H

ostile, America-hating jihadists captured in battles in Afghanistan were shown U.S. hospitality in Guantanamo – given Qur’ans and a proper Muslim diet, offered exercise and prayer time.  Each individual’s case was carefully researched and heard, a lawyer by the jihadist’s side to represent his interests.  Many were simply freed after this process, others ascertained judiciously to be too dangerous and returned to their cells.

And for this process, Leftists in America and anti-Americans around the world howled and spat and said vile things about our country and our president.  Even our new president joined in the condemning chorus, staking out the most left-wing of all candidates’ position on the matter.

Now, with the capture of a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan, we have a sad and tragic opportunity to measure the behavior of America against the behavior of those who fight us on the battlefield, betray us on our shores, and denigrate us from the comfort of their protected European easy chairs.

We certainly can’t expect anything approaching equal treatment and respect from those jihadist thugs who captured the soldier. Here’s what WaPo reports on them:

“Our leaders have not decided on the fate of this soldier.” the AFP quoted the Haqqani commander, identified only as Bahram, as saying. “They will decide on his fate and soon we will present video tapes of the coalition soldier and our demand to media.”

So Haqqani leaders, not a tribunal, will decide his fate.  And he will be videotaped and used as a propaganda tool, a violation of the Geneva accords.  And they will use the soldier to make demands of us, rather than treat him as a prisoner of war.  Anyone who has followed these sorts of cases has to fear for the life of this soldier; I hope that is not the case, but he has suffered the great misfortune of being captured by people who are not Americans.

Check out the several stories posted on Memeorandum about this breaking event, and you will find no Leftist outlets or blogs listed; you will not be able to link over to any stories or posts from the Left, calling for justice and demanding compliance with Geneva. They are uninterested, just as they are suddenly uninterested in civilian deaths in Iraq or military operations in Afghanistan.  Hypocrites.

Don’t count on this story even breaking through the Michael Jackson storm in the European press, obsessed as it is with deviant behaviors – especially by Americans.

Those who demanded full rights don’t even much care about this soldier’s right to life.  Guantanamo was all about serving a purpose other than protecting jihadists; it was about destroying a presidency and denigrating America, nothing more – and the Left’s disinterest in the fate of this soldier is all the proof we need.

2 Comments »

A

s I understand it, here’s the Obama/Clinton State Dept’s take on how they will win what we used to call the war on terror:  The problem between the U.S. and the jihadists is that we just haven’t been likable enough. We’ will win over Islam if we spend less on the military and more on fish sticks for orphans.

That was the gist of Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Judith A. McHale’s talk to the Center for a New American Security today.  (I thought the old Bush security was just fine, by the way, since no Americans were killed by jihadists on American soil during his watch, post 9/11.)  Here’s some excerpts:

Whether we are strengthening old alliances, forging new partnerships to meet complex global challenges, engaging with citizens and civil society, or charting new strategies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, our national interests depend on effective engagement and innovative public diplomacy. The stakes could not be higher. We must get this right…This is not a propaganda contest — it is a relationship race. And we have got to get back in the game.

Enhanced public diplomacy is a key component of the President’s new strategy in the region…To achieve the President’s aims, we are launching a multi-faceted strategy to provide platforms for local moderate voices, support democratic institutions and civil society, and position the United States as a long-term partner working to create opportunities and enable the people of the region to chart the futures of their own countries.

We are responding to requests from the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan to help meet the needs of their people. Secretary Clinton recently announced more than $100 million in humanitarian support for the people of Pakistan. And Ambassador Holbrooke just announced another $200 million. Since 2002, the United States has provided a total of more than $3.4 billion to alleviate suffering and promote economic growth, education, health, security and good governance in Pakistan. [Oh, wait! You mean Bush tried this to the tun of $3.4 billion and they're still trying to kill us? No matter; just apply the Universal Obama Solution - throw lots of money at it.]

Yet we have a credibility gap with many in the region — some have called it a ‘trust deficit.’ So part of our task is reassuring the people that our aim in the region is to support their own aspirations. We need to do a better job of getting the word out about what we are doing to help Pakistan and Afghanistan become more stable and prosperous, both through the local media and by communicating directly with people.”

It is not about getting the word out, or the trust deficit, but it is most definitely about the aspirations of the people of the region.  A significant percentage of them have a deeply imbedded aspiration to bring pain, suffering and death to the Great Satan, and no amount of communication or prosperity is going to change that.  Only rewriting the Q’ran will change that.

Islam has nurtured radicals since the dawn of the religion, through times of great wealth and times of great poverty alike.  Radical Muslims abound in Lebanon, where Democracy still hangs on. And education? Cairo University, where Obama spoke to the Muslim world last week (except for Iran, of course, where the state didn’t broadcast it), has spawned its share of very well educated Islamo-savages.

McHale concluded her comments with a bizarre historical reference:

A few days after I started at the State Department, I moved into George Marshall’s old office. General Marshall saw a world beyond our shores devastated by war and reeling from economic crisis. He knew that our fates and our fortunes were intertwined and that America had to engage with the world to ensure our future. So he launched one of the most far-reaching engagement efforts in history. And today we are still reaping the rewards of that investment in mutual prosperity and security. From Cairo to Kabul, from quiet villages to crowded cities, America is once again reaching out a hand of friendship and seeking new relationships. We know it is the right thing to do and we know, like General Marshall did, that our future depends on it.

Yeah, but back then Europe was a Christian continent. And the enemy was broken, broke and starving – a point we’ll never get to if the administration can’t even admit that we’re fighting terrorists.  There is a role for public diplomacy – what we used to call foreign aid – but alone, it will have no measurable effect on the level of jihadist violence against us.

No Comments yet »

M

ore news from the “Religion of Peace” front:

HERAT, Afghanistan (Reuters) – Taliban militants publicly executed a man and girl on Monday for eloping when she was already engaged to marry someone else, an official said, in a sign of the grip the Islamists have over parts of Afghanistan.

Hashim Noorzai, head of Khash Rud district in southwestern Nimruz province, said the two were executed by gun shots in front of a crowd of villagers.

hat-tip: Infidels Are Cool

No Comments yet »

O

h, they love him and think he’s just great, but Prez-O’s going away gift from NATO was just a crummy T-shirt emblazoned with, “I went to France and all I got was 5,000 non-combatant troops.”  Charm or no charm, Obama is no more successful than his much reviled predecessor when it comes to moving Europe.

But he’s much better at lying about it:

“I am pleased that our NATO allies pledged their strong and unanimous support for our new strategy.  We’ll need more resources and a sustained effort to achieve our ultimate goals.”

Sorry; if you need more resources and sustained effort to achieve our goals, why are you pleased with NATO’s laughably puny decision, and why do you call it “strong?”  Is that like calling the debt-hole-digging budget “A New Era of Responsiblity?”  It’s more like the same old era of Europe counting on us to defend it, and criticising us when we do.

The 27 other NATO countries agreed to send 3,000 personnel on short-term deployments leading up to Afghanistan’s August elections, so they’ll be there for four months max.  Another 1,400 to 2,000 will provide training for Afghanistan’s army. That’s it – but Angela Merle assures us that it’s enough to ensure that “no more terrorist danger emanates from Afghanistan.”

Wanna bet?

1 Comment »

A

h, the Religion of Peace is at it again, this time flogging a teenage girl, who screams and cries as a circle of men watch intently. Does anyone else feel that this appears to be more like a sick sexual perversion, and not a religious event.

The girl was accused of “illicit relations” with a man, which the WSJ tells us was nothing more than appearing in public chaperoned by her father-in-law.  Of course, you will find no video of the father-in-law being flogged; it doesn’t exist because he wasn’t – the sin is just not his problem.  And as more evidence of the low regard Islam has for women, near the end of the clip, the girl stands up and a man can be heard shouting in the background.  According to BBC, he was angry that a mere female should be allowed to stand in the presence of men.

The clip was shot in Afghanistan, where we’re fighting the “good” war.

1 Comment »

Perhaps the most important story of the week for U.S. foreign policy was Ayatolla Ali Khamenei’s swift, rude rejection of President Hope’s latest “I can talk ‘em into it” overture towards Tehran, but it was hardly the only big news.  The need to make money robbed me of time to blog on these two other recent news items:

Fuoad Ajami in the WSJ: 

The opponents of the American project in Iraq did not know much about Afghanistan. They despaired of Iraq’s sectarianism and ethnic fragmentation, but those pale in comparison with the tribalism and ethnic complications of Afghanistan. If you had your fill with the Kurds and the Sunnis and the Shiites of Iraq, welcome to the warring histories of the Pashtuns, the Uzbeks, the Tajiks, and the Hazara Shiites of Afghanistan.

In their disdain for that Iraq project, the Democrats and the liberal left had insisted that Iraq was an artificial state put together by colonial fiat, and that it was a fool’s errand to try to make it whole and intact. Now in Afghanistan, we are in the quintessential world of banditry and tribalism, a political culture that has abhorred and resisted central authority.

I’ve said it ever since Obama rejected Iran and embraced Afghanistan that his position had nothing to do with commitment to or understanding of Afghanistan; it was only a pose so we could appear tough while still being for defeat in Iran.  Ajami’s piece gives depth and confirmation to my position, and points out that Obama has yet to commit to Afghanistan and lay out his objectives – a position that strengthens the Taliban every day.

Also in the WSJ, John Bolton:

While President Obama’s unanticipated Nowruz holiday greeting to Iran generated considerable press attention, his video wasn’t really this week’s big news related to the Islamic Republic. Far more important was that a senior defector — Iran’s former Deputy Minister of Defense Ali Reza Asghari — disclosed Tehran’s financing of Syria’s nuclear weapons program. That program’s centerpiece was a North Korean nuclear reactor in Syria. Israel destroyed it in September 2007.

At this point, it is impossible to ignore Iran’s active efforts to expand, improve and conceal its nuclear weapons program in Syria while it pretends to “negotiate” with Britain, France and Germany (the “EU-3″). No amount of video messages will change this reality. The question is whether this new information about Iran will sink in, or if Washington will continue to turn a blind eye toward Iran’s nuclear deceptions.

That the Pyongyang-Damascus-Tehran nuclear axis went undetected and unacknowledged for so long is an intelligence failure of the highest magnitude. It represents a plain unwillingness to allow hard truths to overcome well-entrenched policy views disguised as intelligence findings.

Our intelligence capabilities in Greater Jihadistan remain a pale shadow of our Cold War capabilities, even though the threat is real and far more complex.  Does anyone think our capabilities will improve under an Obama administration that has put a political hack in charge of the CIA? 

Bolton thinks Obama may well succeed in sparking some talks with Tehran, but that Tehran will use the talks just as they have used the EU-3 (Britain, France, Germany) talks: A good way to cover up and stall, while the Mullahs continue to pursue their dream of nuclear jihad.

No Comments yet »

M

adge, honey, wouldya file this story in the “Is anyone out there the least bit surprised?” file for me, OK?

WASHINGTON – The Taliban’s new top operations officer in southern Afghanistan had been a prisoner at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, the latest example of a freed detainee who took a militant leadership role and a potential complication for the Obama administration’s efforts to close the prison. U.S. authorities handed over the detainee to the Afghan government, which in turn released him, according to Pentagon and CIA officials.

Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, formerly Guantanamo prisoner No. 008, was among 13 Afghan prisoners released to the Afghan government in December 2007. Rasoul is now known as Mullah Abdullah Zakir, a nom de guerre that Pentagon and intelligence officials say is used by a Taliban leader who is in charge of operations against U.S. and Afghan forces in southern Afghanistan.

The officials, who spoke anonymously because they are not authorized to release the information, said Rasoul has joined a growing faction of former Guantanamo prisoners who have rejoined militant groups and taken action against U.S. interests. Pentagon officials have said that as many as 60 former detainees have resurfaced on foreign battlefields. (AP)

This isn’t Bond plus one. Ol’ 008 didn’t slip out of prison using fabu gizmos from Q. He just packed his bag and was flown out, courtesy of the U.S., due to the sheer insanity and never-ending shrillness of the Libs, a torture powerful enough to even break George W. Bush.

As I’ve pointed out before, these forces of stupidity don’t bother to answer the most basic questions. In this case, the question is, “If one of our soldiers was released from a Taliban prison, would he go back to fight?” After the laughter dies down about the idea of a Taliban actually letting one of our guys out, even Libs would have to admit the answer is “no.” So why would they expect a Taliban to do any differently?

Rasoul is heading up Taliban ops in Southern Afghanistan where Obama the Liberator (of Guantanamo, no Afghanistan) is set to send 35,000 of our troops shortly. The former detainee will then set about killing as many Americans as he possibly can, something that would have been impossible for him to do if he were still basking in the Caribbean.

This is exactly why in every war we have held prisoners of war in detention until hostilities are over, and why we’ve just put the particularly nasty ones up against a wall and shot them dead.

But don’t expect a Lib to understand the outrage of freeing enemy prisoners so they can kill our soldiers. No, they’d rather have American blood on their hands than have a Geneva Conventions-violating jihadist terrorist deprived of due process they’re not even due.
 

2 Comments »

Budget Office Has No Faith In Stimulus

T

he Congressional Budget Office, a non-partisan provider of economic analysis to Congress, isn’t the least bit optimistic about the effect of Porkasaurus on the economy. In fact, they see it as bad news:

President Obama’s economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary. (WashTimes)

And what of all the jobs Obama says (models) his bill will create?  CBO dismisses the impact of Porkasaurus jobs on the economy as “minimal.” And that makes this comment from “Suggestions4Obama” particularly pathetic:

I do not understand why people are having diffculty understanding. The number of unemployed people (11.6 million) and the unemployment rate (7.6 percent) rose in January. Over the past 12 months, the number of unemployed persons has increased by 4.1 million. The Department of Labor reported today that nonfarm payroll employment fell sharply in January (-598,000) and the unemployment rate rose from 7.2 to 7.6 percent. Payroll employment has declined by 3.6 million since the start of the recession in December 2007, …. most of this mess happening only in past three months! And some wonder Obama is pushing so hard for a stimulus package. Is the Herbert Hoover approach, do nothing, all we need, leading us to a twelve year depression ??

Here’s the deal, S4O:  Simply stating the problem doesn’t make the stimulus a solution. Ask the guys in the photo – after all, the Depression got worse after FDR tried to spend his way out of it. Continue Reading »

No Comments yet »

T

his week’s non-Watcher’s Council winner in the Watcher of Weasel’s weekly running of the blogs underscored the points I’ve been making in my “The Lies They Teach” series based on Larry Schweikart’s 48 Liberal Lies about American History (That You Probably Learned in School.

Writing in American Thinker, Paul Kengor details How the Academic Left Elected Obama.  In the piece, Kengor details the youth vote:

MSNBC’s exit polling, which is consistent with other exit polling, showed that voters aged 18-29, who made up nearly one in five voters — or about 25 million ballots — went for Obama by more than two to one: 66 to 32 percent. Those voters alone well exceeded Obama’s overall popular vote advantage, which was roughly eight million.

These voting bands of Obama youth are largely parallel with the kids who are in college today, released by their parents into the tutelage of professors who can’t be trusted with American history or culture.  To illuminate the point, Kengor writes:

I’m reminded of the statement from the late atheist philosopher Richard Rorty, who said that the job of professors like him was “to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own” and “escape the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents.”

To these liberal profs, Obama was the realization of a dream they have taught could never be attained in racist, classist, white-dominated America.

Thus, when the university community was presented with Barack Obama, a charismatic, impressive, seemingly excellent Democratic presidential candidate — who happened to be African-American — the reaction was nearly reverential, bordering on idolatry. The good senator’s bracing radical associations — enough to deny any other American a security clearance — and which were not coincidental to a man ranked the most leftist member of the most leftist Senate in U.S. history, didn’t matter to the academic world. Quite the contrary, those who dared to point out these associations — FoxNews, talk-radio, the McCain-Palin ticket — were deemed loathsome Neanderthals deserving of being burned in effigy from the nearest dorm.

Today’s college kids were born after Reagan confronted Communism and ended the Cold War. They have no experience with the Soviet threat and have been taught little or nothing about the horrors of Stalin, the Gulag and life under the Soviet thumb. Instead, they’ve been taught about the evils of anti-Communist crusaders in the U.S.  Kengor points out that McCain’s heroic suffering as a POW didn’t resonate with students who had been taught Vietnam was a war of American imperialist aggression, and that Sarah Palin stood opposed to the false teachings they had received about separation of church and state.

This is no longer child’s play.  Liberal indoctrination on college campuses has achieved its ultimate goal of electing an American president.  We must see that this is the zenith of that movement, and it progresses no further.

Elsewhere in the Watcher’s Winners, on the Watcher’s Council side of the slate, Joshuapundit won with a clear and helpful analysis of the challenges that face Obama’s Afghanistan policy in The Afghanistan Blues.

You can see all the winners, plus some nifty commentary, at Watcher of Weasels.

No Comments yet »

T

he thinking’s a tad convoluted and not too clear on the American system, but a password-protected al-Qaeda-linked Web site gave John McCain an endorsement yesterday, nonetheless. And, even more interesting, the endorsement is predicated on a terror attack on our soil before the election.

AP reports that the al-Hesbah Web site “welcomes” such an attack because it would improve the chances that the “impetuous” McCain would seek revenge, continuing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – all part of al-Qaeda’s master plan to exhaust the US militarily and economically. [Insert evil villain laugh here.]

AP provided this quote from the site, translated by the SITE Intelligence Group :

“This [exhausting of our resources] requires presence of an impetuous American leader such as McCain, who pledged to continue the war till the last American soldier. Then, al-Qaida will have to support McCain in the coming elections so that he continues the failing march of his predecessor, Bush.

“If al-Qaida carries out a big operation against American interests, this act will be support of McCain because it will push the Americans deliberately to vote for McCain so that he takes revenge for them against al-Qaida. Al-Qaida then will succeed in exhausting America till its last year in it.”

An interesting, but flawed, proposition. First, McCain has never pledged to fight until the last American soldier; he’s pledged victory. Second, America wouldn’t let him fight that fight. Third, a lot of folks have thought they could out-fight and out-last us, but if America stands by its military, it’s never happened. Vietnam, the Left’s glorious victory in forcing an American defeat, is fueling the dreams of al-Qaeda.

Al-Qaeda would lose fewer fighters and accomplish more with an Obama victory. Iraq would re-open to them without a shot fired, and Obama is certain to tire of a real fight in Afghanistan before long. His position on Afghanistan as the real war is merely window dressing – when he made it, Afghanistan looked like an easy win, and Iraq looked like a long, tough slog. He’s definitely anti-long, tough slog and his supporters know it and like it. They favor a big, money-filled government teat to suck on, and long, hard slogs get in the way of that.

Al-Qaeda is overlooking one other thing, too: Its total victory over ignoble Spain. There a major bombing spree days before the election resulted in a surrender vote, Spain’s withdrawal from the War on Terror, and an al-Qaeda victory.

Would a major terrorist event just before the election rally America for more war? Look at the Teflon popularity of Obama, who’s whole campaign is predicated on the wisdom of his vote against Iraq and whose supporters aren’t likely to stick with him for long if he begins to adopt an LBJ persona.

AP admits that the suspected author of the post, Muhammad (Muhammed?! Knock me over with a feather!) Haafid, would not be privy to al-Qaeda planning and does not speak officially for the group. So it’s pretty much just blog-fodder.

That being the case, here’s an appropriate blog-thought. They plan an attack. McCain gets wind of it and wipes them out single-handedly, Jack Bauer-like, wrapping it up with a gravelly whisper, “C’mon now, you didn’t think you could whip my America, did you?”

Landslide McCain.

3 Comments »