeda, who will most likely have plenty of viewers watching the hearing and soaking it all in.

Congressional theatrics aside, Alberto Gonzales should have no trouble with the Senators. Here's a brief snippet from his WSJ editorial this morning:

The NSA terrorist surveillance program is a military operation designed to detect them quickly. Efforts to identify the terrorists and their plans expeditiously while ensuring faithful adherence to the Constitution and our existing laws is precisely what America expects from the president.

History is clear that signals intelligence is, to use the language of the Supreme Court, "a fundamental incident of waging war." President Wilson authorized the military to intercept all telegraph, telephone and cable communications into and out of the U.S. during World War I. The day after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt authorized the interception of all communications traffic into and out of the U.S. These sweeping measures were seen as necessary and lawful during critical moments of past armed conflicts. So, too, are the more focused intercepts of al Qaeda during our current armed conflict, especially given the nature of the enemy we face.

The AUMF is broad in scope, and understandably so; Congress could not have catalogued every possible aspect of military force it was endorsing. That's why the Supreme Court ruled in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that the detention of enemy combatants--a fundamental incident of war-- was lawful, even though detention is not mentioned in the AUMF. The same argument holds true for the terrorist surveillance program. Nor was the president's authorization of the terrorist surveillance program in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA bars persons from intentionally "engag[ing] . . . in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute." The AUMF provides this statutory authorization for the terrorist surveillance program as an exception to FISA.

Lastly, the terrorist surveillance program fully complies with the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Like sobriety checkpoints or border searches, this program involves "special needs" beyond routine law enforcement, an exception to the warrant requirement upheld by the Supreme Court as consistent with the Fourth Amendment.

But in addition to the separation of powers battle going on, there is also the investigation into the leaker. The most interesting thing about the investigation is a certain rumor that started popping up around the time of the program's reveal last December. And now the rumor seems to be picking up steam and firming up.

For those of you who haven't been keeping up with the latest leaks from within the investigation into the leaker who leaked the existence of the program to the New York Times, here's the preview of the chaos that could very well be about to unfold. (via Hugh Hewitt)

The American Spectator's Jed Babbin was on John Batchelor's radio show yesterday, and stated that the intelligence community believes West Virignia Senator Jay Rockefeller is the leaker who illegally supplied the New York Times with the details of the NSA program.

Given that the CIA's Porter J. Goss stated emphatically that the leak had done very serious damage to the Uniterd States, if Rockefeller is a suspect, he should be hauled before a Grand Jury asap. When the crime was bribery (Abscam)no one protested that a sitting U.S. Senator ought not to be atarget.

If the crime is much more serious --and this is-- purported good intentions should not shield the suspect.

Has any member of the press asked Rockefeller point blank if he's the law breaker yet?

Jed Babbin sits in for me on Monday's show. That's the day the hearings into the NSA program begin, and Jed will no doubt continue this conversation then.

All of this was originally dished around on FreeRepublic.

The topic was the hearings that start on Monday. Babbin said that he had spent much of today talking on backkground with his sources in the intelligence community. He said flat out that they know that Rockefeller is the source of the leak to the NY Times.

The administration is not sure how to proceed. Babbin doesn't think they have the guts to indict a US senator. He said it would cause a battle royal on the Hill, if not a constitutional crisis.

He did say however, that any senator or Congressional staffer that holds a security clearance can be asked at any time to take a polygraph. The individual can of course refuse to take the test, but failure to do so is reason to remove that person's security clearance.

Babbin said further that Rockefeller, Durbin, and Wyden, and some on their staffs will soon be requested to take polygraphs.

If indeed this is true, it has obviously staggering implications. You would have the co-chair of the Senate Intelligence committee unable to in effect, do anything..

Remember, Rockefeller was also the Senator who admitted to peddling the idea that the U.S. was going to invade Iraq months before the actual invasion, who wrote the Democratic memo on their strategy to politicize pre-war intelligence, who wrote his own CYA letter disavowing the NSA program (a letter supposedly so secret that when it's existence was revealed in the New York Times, that's how the FBI knew to zero in on him) - while supporting the program in private.

And don't forget, Rockefeller also let loose with this weird bluster during Porter Goss's testimony last week.

Some CIA sources and "assets" had been rendered "no longer viable or usable, or less effective by a large degree," he said.

"I also believe that there has been an erosion of the culture of secrecy and we're trying to reinstall that," Goss said.

"I've called in the FBI, the Department of Justice. It is my aim and it is my hope that we will witness a grand jury investigation with reporters present, being asked to reveal who is leaking this information," he said.

Rockefeller suggested that the "leaks" Goss talked about most likely "came from the executive branch" of the government.

That brought a terse response from FBI Director Robert Mueller, who said, "It's not fair to point a finger as to the responsibility of the leak."

Rather odd if you ask me. And of course, I'll just be a stinker and throw my own speculation into the mix. Recall this - the New York Times received information on the NSA program when? Just before the 2004 Presidential election. Yet they decided not to run with it. Why?

It's been said that the New York Times declined because they had to investigate the program further, or they didn't want to inject politics into the election (they saw what happened to CBS), or remind people of terrorism - too bad for them Osama didn't get that memo, and sent out his "straight to video" release just days before the election (spouting Michael Moore poetry, as it were).

But what if the real reason the New York Times withheld the story was because they were worried that the story - if it didn't sink the President immediately - would lead straight to a Democrat given time for an investigation? They sat on it for a year after that, but then their own reporter, Risen, threatened to scoop them with his book.

It's rumor and speculation - but well thought out speculation. Take it as that, and only that, for now. But it's also Monday. Gotta have something to talk about over the morning coffee.

Steelers Win It

DETROIT

The Pittsburgh Steelers finally gave coach Bill Cowher some Super Bowl satisfaction. Moments after the Rolling Stones rocked a Ford Field filled with Terrible Towels, Willie Parker broke a record 75-yard touchdown run, sparking Pittsburgh's 21-10 victory Sunday over the Seattle Seahawks.

Not only did the Steelers earn that elusive fifth championship ring and their first since 1980, but they completed a magic Bus ride that made Jerome Bettis' homecoming _ and likely farewell _ a success.

eh...I wanted to see the Seahawks win, but even in spite of the bad calls the Steelers just outplayed them. Congrats to them.

And, for "Commercial of the Night", I nominate the MacGyver Mastercard commercial. Too cool.

The Media Needs To Get Smart

Everybody has been linking to this new column on Muslim rage by David Warren. It's excellent, a must read. I particularly identified with this part here, where he mentions the terrorists capability to adapt to the Bush Doctrine of democracy:

Our enemy -- fanatical Islam -- has shown itself adaptable to Western military tactics. For instance, the development of a new species of booby-traps, or "IED"s in Iraq, as a low-cost way of randomly killing Iraqis and Americans alike, and thus sabotaging Iraq'’s recovery, is a clever development from the too-costly methods of car bombs and "suicide-martyrs". As the Pentagon keeps explaining, it is a mistake to think the other side is incapable of adjusting its tactics, as we adjust ours.

That enemy is now adapting to the tactic of democracy. Even in Iraq, he takes up the challenge, to win elections instead of merely sabotaging them. And he sees a huge possibility in this: to link together disparate national Islamist movements into a pan-Islamic popular front -- that may itself eventually overwhelm the bulwarks and firewalls of European Imperialism. Like multiple hijacked airliners, a modern Western device can be put at the service of an ancient Islamic cause.

The wave of which I spoke above may prove indistinguishable from this wave. What I fear may hit us in due course might be awkwardly called, "the new democratic pan-Islamism".

He's absolutely right. And it seems frightening. Yet one has to remember, as I've written previously, the enemy is a thinking, breathing, strategizing foe. This is not some static party, content to sit around while we all hash out the politics and drama (the stupid fight over the NSA intercepts comes to mind, do we think the enemy is so stupid as not to adapt?)

And so what does this new development tell us? Democracy is working. The enemy has decided that a frontal assault on freedom does not work, and so they are looking for a back door. And in the states more susceptible to hard liners and terrorists, they have found it.

Of course, the calls of "I told you so!" and "Failure!" might start popping up. But I think those who do that are overlooking the emerging moment of clarity. For the societies that do embrace terror, those are clear-cut choices by the people. No more coddling by the U.N. and Europe. Either they submit to the political process, or the people tire of the terror groups, or they'll go down in a blaze of warfare at the first Hamas strike on Israel.

This is where I also challenge the media to wake up and see the enemy for what it is - a worthy foe, one not content to just sit by and die. They are actively using our freedoms, our "press and news culture" and our compassion against us.

Internal U.S. politics and media bias has clouded this situation for far too long. The enemy is strategizing for a win - we cannot ignore this. And we need an objective press to report on it.

The Great al Qaeda Escape

Move over Steve McQueen, al Qaeda prisoners in Yemen did it for real.

Security forces in Yemen are searching for 23 members of Al-Qa'ida who escaped from prison on Friday.

A security force said the group includes inmates accused of bombing the American destroyer USS Cole in October 2000, the Yemenite daily Al-Ayyam reported.

Seventeen American soldiers were killed in this attack at the Yemenite port of 'Aden.

Security sources said they also include attackers of the French supertanker Limburg in 2002, and that some of the escapees are the most dangerous and important members of Al-Qa'ida.

Abu 'A'sim Al-Ahdal, who is thought to be the number two Al-Qa'ida person in Yemen, is also said to be among the escapees, a security source told AFP.

The escape coincides with the trial of another group of suspected Al-Qa'ida members in Yemen.

Sources said a 140-meter tunnel was dug, connecting the prison cells to a nearby mosque in 'Sana.

Digging a tunnel to a mosque. Nice.

The War Behind The Riots

There is a tendency in the media to simplify the story of the world, possibly they do it for their readers (not that readers need this simplification, but journalists think they do), but also out of a fallback towards laziness and their own ideas of "how the world must be." In addition, the errant behavior of the world community, mostly through the United Nations, in appeasing and promoting the views of the few onto whole societies and making moral relevancy a favorite pastime, has only aided the idea and perpetuation of victimhood throughout the world.

This is not to excuse cunning dictators, terror enablers, and third world theocracies from taking advantage of the world's good intentions - they have, repeatedly and rather successfully. And unfortunately this, and not just offended Muslims, is what has led to the utter chaos going on in the Middle East today.

Angry demonstrators set the Danish consulate in Beirut ablaze on Sunday and the violent turn in protests over publication of cartoons of Prophet Mohammad drew condemnation from European capitals and moderate Muslims.

Syrians set fire to the Danish and Norwegian embassies on Saturday in Damascus. They damaged the Swedish embassy and tried to storm the French mission but were held off by riot police.

Denmark is the focus for Islamic ire as images that Muslims find offensive, including one of the Prophet with a turban resembling a bomb, first appeared in a Danish daily in what has become a face-off between press freedom and religious respect.

As peaceful protests turned to ransacking Danish diplomatic offices and burning them in Syria and Lebanon, world leaders as well as prominent moderate Muslims appealed for calm and said such violence damaged the image of Islam worldwide.

"This has nothing to do with Islam at all," Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora told Future television. "Destabilizing security and vandalism give a wrong image of Islam. Prophet Mohammad cannot be defended this way."

In the row, newspapers have insisted on their right to print the cartoons, citing freedom of speech but for many Muslims, depicting the Prophet Mohammad causes offence.

Protests about the cartoons raged across the Muslim world at the weekend from Lahore to Gaza.

On Sunday's violence in Beirut, Mohammad Rashid Qabani, Lebanon's top Sunni Muslim cleric, said no matter how strongly Muslims felt about the cartoons they must exercise restraint.

"We don't want the expression of our condemnation (of the cartoons) to be used by some to portray a distorted image of Islam," he said. "Today is a big test for us. Let our expression of condemnation be according to the values of Islam."

It is a big test, but I think not so much for Islam. Average citizens are upset, but I think this argument goes beyond just respect for Islam. This is about national power, not daily observances and prayers and respect. Respect, other than the basic introductory politiness, is never given, it is earned, even across cultures and countries. Having diplomatic relations is supposed to be just that, friendly relations between different peoples, not a subservience of culture and society. The Muslim world can protest cartoons all they want, they can recall ambassadors and kick out diplomats, and Europe can respond in any diplomatic way it sees fit. Perhaps acceptable, perhaps not; and thus diplomacy continues. But burning Embassies, looting, calling for violence against citizens of another country - these are not "peaceful protests," these are acts of war.

Now what does this all mean? Has Europe really offended Muslim sensibilities on such a wide scale? Or is there another motive that should be considered?

Let's look at the other motive.

The recent riots and burnings took place in Lebanon and Syria. Syria is an absolute police state, secular, and tied to the last remaining vestiges of the Axis of Evil. The Syrian regime occupied Lebanon for decades, and still has agents inside. The Syrian regime has been linked, by the U.N., to the Hariri murder, has "left it's borders open to terrorists" and has been accused of accepting either production material, or the WMD itself, from Iraq. And nothing happens in Syria without the knowledge and consent of the governing regime.

These attacks would not be possible without the tacit permission or connivance (or both) of the Syrian government. At the moment Syria is facing UN censure for its role in the murder of Lebanon'’s Rafik Hariri.

In fact, when you start to think about it in depth, the questions keep coming. As Mark Steyn muses:

Even if you were overcome with a sudden urge to burn the Danish flag, where do you get one in a hurry in Gaza? Well, OK, that's easy: the nearest European Union Humanitarian Aid and Intifada-Funding Branch Office. But where do you get one in an obscure town on the Punjabi plain on a Thursday afternoon? If I had a sudden yen to burn the Yemeni or Sudanese flag on my village green, I haven't a clue how I'd get hold of one in this part of New Hampshire. Say what you like about the Islamic world, but they show tremendous initiative and energy and inventiveness, at least when it comes to threatening death to the infidels every 48 hours for one perceived offense or another. If only it could be channeled into, say, a small software company, what an economy they'd have.

I probably couldn't even produce an acceptable American Flag for them to burn - the ones you see them burning on TV look brand new - mine is getting a tad faded. But the difficulties in locating flags aside, who else might be stoking this fire?

Iran.

Iran is in the hotseat, being hauled before the Security Council for it's atomic weapons program. And yes, this time it's real.

The way to think about Iran's quest for the bomb is akin to a warm fire in a cold desert. The surrounding states, terrorists, extremists - all who hate the west - are going to instictively be drawn to this fire, and aid in maintaining it, because it is their source of warmth (protection) from the cold, and death. Syria does not have the bomb, cannot get the bomb, and Iran will not give them the bomb. But as Syria aids Iran, it falls under their protection. Terrorists, like al Qaeda, would fall under Iran's protection. Hamas, and others, would fall under Iran's protection. Extremists in Europe would fall under Iran's protection. We pushed al Qaeda out of Afghanistan, we hunt them in Africa, we are about to push them out of Iraq, but Iran will become the new - and possibly impenetrable - terror breeding ground.

Anyone want to face down a nuke to go and get them? Anyone want to watch the entire world's oil supply go radioactive? Anyone want to see Israel disappear? - and their fail-safe for turning the desert into green glass go forward? I don't think so.

Other gulf nations, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, would all be drawn into the U.S. sphere of protection - to protect them, as much also as keeping them from getting the bomb themselves.

Oh, yeah, and to those who say, "Well, just give everybody the bomb, and be done with it. No one is stupid enough to actually use it if everybody has one," - I say you are fundamentally misunderstanding the motive of religious fanatics. They don't seek stability, or power for the long term. They seek religious fulfillment. And the MAD structure that develops from an Iranian bomb is a temporary tactical move, so they may crush internal dissent first, and keep the outside world at bay. Once they eradicate the internal threat, which is very real, despite the media blackout on the democratic elements, the mullahs will be free to construct their plan for removing Israel forever. And as I've posted previously, this is a theoretical model accepted by many analysts, especially John Keegan, a widely respected historian.

Iran, moreover, does not seek such weapons for psychological reasons. It wants them for practical purposes, including, according to a statement by its new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a former revolutionary guard, to "wipe Israel from the map".

Bloggers like Michelle Malkin are absolutely correct when they point out that these riots are not a "row," as the media are so quick to call them. Austin Bay blog ascribes this a war. I agree. This is yet a new front in the same war that's been raging since the creation of Israel.

I feel badly for the average Muslim family who was offended by those cartoons, those and every other anti-Muslim or anti-Islamic screed. As a Catholic I was offended by "Piss Christ," the Eucharists being sold on eBay, the "art" depicting the Virgin Mary covered in feces, Rolling Stone dressing up Kanye West as a battered and thorn-crowned Jesus...honestly I could go on for pages. But that's just it, where does offense cross over into militancy? And why?

This has gone beyond protesting an offensive cartoon, and it's long past time we realized it, and identified why.

Respect or Submission?

Oh the horror, the shame, the shock, the outrage...somebody drew a cartoon and the world goes crazy. And is still going crazy.

Rage against caricatures of Islam's revered prophet poured out across the Muslim world Saturday, with aggrieved believers calling for executions, storming European buildings and setting European flags afire.

Thousands of outraged Syrian demonstrators stormed the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus, setting fire to both buildings.

Police fired tear gas and water cannons to disperse demonstrators at the Norwegian Embassy after the Danish building was burned.

But the protesters broke through police barriers and set fire to the second building, shouting "Allahu Akbar!" which is Arabic for "God is great!"

Well, that's true, God is great. But I have to wonder what He's thinking right about now. Probably looking for His "smiting and floods" recipe book.

A big tenet of the West is freedom of expression, and unfortunately that means the freedom to offend - and it also means that as free citizens we have to prepare ourselves to be offended. Look at the recent Tom Toles cartoon depicting a callous Rumsfeld classifying a dis-membered soldier as "battle hardened," or the limitless assault on Christianity that European papers engage in. What about pop culture's relentless tidal wave of sexually charged advertisements, Hollywood's pursuit of the strange, the vulgar and offensive? As it's "Big Game" time this weekend, what about Janet Jackson's half-time reveal? Aren't all of us offended at some time or another?

Of course. We all get offended. What makes all of these things different though is how we respond.

Christians have limited success in prompting newspapers or other publications, or Hollywood for that matter, from engaging their sensitivities because the protestations mainly consist of public voicing, letters, or mild boycotts. Consider the recent television show Book of Daniel that got yanked after just a few airings. Christians protested the show, but ultimately it was poor ratings and a dismal story that ended that mess. But that too is a form of protest, a protest by mainstream America that they really couldn't care less about the show.

Yet contrast that to the utter hysteria, the violence, the riots, the threats, the arson, the calls for national destruction, boycotts, and calls for holy war - over cartoons.

It's not that sympathy for religion is not in order. It's the response that causes the protest to become more than offense, and in a sad sense could be viewed to give credence to a few of the cartoons.

"The protests in the Middle East have proven that the cartoonist was right," said Tarek Fatah, a director of the Muslim Canadian Congress.

"It's falling straight into that trap of being depicted as a violent people and proving the point that, yes, we are."

The militant and hard-line groups within Islam, intent upon increasing their power, have latched onto these drawings as proof of Western depravity, and those calls have struck a chord with mainstream Muslims. But I have news for them. Cartoons are the bare minimum of offenses here. Note this exchange between columnist Mark Steyn and radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt:

HH: ...the Muslim Mohammed cartoon fiasco scandal is exploding with seven European newspapers reprinting the cartoons judged offensive by many Muslims. And today, the editor, the publisher of one of those newspapers firing the editor of one of these newspapers. What is going on here?

MS: Well you know, this is a point I made in that very, very big piece that the Wall Street Journal website put up a couple of weeks ago, that there aren't a lot of good options when you have a very significant militant minority in your country that is determined, effectively, to demand that its own values be imposed on society at large. You only have to look at, for example, the difference...when a Broadway playwright writes a play about Jesus being gay, and having sex with Judas Iscariot, there are a couple of protests outside the theater, and people write letters. When you attempt to show a representation of Mohammed, you get people threatening to kill you, you get national boycotts, you get people burning down buildings. And at some point, Muslims living in Western Europe have to decide whether or not they're prepared to be offended, because that's what it involves in a free society. Every day of the week, you, I'm sure...every morning, I wake up to hate mail on the e-mail, and I shrug it off. And I'm sure you do, too.

HH: Yes, yes.

MS: And that's what Muslims have to learn to do in the Western world, if they're going to be citizens of the Western world.

HH: In fact, if you protest too much, there's a Will and Grace episode which has caught the attention of Donald Wildmon and the American Family Association. Evidently, they're viewing it as being very disrespectful to Christianity. And this stuff happens...and the Tommy Toles cartoon, which was very disgusting in the Washington Post, for which he's now apologized. But you know, you don't threaten to kill people over it.

MS: No, and in fact, Brokeback Mountain, for example, people said well, Brokeback Mountain, this film about these...this gay western, basically. They're two gay shepherds up on Brokeback Mountain having a gay old time. And people said well, this was supposed to be a controversial movie. Why is it a controversial movie? And a couple of websites started the view, this sort of conspiracy that in fact, the religious right had deliberately decided to kill the film by not making a fuss about it.

HH: I missed that. Oh, I see. Well, you can win from losing.

MS: And I think there's a lot of truth to that, that a few cartoons were published in a Danish newspaper, and the Muslims have decided to go on a worldwide jihad about it. Why not just...and I think they have essentially challenged every newspaper in the free world to demonstrate its commitment to freedom of speech now by publishing one of these cartoons. To the best of my knowledge, the only print publication in the United States to print them so far has been the New York Sun. But certainly, they're basically saying this is the choice. And I, in a sense, I sympathize with that owner of that French newspaper who fired his editor for publishing them, because he doesn't want those guys coming to his house and killing him.

HH: Yeah. Raymond Lakah.

MS: You know, you've got to draw the line. You've got to stand firm against that now. And if they are people who are going to kill you, then the sooner they learn that they can't kill you or you're going to kill them, the better.

Yet here it is, the crossroads. Does the West cave on freedom, and give in to exported Shar'ia law? Or does the Muslim world back down because we make it clear that this type of bullying will not be tolerated? Surprisingly, the European governments, and the EU, even after banishing poor Piglet and beating Burger King into submission because their ice-cream was offensive, have taken a harder line on this new furor than the U.S. State Department. It's possibly an effort by the U.S. to court Muslim sensibilities, but if so it's a foolhardy notion.

In my mind the line is clear, and you have to call it what it is. The protestors are not seeking respect, they're demanding submission - violently. And that is something we cannot and must not do.

What The New York Times Has Wrought

In the Senate Intelligence hearings the other day, Portor Goss came out swinging, venting about the utter backstabbing the New York Times and other print media have perpatrated on our country's ability to conduct the war (for the disclosure of the prisons in Europe and the secret airline), and in addition (and possibly even more important) the strain on our relationships with our allies in the world:

Goss cited a "disruption to our plans, things that we have under way."

Some CIA sources and "assets" had been rendered "no longer viable or usable, or less effective by a large degree," he said.

The revelations have also made intelligence agencies in other countries mistrustful of their U.S. counterparts, Goss said.

"I'm stunned to the quick when I get questions from my professional counterparts saying, 'Mr. Goss, can't you Americans keep a secret?' "

Goss, when pressed, said he was speaking of programs run by the CIA, and would let NSA officials speak for themselves.

So how much cooperation are we going to get from other nations in the world when they feel the U.S. can't keep a secret? How much information will they share with us? How many of their own intelligence operations will they involve us in if the U.S. gets a reputation as being the second best thing to give a press conference?

Senate Democrats (yes you, Rockefeller) sat around blustering about the President acknowledging the program and the Constitutional crisis. But this is mere evasion of embarrassment and due shame for their own culpability. They've beat this drum for years now, screaming about unilateralism and the faulty intelligence for Iraq and the danger to civil liberties.

I have news for Democrats, I find terrorists to be a danger to my civil liberties. I find leaks and unfounded accusations a danger to my liberty. I find micharacterizations of U.S. soldiers, our military, our President, our foreign policy, our intentions in the world, and whatever other mindless rhetoric the DNC comes up with to be a danger to my liberty. And other countries not wanting to deal with the United States, because we can't keep a secret about vital war strategy, is an absolute danger to my liberty.

Goss wants the DOJ investigation to move forward with all speed, for these leaks and the NSA leak, and I think the media is going to be quite surprised when the public at large cheers this one on.

Some CIA sources and "assets" had been rendered "no longer viable or usable, or less effective by a large degree," he said.

"I also believe that there has been an erosion of the culture of secrecy and we're trying to reinstall that," Goss said.

"I've called in the FBI, the Department of Justice. It is my aim and it is my hope that we will witness a grand jury investigation with reporters present, being asked to reveal who is leaking this information," he said.

Rockefeller suggested that the "leaks" Goss talked about most likely "came from the executive branch" of the government.

That brought a terse response from FBI Director Robert Mueller, who said, "It's not fair to point a finger as to the responsibility of the leak."

The Plame standard that the press created is going to become their worst nightmare. But this is what happens when the "gotcha!" mentality and hopeless bias overruns common sense and prudent reporting during a war.

House Republicans Elect New Leader

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Rep. John Boehner of Ohio upset a former deputy to indicted Texan Tom DeLay on Thursday to become majority leader of the scandal-rocked U.S. House of Representatives.

Rep. Roy Blunt had appeared to be the front-runner, based on a long list of public commitments, but Boehner, who campaigned on a vow to seek to renew the party's "spirit and vision," defeated Blunt and Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona in a secret election by fellow Republicans.

Boehner had 122 votes to Blunt's 109. Shadegg dropped out after a first ballot loss.

Boehner's election represented a shake-up in the House leadership, as Republicans effectively gave a vote of no-confidence to Blunt, the acting majority leader and a close ally of DeLay.

But Blunt will remain in the House Republican leadership, holding onto his job as majority whip, the person responsible for making sure Republican-backed bills pass the House.

It's an interesting move, electing Boehner as House majority leader. It appears the Republicans wanted to change even the successor (Blunt) of DeLay. Yet Blunt stays on as majority whip.

This signals to me that the Republicans realized they still needed someone DeLay-minded to get things done, yet they had to keep the scandals off the front page.

Demand Respect, Give None To Others

The row over the publication of cartoons in a Danish newspaper that has since prompted outrage across the Muslim world continues, and as European papers rushed to publish the cartoons in support of the Danes, a French newspaper has decided it better to fire their editor instead.

However the larger part of the story is how the publication of nothing more than a satirical cartoon can spark such outrage and militancy, by people countries away. They demand respect, violently demand it, yet give none to others (what happens if you're caught with a Bible in a Muslim country?). Read the extent of the chaos - from cartoons.

Armed militants angered by a cartoon drawing of the Prophet Muhammad published in European media surrounded EU offices in Gaza on Thursday and threatened to kidnap foreigners as outrage over the caricatures spread across the Islamic world.

Foreign journalists, diplomats and aid workers began leaving Gaza as gunmen there threatened to kidnap citizens of France, Norway, Denmark and Germany unless those governments apologize for the cartoon.

In Paris, the daily newspaper France Soir fired its managing editor after it republished the caricatures Wednesday, and Pakistani protesters chanting "Death to France!"

Gunmen in the West Bank city of Nablus entered four hotels to search for foreigners to abduct, and they warned hotel owners not to host citizens from several European countries. Gunmen said they were also searching apartments in Nablus for Europeans.

Militants in Gaza said they would shut down media offices from France, Norway, Denmark and Germany, singling out the French news agency Agence France Presse.

"Any citizens of these countries, who are present in Gaza, will put themselves in danger," a Fatah-affiliated gunman said as he stood outside the EU Commission's office in Gaza. He was flanked by two masked men holding up their rifles.

If the European governments don't apologize by Thursday evening, "any visitor of these countries will be targeted," he said.

The furor over the drawings, which first ran in a Danish paper in September, cuts to the question of which is more sacred in the Western world _ freedom of expression or respect for religious beliefs. The cartoons include an image of Muhammad wearing a turban shaped as a bomb with a burning fuse.

Islamic tradition bars any depiction of the prophet to prevent idolatry. The drawings have divided opinion within Europe and the Middle East, where they have prompted boycotts of Danish goods, bomb threats and demonstrations against Danish facilities.

France Soir and several other European papers reprinted the drawings in a show of solidarity with the Danish daily.

Foreign journalists were pulling out of Gaza on Thursday, and foreign media organizations were canceling plans to send more people in.

Norway suspended operations at its office in the West Bank town of Ram, just outside of Jerusalem, after receiving threats connected to a Norwegian newspaper's publication of the cartoons.

"There were threats from two Palestinian groups, the Popular Resistance Committees and the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, against Danish, French and Norwegian diplomats," Norwegian Foreign Ministry spokesman Rune Bjaastad said.

The ministry was also considering whether to evacuate the office's 24 staff members and their families, he said.

Jan Pirouz Poulsen, the Danish representative office's deputy head, said there were six Danes in Gaza and about 20 in the West Bank, and that all had been urged to leave "until the situation improves."

Raif Holmboe, the head of Denmark's representative office in the West Bank town of Ramallah, said the office would be closed Friday, following the threats, and no decision has been made whether to reopen Monday. Holmboe said shots had been fired at the Ramallah office earlier this week while the building was empty. No one was hurt.

Palestinian security officials said they would try to protect the foreigners in Gaza. However, police have largely been unable to do so in the past, with 19 foreigners kidnapped _ and released unharmed _ in recent months, mostly by Fatah gunmen.

Emma Udwin, a European Union spokeswoman in Brussels, said security measures have been taken in light of the threats against foreigners. She did not specify.

Outgoing Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia on Thursday condemned the caricatures, saying they "provoke all Muslims everywhere in the world."

"We hope that the concerned governments are attentive to the sensitivity of this issue," Qureia said.

He asked gunmen not to attack foreigners. "But we warn that emotions may flare in this very sensitive issues."

Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for the Islamic militant Hamas, which defeated Fatah in last week's Palestinian parliamentary election, also demanded an apology from European countries. However, he said foreigners in Gaza must not be harmed in the protests.

Thursday's events began when a dozen gunmen with ties to Fatah approached the office of the EU Commission in Gaza. Three jumped on the outer wall and the rest took up position at the entrance.

The group demanded apologies from the governments of Norway, Denmark, France and Germany and called on Palestinians to boycott the products of these countries.

A leaflet signed by a Fatah militia and the militant Islamic Jihad group said the EU office and churches in Gaza could come under attack and urged all French citizens to leave Gaza. Islamic Jihad leaders in Gaza distanced themselves from the gunmen.

The gunmen left after about 45 minutes. The Palestinian employees of the EU Commission had not come to work Thursday. Foreigners working at the office are based outside Gaza, and only visit from time to time.

Gunmen had briefly taken over the same office Monday in protest.

In Pakistan, more than 300 Islamic students protested, chanting "Death to Denmark" and "Death to France."

Let's again break it down. Cartoons, in a newspaper. It's satire, not government policy, not fact, not even a majority opinion. And yet what has happened? Calls for death, across entire countries.

EU policy makers have hinted that they need to find a way to respect freedom of speech and religions at the same time. But they've got their heads in the clouds if they believe that's what's going on here. This is outright militancy and suppression of free thought.

First they came for the Burger King ice-cream cones, next they came for Piglet, and now they're coming for free expression in newspapers. Excuse me, they already did come for free expression - just ask the relatives of Theo Van Gogh.

How much more will the world give in before we realize that these are not tolerant policies and compromises, but the beginnings of subservience.