Armitage did it: No charges of Treason yet

First the sordid facts:

In his 2003 State of the Union address, President Bush said: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Not long after, retired diplomat Joseph Wilson wrote in a new york times op-ed that he knew the president was lying since the CIA had sent him to Niger to see if Saddam had tried to buy uranium there. Wilson told columnist Robert Novak that he was chosen for the Niger mission at the request of Vice President Dick Cheney and that he found no evidence that Saddam had tried to buy uranium in Niger.

Wilson's charge marked the beginning of the "Bush lied" meme about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Then it all started falling apart for Wilson.

In his July 14, 2003 column, Robert Novak disclosed that Wilson had been sent instead at the insistence of his wife, Valerie Plame, who worked at the CIA.
At that point the drive-by-media (dbm - thanks Rush) added the charge of leaking the identity of Ms. Plame who had once been an undercover operative. The dbm screamed that the leaker had violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
Wilson blamed the leak on White House special assistant Karl Rove, claiming it was payback for his "whistle-blowing."

A special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, was appointed to investigate the charge. After two years Fitzgerald cleared Rove but indicted Lewis "Scooter" Libby, chief of staff to the vice president, on a charge of having lied to a grand jury about from whom he had learned of Ms. Plame's occupation. Not for leaking, but for fibbing. He is awaiting trial.

Democrats and the dbm would be happier if they had snared Rove or Cheney, but Libby wasn’t chopped liver. And the ‘Bush lied” meme rolled on.

Then it all started falling apart for Fitzgerald, the Democrats and the dbm.

It has now been disclosed that it was then Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage who disclosed Ms. Plame's identity to Bob Novak. It turns out that Armitage told his boss, Secretary of State Colin Powell, about his leak in October, 2003, after a second Novak column. Two days later Powell said to a reporter: “We have been asked by the Justice Department, those who are conducting this investigation, to make ourselves available for any purpose that they have. We are doing our searches in response to the letter we received yesterday.”

Colin Powell was lying.

Fitzgerald knew in his first few days as Special Prosecutor that Armitage was the leaker and that the Intelligence Identities Act hadn't been violated. Yet he has persisted in a sham prosecution.

For more than three years, Rove and Libby have been accused, falsely, of being the source of the leak. Armitage and Powell knew the truth, but said nothing.

The reporters who revealed Armitage as the leaker claim that his motives were not malicious. He is "a well-known gossip who loves to dish and receive juicy tidbits about Washington characters" and "apparently hadn't thought through the possible implications of telling Novak about Plame's identity."

Let’s see if that claim holds water. Armitage is a well-known critic of the Bush White House and of the Iraq War. Powell, his boss and mentor, decided to withhold the information from the White House, because he “feared the White House would leak that Armitage had been Novak's source--possibly to embarrass State Department officials who had been unenthusiastic about Bush's Iraq policy."

Uh huh… sure. As Chris Hitchens said today, Powell was then acknowledged as the most over-rated man in America, and he was trying out for most over-rated man in the world.

Because Armitage did not come clean nearly 3 years ago, innocent White House officials were distracted from serving the country in order to participate in the investigation. Scooter Libby lost his job and was indicted for telling a fib (maybe). No crime was committed that warranted a Special Prosecutor or the expenditure of millions of dollars.

And after all that, investigations by the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Robb-Silberman Commission on prewar intelligence, and the British Butler Commission all concluded it was Wilson who was not telling the truth. Saddam had indeed tried to buy uranium in Africa. In fact Wilson himself had acknowledged as much to the CIA officers who debriefed him after his Niger trip. Wilson’s new york times piece was an outright lie intended to impede our conduct of the war.

After all the leaks of top secret information by the times and by sundry judges and congressmen, I no longer understand the meaning of treason. But it is my sense is that Armitage and Wilson have committed high crimes against the United States.

By the way, I have not revealed the names of the reporters who revealed Armitage’s crimes nor the name of their book. They were part of the “Bush lied” chorus and I refuse to give them any credit for finally coming clean (sort of).

Pop Psychology

Ever since hearing about Freud in high school, I’ve had a poor opinion of psychology as a serious intellectual discipline. My opinion was not changed by the mandatory Introduction to Psychology course I took in college nor by the troves of self-help books that promote pop psychology myths (humans are basically good, we all lack self-esteem, you shouldn't judge anyone). So it was a bit discomfiting to find that my Omnilore course on “The Evolutionary Origins of Religion” is based on the “science” of Evolutionary Psychology (Ev Psych).

For the first class on Sept. 14, I volunteered (out of self-defense) to investigate and critique the foundations of Ev Psych. As usual, I first went to Wikipedia and found that Ev Psych is “a theoretical approach to psychology that attempts to explain ‘useful’ mental traits—such as memory, perception, or language—as adaptations, i.e. as the functional products of natural selection (disambiguation).” Evolutionary psychology has roots in cognitive psychology and evolutionary biology and draws heavily on behavioral ecology, artificial intelligence, genetics, ethology,… and is closely linked to sociobiology. Whew! But what about it?

Ev Psych is the antithesis of the so-called Standard Social Science Model (SSSM). The SSSM is generally held to entail that culture is a kind of superorganism, which is absorbed upon the blank slate minds of humans, shaping their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.

To understand the differences between these two approaches, consider the following question. What determines behavior more, nature (inheritance) or nurture (upbringing)? Although phrased as a binary question, it is thought by most that both factors are important. But on a scale of zero (nature) to one (nurture) where do you fall? An answer of 0.6 would say behavior is 60% determined by nurture and 40% by nature. (This answer favors SSSM over Ev Psych.)

It’s just like intelligence. We all know that there is a scale of intelligence:

Daffodil (0.0) –- Denny Kucinich (0.3) –- Al Franken (0.6) –- any human (1.0)

On the intelligence scale, you might place John Mark Karr (0.1 - based on DNA evidence), Barbara Boxer (0.5 – just listen to her) and Michael Moore (0.7 - and falling fast).

So here are the questions I need your help with.

1. What more determines behavior (of humans) genes (0.0) or culture (1.0)?

2. Is the brain at birth a collection of pre-programmed modules (0.0) or a blank slate (1.0)?

3. Are our brains optimized for the stone age environment (0.0) or for the modern environment (1.0)?

4. Are humans purely physical beings (0.0) or do we have both bodies and souls (1.0) ?

5. Are we genetically predisposed to believe in God? (Yes, it’s in our genes = 1.0)

6. Is it more important that society be free (0.0) or equal (1.0)?

7. Is blood thicker than water? (Yes, definitely = 0.0)


What do you think? Does this Ev Psych make any sense? Are we still psychological hunter/gatherers or are we made in God’s likeness with the gifts of compassion and free will?

I Can Only Imagine

Several friends have sent me the inspirational piece by sports columnist Rick Reilly published in 2005 by Sports Illustrated. It is called Strongest Dad in the World:

I try to be a good father. Give my kids mulligans. Work nights to pay for their text messaging. Take them to swimsuit shoots. But compared with Dick Hoyt, I suck.

Eighty-five times he's pushed his disabled son, Rick, 26.2 miles in marathons. Eight times he's not only pushed him 26.2 miles in a wheelchair but also towed him 2.4 miles in a dinghy while swimming and pedaled him 112 miles in a seat on the handlebars--all in the same day.

Dick's also pulled him cross-country skiing, taken him on his back mountain climbing and once hauled him across the U.S. on a bike. Makes taking your son bowling look a little lame, right?

And what has Rick done for his father? Not much--except save his life.

This love story began in Winchester, Mass., 43 years ago, when Rick was strangled by the umbilical cord during birth, leaving him brain-damaged and unable to control his limbs. "He'll be a vegetable the rest of his life;'' Dick says doctors told him and his wife, Judy, when Rick was nine months old. "Put him in an institution.''

But the Hoyts weren't buying it. They noticed the way Rick's eyes followed them around the room. When Rick was 11 they took him to the engineering department at Tufts University and asked if there was anything to help the boy communicate. "No way,'' Dick says he was told. "There's nothing going on in his brain.''

"Tell him a joke,'' Dick countered. They did. Rick laughed. Turns out a lot was going on in his brain.

Rigged up with a computer that allowed him to control the cursor by touching a switch with the side of his head, Rick was finally able to communicate. First words? "Go Bruins!'' And after a high school classmate was paralyzed in an accident and the school organized a charity run for him, Rick pecked out, "Dad, I want to do that.''

Yeah, right. How was Dick, a self-described "porker'' who never ran more than a mile at a time, going to push his son five miles? Still, he tried. "Then it was me who was handicapped,'' Dick says. "I was sore for two weeks.''

That day changed Rick's life. "Dad,'' he typed, "when we were running, it felt like I wasn't disabled anymore!''

And that sentence changed Dick's life. He became obsessed with giving Rick that feeling as often as he could. He got into such hard-belly shape that he and Rick were ready to try the 1979 Boston Marathon.

“No way,'' Dick was told by a race official. The Hoyts weren't quite a single runner, and they weren't quite a wheelchair competitor. For a few years Dick and Rick just joined the massive field and ran anyway, then they found a way to get into the race officially: In 1983 they ran another marathon so fast they made the qualifying time for Boston the following year.

Then somebody said, "Hey, Dick, why not a triathlon?''

How's a guy who never learned to swim and hadn't ridden a bike since he was six going to haul his 110-pound kid through a triathlon? Still, Dick tried.

Now they've done 212 triathlons, including four grueling 15-hour Ironmans in Hawaii. It must be a buzzkill to be a 25-year-old stud getting passed by an old guy towing a grown man in a dinghy, don't you think?

Hey, Dick, why not see how you'd do on your own? "No way,'' he says. Dick does it purely for "the awesome feeling'' he gets seeing Rick with a cantaloupe smile as they run, swim and ride together.

This year, at ages 65 and 43, Dick and Rick finished their 24th Boston Marathon, in 5,083rd place out of more than 20,000 starters. Their best time'? Two hours, 40 minutes in 1992--only 35 minutes off the world record, which, in case you don't keep track of these things, happens to be held by a guy who was not pushing another man in a wheelchair at the time.

"No question about it,'' Rick types. "My dad is the Father of the Century.''

And Dick got something else out of all this too. Two years ago he had a mild heart attack during a race. Doctors found that one of his arteries was 95% clogged. "If you hadn't been in such great shape,'' one doctor told him, "you probably would've died 15 years ago.''

So, in a way, Dick and Rick saved each other's life.

Rick, who has his own apartment (he gets home care) and works in Boston, and Dick, retired from the military and living in Holland, Mass., always find ways to be together. They give speeches around the country and compete in some backbreaking race every weekend, including this Father's Day.

That night, Rick will buy his dad dinner, but the thing he really wants to give him is a gift he can never buy.

"The thing I'd most like,'' Rick types, "is that my dad would sit in the chair and I would push him once.''

Here's the video.... get your hanky ready...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D52rJd9GX10

And listen to the song...

I can only imagine what it will be like,
when I walk by Your side...
I can only imagine, what my eyes will see,
when Your Face is before me!

I can only imagine. I can only imagine.

Surrounded by Your Glory, what will my heart feel?
Will I dance for you, Jesus? Or in awe of You, be still?
Will I stand in Your presence, or to my knees will I fall?
Will I sing Hallelujah!? Will I be able to speak at all?

Not for the Squeamish!!

Dog Pack Kills Gator in Florida -- At times nature can be cruel, but there is also a raw beauty, and even a certain justice manifested within that cruelty.

The alligator, one of the oldest and ultimate predators, normally considered the apex predator in it's natural Eco-system, can still fall victim to implemented team work strategy, made possible due to the tight knit social structure and survival of the fittest pack mentality, bred into the canines over the last several hundreds of years by natural selection. Note that the Alpha dog has a muzzle hold on the gator preventing it from breathing, while the remainder of the pack prevents the beast from rolling. Definitely, Not for the squeamish!

(Thanks to Pam Cleveland, Florida gal)


Teacher burns U.S. flag

Dave Halden, who teaches seventh-grade social studies, burned American flags in two different classes Friday and asked students to write an opinion paper about it. A teacher in the Jefferson County school district since 1979, Halden has been temporarily reassigned to non-instructional duties pending a district investigation. Halden could not be reached yesterday for comment.

Kentucky has a statute making desecration of a national or state flag in a public place a misdemeanor, but the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that flag desecration is protected speech. The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky said the federal ruling would trump the state statute.

After class, Halden decided to show his support for the ACLU by burning another flag. (see above).

Cost of flag: $25, Cost of gasoline $2,

Value of asshole catching on fire: PRICELESS

(Thanks to John Lama)

Bush: B-2 Flights Over Tehran for ‘Peaceful Purposes’

(2006-08-26) — Just hours after Iran opened a new plant capable of making plutonium “for peaceful purposes”, U.S. President George Bush assured his Iranian counterpart that any B-2 bombers that appear over Tehran in the near future would also serve peaceful purposes.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cut the ribbon on the new heavy-water nuclear plant Saturday as part of a month-long Iranian tribute to the effectiveness of the United Nations.

Mr. Bush hailed Iran’s “transparent diplomacy” and said, “I called President Ahmadinejad today to congratulate him, and I told him that if he happens to notice one of them Stealth bombers going over his town at about 600 miles per hour, he can be assured that the pilot has only the best intentions in his heart for world peace.”

“There’s nothing like the B-2 when it comes to giving peace a chance,” Mr. Bush added.

(Thanks to Scott Ott, Editor-in-Chief, ScrappleFace.com)

Enough Already

Name the political party that started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks, passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws and fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

Which party kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs in 1912? Which party stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs in the 1960s? Which party was opposed to Dr. King’s 1963 March on Washington and had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist?

Di - do – di – do –di – do - tick – tick – tick –

You’re right! It was the Democratic Party. Yes, it was the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

Are you ready for another test? This one is easier. Name the political party that was founded on an anti-slavery plank, fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment), passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. (Note the hint)

Which party appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation, pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools? Which party started the NAACP and affirmative action?

Time’s up. It was the Republican Party. It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans.

Yet today nearly 90% of blacks vote for the Democratic Party. What has the party done for them? Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats.

Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous. Democrats are opposed to school choice scholarships that would help black children get out of failing public schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites. After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3 killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29.

Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems.

In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.

The above consists of excerpts from a terrific piece by Frances Rice in Human Events, Aug. 16, 2006.

A few days ago (Aug. 23), Juan Williams, black commentator for NPR and Fox News and a committed liberal, wrote a Washington Post column about the “culture of failure that taints black America.” Williams describes “a culture steeped in bitterness and nihilism, a culture that is a virtual blueprint for failure.”

Failure starts in the home. “With nearly 70 percent of black children born to single women today, these young people too often come from fractured families where there is little time for parenting. Their search for identity and a sense of direction is undermined by a twisted popular culture that focuses on the "bling-bling" of fast money associated with famous basketball players, rap artists, drug dealers and the idea that women are at their best when flaunting their sexuality and having babies.”

“In 2004, on the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision, Bill Cosby took on that culture of failure. Cosby said that the quarter of black Americans still living in poverty are failing to hold up their end of a deal with history when they don't take advantage of the opportunities created by the Supreme Court's Brown decision and the sacrifices of civil rights leaders from Martin Luther King Jr. to Thurgood Marshall and Malcolm X.

“Cosby asked the chilling question: ‘What good is Brown ‘ and all the victories of the civil rights era if nobody wants them? A generation after those major civil rights victories, black America is experiencing alarming dropout rates, shocking numbers of children born to single mothers and a frightening acceptance of criminal behavior that has too many black people filling up the jails. Incredibly, not one mainstream civil rights group picked up on his call for marches and protests against bad parenting, drug dealers, hate-filled rap music and failing schools.”

(Juan Williams new book is called Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movement, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America - and What We Can Do About It)

What do the mainstream civil rights groups complain about? It is the racism that caused the disaster in New Orleans. The esteemed black leader Andrew Young stated that blacks have been "ripped off" by stores run by Jews, Koreans, and Arabs.

Thomas Sowell, a real black leader, noted (Real Clear Politics, Aug. 23) that “one of the biggest blind spots of most civil rights leaders and spokesmen for the black community has been their utter lack of knowledge of economics.”

While it is true that prices tend to be higher, and the quality of service and products lower, in stores in low-income neighborhoods it is because of the higher cost of doing business in those neighborhoods. Many of the ghetto stores charging high prices are struggling to survive because crime, shoplifting, vandalism, and riots have raised the costs, both directly and by causing insurance rates and the costs of security to be higher in ghetto neighborhoods.

And the tens of thousands of blacks who fled from New Orleans and have not returned are now driving up the crime rates in Houston (23% increase in the murder rate) and other cities that welcomed them. Enough, already!

John and Johnny

Here are my two favorite people whose names begin with John, my son John and my grandson Johnny Walton (Carolynne’s son). It was taken when Johnny visited San Francisco before shipping out for his second tour in Iraq. They are visiting the redwood trees in Muir Wood. These guys are such fun.

John sent me the following:

I was checking out the apartment and roommate sections of Craiglist and ran across this gem. Check out the last two sentences. For those of you not from San Francisco, I swear the person writing the ad was not making a joke.

Share spacious quiet 2-bedroom apartment in Bernal Heights with politically active 33-year old lesbian graduate student at S.F. State. Share kitchen, common space and 1/2 utilities. Sorry, no laundry facility on site, but there are laundromats nearby. Ample street parking. When I'm not at school I love yoga, going to the theater and occasionally having friends over for dinner. Month-to-month lease, 1st, last month's rent with $1000 deposit.

Please be open and tolerant.

No men, no meat, no Republicans, no TV, no smokers, no pets, no plants

John again: Here's another ridiculous Craigslist post, and a response from a good guy.

Beware of Northstar / Sierra pass organizers

"Several people on CL are trying to get you to sign up with them to form a group to buy a Northstar/Sierra season pass. Their service is probably legit, but they have a hidden agenda. The passes cost $439 each. The thing they are not telling you is that after they sign up 15 people, the organizer gets his pass absolutely FREE! Several people on CL are offering the exact same service for around $412 each. This is because they are kindly putting the 16th "FREE" ticket back into the group so the cost is divided by 16, not 15. I highly advise that you join a group that offers the pass for $412 and don't support the selfish people trying to score a free $439 pass at your expense. I don't like to see people profit at the expense of others, so this is why I'm taking the time to warn all of you."

In response to 'Beware of Northstar'

Could you be the socialist wussy I’ve been dreaming of on all these cold nights? I felt so warm and gushy when I read your posting. My fellow comrade, I think it only fair that I reciprocate some of that warm gushyness back to you.

I too am sickened by the concept of profits. Really though, what was that asshat thinking? Offering innocent strangers a nice savings of $37 on season passes to Northstar, in hopes of getting himself on to a few overpriced slopes this winter. What was he trying to do there? Identifying a profit, investing his time, taking a risk, offering strangers savings... God forbid he was a student or low income citizen. It makes me sick.

Like today, I saw these high school kids at McDonalds for lunch. Those selfish little runts realized that if they pooled their few dollars and split a 30 piece nuggets that they would each end up with 2 nuggets more than if they ordered four 6 piece meals. Think of those 6 extra battered and succulent little morsles of pulverized chicken carcase going unpaid for. I was so disgusted. What nerve!

I've heard of this great place I think we should elope and move to. It's called communist Russia. It's beautiful there. Lots of snow, dirt, poverty and politicians who share our passion. Actually, I'm selling 1-way passes from SFO to Moscow. They cost $439 each, but if you buy one from me they only cost $412! I only have to sell 15 more and then we can fall in love, move out of this capitalist shit hole and score sweet low paying jobs at the local shoe factory. I yearn to hold your hand and spill potato goolash all over my stained coveralls.

What's Craiglist?

Evolution's Head Fake

Basketball coaches teach young players to watch the waist of the opposing player to avoid being faked out of your jock by the dreaded head fake.

“Hold the ball in the triple-threat position. Begin your shooting motion. Simultaneously, straighten from your crouch, jerk your head back a bit, and raise the ball to the height of your sternum. If you do a motion quickly and somewhat jerkily, the defender is more likely to fall for the fake. Sell the move so the defender bites. Shoot the ball or drive to the basket once your defender is out of position.”

If you watch the opponent’s face, a head fake will freeze you in place and its Goodnight Nellie. Dunk! As a vertically challenged player, I can tell you that the head fake was a critical weapon in my limited offensive arsenal.

But is the head fake an entirely learned skill or is there an evolutionary predilection that some are blessed with? Since white men can’t jump, did they evolve a wobbly head gene that compensates their jumping deficit? Was Bob Cousy the first great head faker? Did he need it to beat K.C. Jones in practice? I’ll have to ask Mark Weissman who played with Cousy during summers in the Catskills.

But today I want to discuss the head fakes that occur in biology classes. That’s when the teacher describes Darwinian Evolution, but all the examples are something else. She may inform you that these are examples of “micro-evolution,” just miniature versions of the real thing. She’s lying!

It goes like this. Darwin said in The Origin of Species that innumerable random variations of biological species, acted upon by natural selection, will eventually produce new species. This is the theory of evolution. Never mind that evidence of this theory has never been found in the fossil record. The teacher will ignore this uncomfortable fact (You may never hear it) and will instead use examples of micro-evolution passing it off as the real thing.

But what is this micro-evolution? Well, if you have children, look at them. They are like you, but not exactly. The boys may be larger and taller; the girls too. It’s called descent with modification. It’s the quantum jump of micro-evolution. Their kids may be larger still, smarter too. And on it goes as we grow better and better through our natural response to a richer environment. Fabulouso!!

Earthworms do it too. Baby worms that are better attuned to the environment will preferentially survive (“survival of the fittest”) and have kids themselves who will be better able to thrive in the environment. When we do it with Golden Retrievers to produce lighter coats or bigger heads it’s called selective breeding. What it’s not, is evolution, since your babies are still humans, the worms are still worms and the Goldens are still Goldens. Since evolution, by definition, is supposed to produce new species, it’s a BIG LIE.

The teacher will try the “micro-evolution” head fake, but don’t fall for it. It may be micro-giant-raccoon-farts, but it’s not evolution.

Djibouti, Gitmo and Iraq Updates

Here are recent updates from three of our favorite warriors Brian of Djibouti, “E” in Gitmo and Johnny Walton in Iraq. I’m still sending packages to all three and appreciate recent contributions from Haya and Lori.

Djibouti

I had a great week in Kenya! We met lots of really fun people, good food, perfect California weather, and some quality time out of our cammies. During the week we saw giraffes, lions, cheetahs and many other African animals. Picture attached of one of the cheetahs I was able to pet.

We have been working lots of hours, and that is why I haven’t sent many emails. The 2nd picture I sent is from one of our last ranges where we did a simulated chemical gas drill, although not when this picture was taken. We are finally seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. Depending on flights and mission requirements we may be home in a month, please cross your fingers!

Most importantly, thank you for the support from back home. The kids at the orphanage are leading better lives because of your generosity. I have received the last few boxes of soccer equipment today, and we are trying to schedule a day where we can go out and distribute the stuff to the kids it will benefit most. The mail is very slow here. If you plan on sending anything more for the kids please send it to the Base Chaplain with my address, he will make sure to distribute it.

In total I have 40 plus soccer balls plus shin guards, cones, whistles, soccer clothing. My small tent area is overwhelmed with soccer equipment, but as long as I can get to my rack (bed) I will be OK. We are starting our new schedule Wednesday, and I should be able to mount up some Marines and head out to the school and orphanage with the equipment.

Thanks so much for everything you have done for me while I was here. Without you this deployment would have been hard, but the last 6 months have been pretty rewarding thanks to your support! I will try to get one more bulk email out before I leave. We cannot disclose our flight date for security reasons, but I will send out an email once I’m home for sure.

Brian

Guantanamo

Hi Bill,
Thanks for the package. It is absolutely great. I am going to pass the Jerky around. Some will go to the guards, some will go to my guys in our shop, and I will take out a package when I go fishing next. (We fish out in the bay-two week haul- 6 baracudas, 3 Jacks, 1 hammerhead, 4 small sharks, small various snapper, among others) And the books will get passed around as well. The "Attila" book on his leadership secrets was a nice touch. (It is on the Air Force reading list.)

Your grandson is in a great outfit. The 82nd is an historic unit, known the world over. Sports magazines (old or new) would go over well. I owe you a pic of your goodies in action. I just got a new digital camera. I will send one once I take it.

Thanks again,
We all appreciate the support,
"E"


Somewhere in Iraq

Hi Dad,
Johnny will be excited to get all the goodies! He asked for gum and chap- stick (regular). I went to Costco and got him some batteries. He uses them for his MP3 player and other stuff and says he goes through a ton of them. He also asked me for protein foods, specifically puddings. Have you heard of them?

Did I tell you that I sent Brian a pack of Trident splash - strawberry with lime? I figured he would appreciate that (he is always talking about limes)!!

I don't know where Johnny is at this time. The plan was Mosul. I asked him where he was and he said "Iraq"! I asked if he could tell me where and he said "no"! I hate that, but I guess it is a security issue. I just keep saying my prayers and ask God to watch over Johnny.

Thought you would like this:

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American G.I. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Love,
Carolynne

Darwiniacs

The Religion of Liberalism’s creation myth is Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. I have read a bit about Darwinian evolution and about the criticisms of the theory offered by the Intelligent Design community. I’ve found the criticisms to be compelling, but never have I read a more thorough deconstruction of Darwin's theory than in Ann Coulter’s new book Godless.

Cutting through all the mumbo-jumbo about Galapagos finches, peppered moths, Haeckel’s embryos, the primordial soup, punctuated equilibrium and evolutionary psychology, Coulter lays out Darwin’s theory in simple terms:

Random mutations of desirable attributes lead to variations in living organisms. Those best suited to the environment preferentially survive and pass on their favorable attributes to their offspring. This natural selection process leads, over millions of years, to the creation of new species.

It is a nice story and it may be elevated to the level of a scientific theory if, and only if, it makes predictions that can be checked by experiment or observation.

In his masterpiece The Origin of Species, Darwin defined the test for his theory. “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

Unfortunately, the great scientist’s test is not a valid test for a scientific theory. We all know how difficult it is to prove a negative (“could not possibly”). Karl Popper, the great philosopher of science, said any theory that cannot be refuted is not science. This is an “immunizing stratagem” distinguishing pseudo-science from real science.

Yet, Intelligent Design scientists such as Michael Behe (Darwin’s Black Box) have taken up that nearly impossible challenge. Behe has identified a number of “irreducibly complex” molecular machines that, most likely, meet Darwin’s test, thereby disproving evolution. Life, even at the molecular level, Behe concludes, “is a loud, clear, piercing cry of design.” The evidence keeps piling up.

Still, Darwiniac and Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins (“Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.”) denounced Behe as being “cowardly” for believing in God –- before admitting that he couldn’t answer Behe’s argument.

But there was and still is an eminently testable prediction of evolution that was brought to Darwin’s attention by most of the paleontologists of his day. If Darwin was right, there should have been a rich fossil record showing the “numerous, successive, slight modifications” leading from one species to another.

It was a nice yarn Darwin had spun, but there was nothing in the fossil record to support it. Contrary to the gradual change from one species to another that Darwin predicted, the record showed new species suddenly appearing without precedence, remaining largely unchanged for millions of years, and then disappearing to be replaced, again suddenly, by new species.

Darwin’s explanation was that the fossil record in 1859 was meager, so he recommended the paleontologists get busy.

Well they have been busy for 147 years since Darwin’s publication. Still, nada!! David Raup of the Field Museum of Natural History wrote: “We now have over a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn’t changed much. Ironically, we have fewer examples of evolutionary transitions than we had in Darwin’s time” (since some of the previous examples were proven to be false or frauds).

Darwin said there would be “interminable varieties, connecting together all of the extinct and existing forms of life by the finest graduated steps.” But the fossil record shows nothing at all like this. Ann Coulter points out that “the more advances paleontologists make in uncovering the fossil record, the more absurd the evolution fable becomes.”

The world famous evolutionary scientist Steven Jay Gould once famously called the “extreme rarity” of transitional animals the “trade secret” of paleontology.

And if the lack of millions of transitional fossils is not a big enough problem, the “Cambrian Explosion” is a catastrophe for the Darwiniacs. Around 590 million years ago, in the blink of an evolutionary eye (about 5 million years), occurred a sudden explosion of nearly all the animal phyla we have today. As Richard Dawkins, himself, describes the Cambrian fossils: “It is as though they were just planted there, without evolutionary history.”

Hmmm … planted??

Darwiniacs clutched to the fact that the pre-Cambrian fossils had not yet been found -- the Darwin defense once again. Then in 1984 Chinese scientists discovered the pre-Cambrian fossils, and guess what? The “sad little worms and sponges” were nothing like the Cambrian fossils. No transitional species. Jan Bergstrom, a paleontologist who examined the Chinese fossils, said the Cambrian period was “not evolution, it was revolution.”

Faced with the obvious truth of the evidence, Steven Gould tried to salvage evolution by abandoning Darwin’s theory for a new theory of “punctuated equilibrium”-- which is no theory at all -- just a statement that the sudden appearance of new species is the way evolution works. Huh?

Basically what happens is this, Ann wrote: “Your parents are slugs and then suddenly -- but totally at random -- you evolve into a gecko and your brother evolves into a shark and your sister into a polar bear and so on, then everyone relaxes by the pool for 150 million years.”

To the Darwiniacs Gould was a heretic. The rest of Darwin’s tribe recoiled in horror -- there was a schism in the church of evolution.

So what is the current status of Darwin’s theory of evolution? Is it the finest expression of the mind of man, as Darwiniacs would have us believe? Or is it “the last of the great 19th century religions”?

We’ve pretty much destroyed the validity of evolution as Darwin described it since its predictions (“interminable varieties connecting together all of the extinct and existing forms of life by the finest graduated steps”) have been proven false. What about the very beginning? Could evolution work to create life?

Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, both eminent physicists, studied that possibility and showed that “the odds were utterly miniscule.” Nobel Prize winner Francis Crick (DNA) said “the probability of life originating at random is so utterly miniscule as to make it absurd.”

QED.

Ann offered up an alternative theory. “Imagine a giant raccoon passed gas and perhaps the resulting gas might have created the vast variety of life we see on Earth. And if you don’t accept the giant raccoon flatulence theory for the origin of life, then you must be a fundamentalist Christian nut who believes the Earth is flat.”

I think Ann’s theory deserves some serious study. A research grant from the New York Times School of Evolutionary Psychology is just what I need.

Despicable

You know how much I despise the la times. I try not to even look at it. Well today I was hoodwinked. I went to sit down at Starbucks and on the chair was the A-section of the times. On the front page, above the crease, was an article about our war in Vietnam. I didn’t realize we were once again fighting in Vietnam. But no, it was about the 30 year old war, the one John Kerry served in, and the article was a re-hashed hit piece about American “war crimes.” The damn thing went on for two more full pages, maybe 100 column inches in total, about 4,000 words plus pictures.

The article claims there were “300 substantiated atrocities by US forces and 500 unconfirmed allegations.” As usual in an la times hit-piece, the claims lack perspective.

Let’s take a brief look at the Vietnam War. US troops deployed in Vietnam peaked at 543,000 in 1969 and over 2.6 million served there during the war. The US suffered 58,226 killed in action, 153,303 wounded and about 2,300 missing in action. Many Americans were tortured and killed in captivity. Over 97% of the US troops who served in Vietnam were honorably discharged and 91% were proud of their service there. Over 82% (and 75% of US civilians) believed we lost in Vietnam because of lack of political will.

So what does that tell us about the la times story? Let’s accept the 300 cases and even the 500 allegations and round up to say 1000 US soldiers guilty of crimes in Vietnam. Let’s just ignore the brutality of the enemy as a mitigating circumstance. Accepting that there were 1000 guilty US troops out of the 2,600,000 who served in Vietnam works out to a guilty percentage of 0.04%. Let me repeat that. Of the US forces who served in Vietnam, perhaps 0.04 percent were guilty of war crimes. That is an amazingly low percentage.

To appreciate how low, let's compare it to violent crime in the US. During the Vietnam era there were 40-50 violent crimes every year per 1000 adult population. That’s about 4.5% -- which is a lot more that 0.04% (for those of you who went to public schools). And what’s more, the 45 violent crimes per 1000 per year add up to 450 per 1000 accumulated over the 10 years of the war. That’s 45% which is even more greater (LOL) than 0.04%.

But what the la times is doing is no laughing matter. It is a slander and it is despicable! They will do anything, anything at all, to make sure we lose another war.

Liberals are Druids

I love Ann Coulter, and not just for her looks –- she’s too skinny for my taste. No, I love Ann for her brain, her wit, her moxie and most of all for her unique, innate ability to DRIVE LIBERALS CRAZY. On TV and in person she comes across as a pussy cat, delicate, vulnerable, perhaps because she is frequently attacked. But on talk radio and, especially, in her books Ann is as brusque as a nun and as lethal as an IED.

All her books are gems. I particularly liked Slander (that catalogues the monstrous liberal lies about the American Right, and tells some funny stories, like the time when Al Gore claimed the Cain and Abel parable was about the dangers of pollution) and Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism. That one opened my eyes about “the indispensable Joe McCarthy.” (Schoolchildren are taught that “McCarthy was a liar” and that he “did not discover a single communist anywhere.” History is an endless process of liberal brainwashing.)

But Ann’s new book is her best yet. Godless: The Church of Liberalism explains why you really don’t want to talk to liberals, even if you sometimes must. (Her book just prior to Godless was How to Talk to Liberals.) It’s because, generally speaking – yes, I have some libdem friends who don’t exactly fit the mold - liberals are Druids.

Ann explains that if Martians landed in America they would conclude that Liberalism is our state religion while Christianity and Judaism are prohibited by law. Liberalism bears all the attributes of a religion, with its own cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident), its creation story (Darwinian evolution), its holy sacraments (abortions of all types), its holy writ (Roe vs. Wade), its martyrs (Soviet spies and cop killers), its churches (public schools) and its clergy (public school teachers).

“The state religion of liberalism demands obeisance to the National Organization of Women, tithing to teachers unions, reverence for abortion and formulaic imprecations (eg. “Bush lied, kids died.”)

Everyone is taxed to support indoctrination into the state religion in the public schools, where innocent children are taught a specific belief system (certainly not belief in God and morals) rather than, say, math.

“As a matter of faith, liberals believe: Darwinism is a fact, people are born gay, child-molesters can be rehabilitated and recycling is a virtue, while chastity is not.”

There is plenty of food for thought in Ann’s new book. Her chapters on -- liberal’s passion for the perp, liberalism’s doctrine of infallibility (hysterical women), the fairy tale (sparing the rod to spoil the teacher), the left’s war on science and how the Walkman evolved into the iPod by random mutations -- are priceless and worthy of several blog posts. Stay tuned.

Now they've gone too far

I’ve tried to spare the British feelings when commenting on Euro-trash attitudes toward America and American culture, but now I fear they have gone too far. British movie star Rupert Everett has branded the Starbucks coffee chain a "cancer".

The actor is backing a campaign to boycott a new branch close to his home in Bloomsbury, central London. It will be the first major chain to open on Lamb's Conduit Street, which is famed for its small, independent shops.

Everett said: "Starbucks is spreading like a cancer. Nobody in the neighbourhood wants it, including me. There are plenty of diners and coffee shops there already."

Everett, who starred in My Best Friend's Wedding, has joined with 1,000 other residents to sign a petition expressing "deep concern" about plans for the new Starbucks.

Ash Ranpura, who helped organize the campaign, said: "Lamb's Conduit Street is a rarity in central London, having a genuine village atmosphere where locals know each other, stop and talk -- and rally round when their community is under threat."

Well, I have to ask my Starbucks pals: John, Erin, Fred, Angela, Dr. Dave, Lori, Tom, Sue, Glen, Rori, Jill, Bob, Judy, Angelo, Mel, Dan, China Jim, Steve, Mark, Chuck, Barry,… Don’t we know each other? Stop and talk, and talk, and talk…? Rally round? And love our Starbucks? The heck with those snooty Brits!

Starbucks said the new store would provide more than 10 jobs.

But, much like their Wall Mart hatred, the libs have identified Starbucks (a big donor to the Democrat Party) as a globalizer, danger to the eco-system, blah, blah, blah. They even have a web site (www.ihatestarbucks.com) devoted to Starbucks bashing. Here is a typical comment:

“I thought it would be cool to work at Starbucks, and I have to admit they have good benefits....but man was I wrong in the \"fun\" part. Starbucks is a greedy corporate dynasty with little to no remorse for the more \"intimate\" private coffeehouses they trample! The whole purpose and integrity of the \"coffeehouse\" has been lost! Thank you Starbucks for proving once again that we Americans are gullible, mindless sheep, who stupidly mistake convenience for QUALITY and TASTE!”

Angry fella! I know I’ve been concerned about the integrity of the \"coffeehouse\" whatever that is.

But there’s more to be concerned about in Britain than coffeehouse integrity.

Animal rights activists have described as "sick" a live art performance involving a naked woman Kira O'Reilly cradling a dead pig for four hours.

James Green, director of the Newlyn Art Gallery in Penzance, southwest England, defended the show. "In terms of the gallery's view, we feel very strongly that we should provide audiences in the region with opportunities to see the kind of works that they have to go to London to experience," he told Reuters.

But a spokeswoman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) called the performance "sick".

"As Miss O'Reilly seems to depend on the shock of using a murdered pig as a prop, perhaps lacking the talent to make it as a proper artist, may we suggest she take up a day job instead to pay the bills," she said. "Cruelty is not entertainment."

O'Reilly calls the performance "a slow crushing dance with a pig for one person at a time. The work left me with an undercurrent of pigginess, unexpected fantasies of mergence and interspecies metamorphoses began to flicker into my consciousness."

I guess this is what passes for culture in Merry Old England these days.

Jimmy Carter Power

Yesterday I wrote about anti-Americanism as reflected in a book by a typical lefty intellectual. Julia Sweig disparages US foreign policy since WWII and recommends a new strategy based on a policy of “generosity, modesty, discretion, cooperation, empathy, fairness, and manners.” I wondered how well that policy would have worked with guys like Hitler and Stalin.

Today I want to discuss the time when Sweig’s policy was actually employed by the US government. You may remember our former president Jimmy Carter’s exercise of soft power in his dealings with the Ayatollah Khomeini.

In October, 1979 the ayatollah's prime minister met with US national security adviser Zbigniew Bzrezinski. Carter had addressed a flattering letter to Khomeini, praising the ayatollah as "a man of God" and, in a show of goodwill, Carter lifted the ban on arms exports to Iran.

A few days after the meeting, however, Khomeinist militants raided the US Embassy in Teheran and seized the diplomats. The drama was to continue for the last 444 days of the Carter presidency. In a piece for the New York Post (“America can’t do a thing” 11/2/04) Amir Taheri analyzed the Carter response. Following are excerpts.

According to his late son Ahmad, the ayatollah feared "thunder and lightning" from Washington. But what came, instead, was a series of bland statements by Carter and his aides pleading for the release of the hostages on humanitarian grounds. Carter's envoy to the United Nations, a certain Andrew Young, described Khomeini as "a 20th-century saint," and begged the ayatollah to show "magnanimity and compassion."

Carter went further by sending a letter to Khomeini, an appeal from "one believer to a man of God." Carter's syrupy prose must have amused Khomeini, who preferred a minimalist style with such phrases as "we shall cut off America's hands."

As days passed, with the US diplomats paraded in front of TV cameras blindfolded and threatened with execution, it became increasingly clear that there would be no "thunder and lightning" from Washington. By the end of the first week of the drama Khomeini's view of America had changed.

Ahmad Khomeini's memoirs echo the surprise that his father, the ayatollah, showed, as the Carter administration behaved "like a headless chicken."

What especially surprised Khomeini was that Carter and his aides, notably Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, rather than condemning the seizure and the treatment of the hostages as a barbarous act, appeared apologetic for unspecified mistakes supposedly committed by the United States and asked for forgiveness.

Once he had concluded that America would not take any meaningful action against his regime, Khomeini took over control of the hostage enterprise and used it to prop up his "anti-imperialist" credentials.

The surprising show of weakness from Washington also encouraged the mullahs to come up with a fresh demand each day. For instance, one demand was for the United States to capture and hand over the shah for trial. The United States was asked to apologize to Muslim peoples everywhere and, in effect, change its foreign policy to please the ayatollah.

Matters worsened when a military mission to rescue the hostages ended in tragedy in the Iranian desert. The force dispatched by Carter fled under the cover of night, leaving behind the charred bodies of eight of their comrades.

In his memoirs, Ahmad nicely captures the mood of his father, who had expected the Americans to do "something serious," such as threatening to block Iran's oil exports or even firing a few missiles at the ayatollah's neighborhood.

But none of that happened. It was then that Khomeini coined his notorious phrase, "America cannot do a damn thing."

He also ordered that the slogan "Death to America" be inscribed in all official buildings and vehicles. The U.S. flag was to be painted at the entrance of airports, railway stations, ministries, factories, schools, hotels and bazaars so that the faithful could trample it under their feet every day.

The slogan "America cannot do a damn thing" became the basis of all strategies worked out by Islamist militant groups.

That slogan was tested and proved right for almost a quarter of a century. Between Nov. 4, 1979, and 9/11, a total of 671 Americans were held hostage for varying lengths of time in several Muslim countries. Nearly 1,000 Americans were killed, including 241 Marines blown up while sleeping in Beirut in 1983.

For 22 years the United States, under presidents from both parties, behaved in exactly the way that Khomeini predicted. It took countless successive blows, including the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York, without decisive retaliation. That attitude invited, indeed encouraged, more attacks. The 9/11 tragedy was the denouement of the Nov. 4 attack on the U.S. embassy in Tehran.

The peace loving Jimmy Carter pleaded for the hostages on humanitarian grounds, begged for "magnanimity and compassion," appealed to "a man of God," apologized to Muslim peoples everywhere for unspecified mistakes, asked for forgiveness and the Muslims concluded that "America cannot do a damn thing." How about that for a successful strategy, Julia Sweig? Do you know what worked better? It was the election of Ronald Reagan when the 444 day hostage crisis ended the day he entered the White House. Ever wonder why?

Fighting Anti-Americanism

After WWII the entire world saw that American ideals were intended to expand social, legal, and economic protections around the world. The United States support of international institutions such as the United Nations was viewed by the world as symbolic of our goodness.

Now, however, “Anti-Americanism” has spread into a global phenomenon, and scholars tell us why. Julia E. Sweig, Senior Fellow and Director for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations has written the book: Friendly Fire: Losing Friends and Making Enemies in the Anti-American Century.

Sweig explains that it’s not all George Bush’s fault. Rather, “it is deeply entrenched antipathy accumulated over decades that may take generations to undo.” Consider the causes:

Cold War legacy: “U.S. intervention in Vietnam and attempts to overthrow governments in Iran, Guatemala and Cuba created profound distrust of U.S. motives throughout the developing world and Europe.”

Isn’t it interesting that the world had no issues with US intervention in Europe on behalf of the English and French and in Korea on behalf of the South Koreans. After French colonialism of Vietnam ended in defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu, leading to an aggressive communist regime in the North, the US was suddenly the bad guy for helping the South Vietnamese.

It also appears that the European and American lefties have amnesia regarding the real cold war legacy, that being the end of the Soviet Empire and freedom for millions of Eastern Europeans. When asked who was responsible for the demise of the Soviet Union, Europeans, elites especially, will credit Mikhael Gorbachev, somehow forgetting about Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul.

Sweig also blames the “cultural coarseness of Americanization” sweeping the European continent. When the Cold War ended, “we expected the world to embrace free markets and liberal democracy,” she said. Ah yes, we must admire the Euro cultural sophistication and bemoan our coarseness, and apologize for our admiration of free markets and belief in liberal democracy. Does she actually believe that?

Power and powerlessness: “Power generates resentment. In Latin America, for example, U.S. policies — whether on trade, aid, democracy, drugs or immigration — presumed that Latin Americans would automatically see U.S. interests as their own.”

Let’s see: We have promoted free trade against the wishes of our labor unions, we provide immense foreign aid, support democracy, try to resist drug imports and allow more immigration than the rest of the developed world – and these things make us bad.

Globalization: “In the 1990s, President Clinton promised that open markets and open societies would be the bridge to the 21st century. So where globalization hasn't delivered, the U.S. is blamed.”

And where is it that globalization hasn't delivered? It’s certainly not in China or India, England or Ireland, Australia or South Korea. No, globalization has been less successful in Iran and North Korea, Nigeria and Venezuela and … in France. You have to wonder if there might be internal reasons for these basket cases… and France.

What we stand for: “The appeal of the U.S. model overseas is eroding as the gap between rich and poor widens, public education deteriorates, healthcare costs soar and pensions disappear. The US government's seeming indifference to its most vulnerable citizens in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina further undercut belief in the American social contract.”

I’m sure that most Americans feel really good about the European’s sympathy for our economic injustice. After all, the poor in America live only as well as the middle class in Europe. How sad is that? As for the Hurricane Katrina victims, only a college educated woman, Julia Sweig, could believe that the US government was indifferent. Ridiculously generous, perhaps, lacking oversight, but indifferent?

Still Sweig admits that “the ideal of the United States as a beacon of justice, democracy, freedom and human rights still garners grudging respect abroad.”

She does not ask why the respect is grudging, nor does she see that the truth underlying her statement undermines her entire thesis. We are the “beacon of justice, democracy, freedom and human rights.” And we are willing to fight for those ideals in the service of others just as we have for over a century.

Sweig thinks that the way to get our global mojo back is to base our foreign policy on the softer lexicon of “generosity, modesty, discretion, cooperation, empathy, fairness, manners and lawfulness.” Oh, and “decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels will help improve our moral standing.”

Damn! Why didn’t we think of that before? Modesty would have worked with Hitler. Empathy could have charmed Stalin. Manners will effectuate détente with Ahmadinejad. Let’s try discretion on Kim Jong-Il.

Do you see why the lefties must never again win control of the US government?

Who Said It?

We’re all familiar with the Democratic Party talking points. Because each is repeated so frequently, however, it is difficult to know who said it first. So for the bored libdem watchers, let’s see if we can identify the nutcases. A perfect score gets you a free lifetime subscription to PalosVerdesBlog.

Dem Talking Points

1. Bush says he is a follower of Christ and claims to support human rights but at the same time attacks and occupies other countries, kills thousands of people, spends billions of dollars on wars.

A. Howard Dean
B. Nancy Pelosi
C. John Murtha

2. One percent of the total US population is in prison. And 45 million people don't have health care coverage.

A. Hillary Clinton
B. Harry Reed
C. Cynthia McKinney

3. Hatred of Bush is increasing everyday around the world. For a ruler, this is the worst message that he could receive. Rulers and heads of government at the end of their office must leave the office holding their heads high.

A. Jimmy Carter
B. Bill Clinton
C. Ramsey Clark

4. Bush can save the American economy using appropriate methodologies without killing people, innocents, without occupation, without threats.

A. John Kerry
B. Dick Durbin
C. Cindy Sheehan

While all of the above are Democratic Party themes, none of the answers is correct. In fact, the perpetrator was one man, and I don’t mean the head of the ACLU.

No, all these statements were made by the Iranian nutcase President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in his “60 minutes” interview by Mike Wallace. If the interview were a boxing match, Mahmoud won in a TKO.

John McIntyre on Real Clear Politics found Ahmad’s demeanor and appearance to be eerily similar to Adolf Hitler. Appeasing Ahmad. and Iran has many similarities with the 1930's appeasement of Hitler. In the early 1930's Hitler was written off as a sort of silly looking rabble rouser even when he assumed the Chancellorship in 1933. Much of the world thought that Hitler could be controlled. They were wrong.
We see similarities today, with many politicians saying that Ahmad. is really just a pawn of the Iranian Mullahs. “In his answers to Wallace you can almost hear Hitler spouting out grievances of the Sudentland Germans and the Germans in Danzig when you hear Ahmadinejad take up for the Palestinians, Lebanese, and Iraqis.” He is making a play to speak for the world's one billion "aggrieved" Muslims.

McIntyre worries that no one wants war with Iran or with a billion Muslims. He notes that the relentless advance of technology will make it utterly impossible to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons at some point in the future, and suggests that we need to change the Iranian regime and its current President.....before it is too late.

Clearly McIntyre is right, and we should be doing all we can to encourage the millions of Iranian dissidents. But I believe there is more we can do. The US Air Force needs to strike the Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities hard and often. That will put the damper on their bomb building ambitions. And it might be the thing that makes the unhappy Iranians believe that the US is serious and would support an uprising. I’d take out their air force while we’re at it and as much of the Iranian tank corps as is convenient.

Ahmadinejad, again: “Those who refuse to accept an invitation to good -- will not have a good ending or fate." We’ve tried long enough. Now go to hell.

"Condi versus Hillary"

KUALA LUMPUR, 27 July, 2006: US top diplomat Condoleezza Rice won rave reviews for her musical performance at the Asian security talks, despite skipping the traditional rowdy skits in favour of a sombre piano recital.

With North Korea firing off missiles, carnage in Lebanon, rockets raining on Israel and killings convulsing Iraq, Rice was in no mood for the kind of frivolity staged in previous years. In keeping with her “serious” mood the Secretary of State performed two pieces from the brooding repertoire of Johannes Brahms – a solo Intermezzo number two, and Brahms Sonata for violin and piano, opus 108, with a Malaysian guest soloist.

Regional ministers swooned over the performance as they left the dinner. “Oh, beautiful, beautiful. She’s a great pianist. She’s a concert pianist,” said Philippines Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo, who insisted that despite the geopolitical realities a good time was had by all.

Rice’s decision to take the stage alone was a relief to some of her entourage. Karen Hughes, czar of US public diplomacy, admitted she had been let off the hook. “I can’t even hum,” she confessed.

In their recent book Condi vs. Hillary Dick Morris and Eileen McGann posit that Condi Rice is the only national figure who has the credentials, the credibility, and the charisma to lead the GOP to victory in 2008. A race between these two commanding, but very different, women would prove one of the most fascinating and important races in American history.

The book traces their very different childhoods -- Hillary Rodham's in suburban comfort, Condi Rice's in Alabama, during the civil rights era. It explores Hillary's career as an ambitious liberal who attached herself to a governor on the rise, Condi's career as a woman of broad and deep talents who has earned her own way.

In an interview with Foreign Policy magazine, Dick Morris explored and contrasted their psychology, integrity and intellectual ability.

Morris: Everything Hillary has accomplished has come in the wake of her husband's achievements. She became a partner at the Rose Law Firm because Bill became Governor. She got health care reform because he became president. She got the Senate nomination in a state in which she had never lived without a primary and with $45 million for the race because he was president.

Condi has done everything on her own. She graduated near the top of her class at the U of Denver at the age of 19, earned a masters degree from Notre Dame and a doctorate from Denver. She became a tenured professor in her 20s. At 34, she was negotiating directly with Gorbachev hammering out the details of German reunification as the President's chief advisor on Soviet relations. She is fluent in Russian and French. A world class concert pianist. She has an incredible mind and will.

Hillary is not her husband's equal as an intellect by any means. She is not a creative person and performs tasks through memorization and dedication. She is a hardened advocate but not a subtle mind. She is sincerely devoted to the ideals she stands for -- a vastly greater government role in health care, education, and the lives of people with a much greater tax burden to match. She is as close as we have to a genuine European Socialist in our politics.

As President, I think Hillary would repeal all the Bush tax cuts, including the cuts on the lower and middle income people. I think she would revisit and push her health care reforms of 1993-4. And I believe she would cripple Welfare Reform by substituting a vague education or job training alternative as a way to fulfill the work requirement. I think she would be a left wing ideologue and would not be good for the country.

I think that Condi, by contrast, would pursue a more conservative fiscal policy and would give priority to creating a stable global environment. Her sure grasp of foreign issues and her understanding of how to keep our country safe from terrorism would lead to a wise foreign policy which would be well beyond Hillary's ability.

Most of all, I think that a Rice presidency would lead quickly to the end of the legacy of racism that has dominated so much of our history. The impact of an African American presidency would be to send a message to every black boy and girl in the country that there is no ceiling and that they can be whatever they want to be.

Now all we have to do is convince Condi to run. With the NFL Commissioner job taken she may be more amenable to the presidency. My son John already has his Condi '08 T-shirt.

Palos Verdes Adopts an Orphanage

The article by Evan Ortega in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News yesterday (8/12/05) told the story about our hometown support of “Brian of Djibouti” and his adopted orphanage. It was gratifying to tell Evan about the dozens of PV folks who had taken Brian Weiss and his fellow Marines to their hearts and who contributed so enthusiastically and generously to the Djiboutian orphans. Evan was able to exchange emails with Brian who said he had received more than 100 boxes of goods for both the soldiers and the kids.

Brian also described the mission of the 1800 soldiers supporting Operation Enduring Freedom in Djibouti. “American troops are in Djibouti to ensure that terrorists cannot gain a foothold in Africa -- by creating a partnership with the people for lasting strength and security.” Well said, Brian.

Do you mean that there are no oil interests in Djibouti? (None) And after your work shifts in 117 degree heat, why do you and your teammates spend your time at the orphanage? “As for why we are helping out the kids, it’s because they need the love and support they should be getting from their parents.” But aren’t the Marines known to be a bunch of tough guys? “The Marine Corps is the world’s foremost fighting force, and yet we can put that to the side to help provide a better life for these kids.”

God bless our military -- they are the very best!

In neighboring Somalia things are not so good. Somalia with Ethiopia and Djibouti in East Africa are referred to as the Horn of Africa. According to Mike Clough, Africa advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, “Somalia is on the brink of becoming the fourth front in the U.S. war on terror.”

Clough recounts the history of the U.S. “missteps in the region” beginning in 1977 when Jimmy Carter “encouraged Somalia to take advantage of political instability in the Ethiopian capital and grab control of Ethiopia's Ogaden region.” Somalia attacked, but Ethiopia quickly defeated them with a massive influx of Soviet military hardware and Cuban and East German military forces. Ethiopia became Moscow's staunchest ally in Africa. In response, Carter “armed Mohamed Siad Barre's thugocracy in Somalia.” This was only the first of many foreign policy exploits of the Carter administration. (Recall Carter’s support of the Sandinista Marxists, his transfer of control of the Panama Canal to a brutal military dictator, and, of course, the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran - and 52 American hostages - by Iranian militants.)

The US ignored Somaila for two decades while it descended into tribal warfare. Fast forward to 1993 when Bill Clinton decides to intervene, sending in the US military to capture Somali warlord Mohamed Aidid. A troop of Delta Force commandos backed up by Army Rangers was dropped by helicopter into the capital city of Mogadishu. Two senior lieutenants of the warlord were taken into American custody. However, when Somali militia armed with RPGs downed two Black Hawk helicopters, the mission became a pitched battle between the American forces and Somali militia (that was dramatized in the film Black Hawk Down). In the firefight, 18 Americans died.

Meanwhile, Clinton had embraced the Ethiopian government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi as the “region's cop.” Clinton's support encouraged the Ethiopian to believe that he could dictate Somalia's political future. “Thus were sown the seeds of the current conflict unfolding in the Horn of Africa.”

2006: Islamic militants recently took over Mogadishu. The US-backed regime in Ethiopia is eager to lead the battle against the Islamists, who may have ties to Al Qaeda. A war could quickly spread throughout the Horn of Africa.

That is why Brian and his mates are on guard in Djibouti.

"Oui, you big strong Hezbollah man”

Starbucks War Room, 8/13/06 (tomorrow): Anticipating a bracing discussion about the neuveau Gallic militarism, I thought it useful to outline the recent UN Security Council Resolution 1701 on “The Situation in the Middle East.” As Claudia Rosett put it: If Only Turtle Bay Had a Moral Compass... But non, this 1701 is just its latest attempt to paper over the real problems.

The UN resolution said Hezbollah must halt all attacks and Israel must stop all offensive military operations. The resolution stipulates that after fighting stops, Israel must withdraw all its forces from Lebanon at the earliest opportunity, in tandem with a UN-Lebanese troop deployment. The resolution authorizes up to 15,000 UN troops to move into Lebanon to enforce a ceasefire. France is to lead the force, which will expand the existing UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), but have a stronger mandate.

But… French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy made clear in an interview with Le Monde newspaper that the mission of the UN troops would not include disarming Hezbollah by force. "We never thought a purely military solution could resolve the problem of Hezbollah," he said. "We are agreed on the goal, the disarmament, but for us the means are purely political."

Purely political means???

Following the UN vote, the Israeli army pushed deeper into Lebanon with air strikes and helicopters flights lifting hundreds of Israeli troops. Israel's top general said the offensive would go on until the UN force arrived to put down Hezbollah. "We will continue to operate until we achieve our aims," Lieutenant-General Dan Halutz told reporters.

Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said Hezbollah had the “right to resist any Israeli soldiers who remained on Lebanese soil.”

Which brings us right back to the French-led UN regiment (The Quicheaters). Little Green Footballs blog ran this story yesterday and many of the 200 plus reader comments were priceless. Here are a few of the best.

Brace yourself people. Some awesome French nuanced "political" action coming up... Run for your lives Hezbozos!... Or not.

Yeah. All Hezbollah needs is some Chocolat pastries. Perhaps they will have wine-tastings. Jackass.

I understand French policy in WW2 now. Surrendering to the Germans was all part of an elaborate plan to get Hitler to disarm by purely political means. Only those damn Limeys and the cowboy Americans screwed it up.

Just what the situation needed - 15,000 French human shields. The Hezbollah must be shaking in their boots. Is it really a human shield if it's a Frog?

Foreign Minister Douche-Blasé continued: And I would just once again, ladies and gentilhommes de la presse, again like to offer up a big wet kiss of Merci to the Iranian mullards, who continue in their role as une force de la stabilization in the Middle East...

Interchange between Hezbollah chief Nasrallah and the French General in charge:

NASRALLAH: If you will not let us past the Litani River, we shall take your UNIFIL post by force!

FRENCH GENERAL: You don't frighten us, Arab pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottom, sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you.

NASRALLAH: Now look here, my good man--

FRENCH GENERAL: You empty headed animal food trough wiper! I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries! Now, go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!

Sometime later:

FRENCH GENERAL: Oui, you big strong Hezbollah man, you will give me your long thick gun, ne c'est pas? What, bend over? Oui, oui, Monseiur ...

Sacrifice or Suicide

Fri. Aug. 11, 2006, Starbucks War Room: Dr. Dave Young and I were trying to understand the insanity that would lead a network news anchor to equate U.S. soldiers, seamen and civilian first responders with terrorist suicide bombers.

It happened on Thursday's Hardball on MSNBC. Chris Matthews was interviewing NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams about the terrorists caught in the plot to bring down airliners leaving Britain. Chris referred to John “Silky Pony” Edwards’ belief in likeability as a defense policy, that if only the Islamist got to know us better, they would learn to love us (or at least not kill us). Matthews noted how these latest monsters lived for years in Britain and yet "having gotten to know us, they want to kill themselves to hurt us. Isn't that an even deeper conundrum here than the chemicals used in these attacks?"

Got to hand it to Chris: That is indeed a deep conundrum. (What a moron!)

Williams, live from Heathrow Airport, responded: "And that, Chris, that last aspect, the willingness to take one's own life -- I always tell people, you know, there are guys on our team like that, too. They're called Army Rangers and Navy Seals and the Special Forces folks and the first responders on 9/11 who went into those buildings knowing, by the way, they weren't going to come out. So we have players like that on our team."

Dr. Dave and I considered two possible explanations for Williams’ outrageous statement. (1) He is so anti-US-military that he sees them as equivalent to terrorists. (2) He is the stupidest person alive.

Dave noted that whichever option is true, it is testament to the victory of American education. Only a college educated person could say something like that. I found that Brian Williams was born in Elmira, NY, a berg not far from my hometown of Rochester, NY. He attended George Washington University and the Catholic University of America, and that could explain his liberal nuttiness.

Dave called the equation of sacrifice and suicide relativism ad extremis, which means, I think, that these actions are exact polar opposites. But hey, I knew that.
Brian Williams has shown his amazingly ignorant view of history by comparing Osama bin Laden to George Washington and other such nonsense before. So this latest insanity is not out of character. Still, it was amazing to hear someone say it sincerely and out loud.

If Williams can't distinguish between a suicidal murderer killing innocent people and someone who commits an act of selfless sacrifice in an attempt to save innocent lives, he shouldn't be the anchor man in Elmira, NY much less for NBC News.

And then there was Mike “Maniac” Wallace telling Sean Hannity about his interview of the Iranian Holocaust Denier, but that’s another blog.