Morning Report: October 24, 2006

Shinbari dies, Berri crosses the line. A terrorist leader is killed while a Lebanese politician speaks the unspeakable ... and injustices against women go on.

Terrorist leader Ata Shinbari killed in Gaza shootout. Debka: 'After 10 Qassam missiles were fired into Israel in 48 hours, Israeli troops were hunting the Palestinian launchers and their crews in northern Gaza Monday when confronted with a large group of gunmen. Both parties opened fire. Nine armed Palestinians were killed and 20 injured. Shinbari was a senior commander of the Popular Resistance Committees, which is active in the missile offensive and was Hamas’ partner in kidnapping Gideon Shalit in June. Mahmoud Abbas accused Israel of a massacre on the first day of Eid el Fitr. Another three Palestinian gunmen were killed in a clash with Israel soldiers operating against smuggling tunnels on the Philadelphi strip in S. Gaza.' (Debka)

Totten: Nabih Berri crosses the Red Line. Michael J. Totten writes on some surprising comments by Lebanon's Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri. 'A few days ago Lebanon's Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri floated the idea of opening peace talks with Israel. ... Lebanon is a hard country to read from afar. I can't tell you how many times a government official said some boilerplate nonsense in public that almost everyone knew wasn't sincere. You had to know the Lebanese "street," and you had to look at the target audience. Most statements on foreign relations are intended for foreign consumption, especially the bits about Syria. The same goes for Israel. ... Even so, advocating peace talks with Israel was a "red line" when I was in Beirut. Some Lebanese did it anyway, but they only did it in private.' Go read the full article at the link. (MJT)

Muslim clerics: Woman raped by father-in-law must leave husband. The Muslim Woman:

Soon after a Muzaffarnagar district court in Uttar Pradesh convicted and sentenced the father-in-law of Imrana for raping her, clerics say her husband should leave her.

...

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has also remained silent over the clerics’ reaction and the court verdict. AIMPLB’s silence was much stonier when a fatwa was issued by leading Islamic seminary Darul-uloom Deoband, annulling Imrana’s marriage and asking her to marry the rapist last year when the case was reported.

...

On June 6, 2005, 28-year-old Imarana was raped by her 69-year-old father in-law Ali Mohammad. Since then the case has raked up heated issues like uniform civil code, the role of panchayats and Shariat in India.

Despite a ten-year jail term for the rapist, Imrana, the mother of five, is now a terrified woman. She says her priorities are her children and she will abide by law and religion.

Full post at the link. (TMW)

Commentary. If you're having trouble keeping track of the players on the strategic stage (I know I am), keep watching Dreams Into Lightning. I'm planning a new "database" feature consisting of short, factual roundups on various persons, places, and events. On the TypePad site, these will be grouped under the new category "Database". And watch for more format tweaks.

What is there to say about the repulsive misogyny in Imrana's case? Only that it shows a mentality in which women are treated as objects and the victim is seen as a suitable object for punishment.

The courageous Bangladeshi journalist Jamil Ziabi writes: 'We can draw a comparison. On the one hand, what Al-Qaeda does: it adopts Islam as a slogan, and operates in words and deeds in its name. Its leader is Osama bin Laden, who uses his money and capabilities to beguile youth, and to push them into the folds of terrorism, so that they will eventually explode themselves, kill innocent people, and spread fear and terror. On the other hand, there is what Muhammad Yunus and Muhammad Abdu Latif Jameel are doing with their money and capabilities in order to fight poverty, and to contribute to security, stability and international peace.' But are enough people reading and heeding his words? When books are being confiscated in Jordan, you have to wonder. But as ODIE says, "it is a sign of fear".

Morning Report: October 23, 2006

Low. Israel flies low, Hezbollah lies low, and Olmert takes the low road.

Israeli overflights not deterred by French threats. Ha'Aretz: 'srael Air Force planes swooped low over Lebanon on Monday, a day after the Jewish state rejected a call by France's defence minister to halt violations of its neighbor's airspace. The planes conducted mock raids over much of southern Lebanon, Reuters reported, and residents saw them flying low over the capital Beirut, but neither Hezbollah nor the Lebanese army fired anti-aircraft rounds at them as they have done in previous years.' (Ha'Aretz)

We have not yet begun to fight! Well isn't it about time we started? asks Debka.

Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert informed the nation Sunday night: “Our soldiers will be trained to stand up to the threats confronting us, principally from Iran, and we have already started work.” Already, he said. So what have “we” been doing till now? Handing the Gaza Strip to the Iranian-armed Hamas?

He was addressing a group of his Kadima party followers.

The new star poised to expand the government coalition this week, Israeli Beitenu’s Avigdor Lieberman, added his two bits: “I’m joining he government,” he said “to save Israel from the Iranian nuclear (threat).”

Debka's analysis concludes: 'Olmert continues to keep up the hollow pretense that the decision to go to war against Hizballah unprepared and the decisions he took while it was going on were the product of profound political and military wisdom. His feeble attempts to gloss over Israel’s very real loss of strategic credibility in the region, while using both hands to hold his government together, are exceedingly harmful. Iran, Syria, Hizballah and Hamas, convinced that Israel is daydreaming if not half-asleep, are encouraged to march on to a fresh war as long as the Israeli leaders who got their sums so badly wrong in Lebanon remain firmly in place. Therefore, shoring up the incumbent government for the long haul – led by the very prime minister, foreign and defense ministers and chief of staff who mismanaged the Lebanon war - could provide Ehud Olmert with stable rule, but also spell calamity for Israel. Lieberman and his big talk will be proven immaterial when the Iranian rockets, launched from Lebanon as recently as July and August, start flying again – this time from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as well; next the heavy missiles from Tehran and Damascus.' Full article at the link. (Debka)

Vital Perpective on Nasrallah's Jerusalem Day no-show. Vital Perspective: 'On Friday, Hezbollah marked al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day by holding a subdued military parade in comparison to years past where the streets were filled by massive military parades in Beirut to demonstrate the importance of Jerusalem to Muslims. Instead of thousands of terrorists marching in uniform, the invitation-only event in a concert hall featured an orchestra, a choir and several anti-Israel speeches. Hassan Nasrallah, the keynote speaker in years past, was noticably absent Friday. His deputy filled in, telling the hundreds of supporters in attendance that Hezbollah would not give up its fight against Israel. In 1981, Ayatollah Khomeini declared the last Friday of Ramadan al-Quds Day to demonstrate the importance of Jerusalem to Muslims. The al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem is the third holiest site in Islam after the Saudi cities of Mecca and Medina.' (Vital Perspective)

Israel Matzav on Saudi Hamas play. Debka recently reported: 'Saudis bring over to Jeddah hardline Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal for last-ditch try to avert Palestinian civil war. The Hamas politburo chief traveled from Damascus disguised as a pilgrim. Saudi rulers offered him and his movement generous terms for breaking away from the Damascus-Tehran bloc, freeing the kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilead Shalit and signing a cooperation pact with Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas. In a back-up move, the Saudis last week invited to Mecca the heads of the Syrian opposition in exile: former Syrian vice president Khalim Haddam, today a sworn foe of Syrian president Bashar Asad, the leader of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood Sader e-Din Ali Bayanouni and Bashar’s uncle, Rifat Asad, who aspires to oust his nephew and take his place. This act is seen as Riyadh’s warning to Asad of dire consequences, including punitive financial measures, if he tries to disrupt this Palestinian reconciliation move. To demonstrate its importance to the oil kingdom, King Abdullah granted Meshaal a private audience. DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources describe this as a direct Saudi challenge to Iran and its schemes - in contrast to the inertia displayed by the Egyptian, Jordanian and Israeli governments. ...' Israel Matzav adds:

What's clear from this article is that the Saudis - who are Sunni Muslims - are fearful of Iran exporting its Shiite revolution to Syria and the 'Palestinian Authority.' With the ongoing civil war between Sunni and Shiites in Iraq, and the occasional civil war between them in Lebanon, were Iran to turn Syria and the 'Palestinians' into Shiite territories, it would leave only Israel and Jordan outside the Iranian envelope in this area. And that could have revolutionary consequences for the Saudis.

Full articles at the links. (Debka, Israel Matzav)

Commentary. Carl's analysis adds some detail to the talk of an Arab, anti-Iranian coalition that's been going around.

Iraq the Model and the Lancet Study

It's rare for me to criticize Iraq the Model, and downright weird to find myself on the same side with anti-American bloggers like Riverbend. So let me be clear upfront that I am very skeptical of the the Lancet study; but I believe it needed a better response from ITM than Omar's rant - eloquent though it is - and I'm afraid the ITM brothers have hurt themselves more than the Lancet. I'll try to explain why.

When I first read Responding to the Lancet Lies, I cheered - but I also winced because I was afraid it would generate a backlash in the Iraqi blogosphre. It looks like I was right.

The first problem with Omar's post is that it begins:

Pajamas invited us to respond to a study full of lies made by Burnham, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health that claimed 665,000 Iraqis were killed since 2003. The disgraceful study is expected to be published on the website of The Lancet, a medical journal today.

This makes it sound like Omar and Mohammed were being set up by Charles and Roger. Now I know that's not what happened and I know nobody put any words in Omar's mouth, and as partners at Pajamas Media they have every right to accept assignments from PJM. But I think this was a bad way to begin the article and it's an invitation to other Iraqis to criticize the brothers for being "tools" of an American-controlled media group.

More important, the ITM post lacks a serious attempt to refute the article. Here is what Omar wrote about the article's accuracy:

When the statistics announced by hospitals and military here, or even by the UN, did not satisfy their lust for more deaths, they resorted to mathematics to get a fake number that satisfies their sadistic urges.

When I read the report I can only feel apathy and inhumanity from those who did the count towards the victims and towards our suffering as a whole. I can tell they were so pleased when the equations their twisted minds designed led to those numbers and nothing can convince me that they did their so called research out of compassion or care.

And he's probably right. But he needs to go the extra step and show why the numbers are wrong. He doesn't do that.

By contrast, Zeyad at Healing Iraq gives a fairly dispassionate - and not overwhelmingly partisan - analysis of The Human Cost of War in Iraq. Zeyad begins:

I urge you to carefully read the study first. Very few people seem to have actually done so.

In comparison, the much-criticised Iraq Body Count relies only on media reports (mostly Western and often by conflating 2 different sources) for their maximum body count of 48,639 civilians. I have said and will say again that the media reports only a tiny fraction of deaths in the country, usually the victims of car bombings or other significant violent events.

The collaborative study by the John Hopkins University, The School of Medicine at the Mustansiriya University, and the MIT Center for International Studies, pubished in The Lancet, is not the same. It is not an actual body count. This is an estimate of the total number of excess deaths over the last 3 years.

It uses cluster samples (uniform groups of samples in a specific geographical areas) as opposed to simple random samples. This is usually much more cost-effective and easier and in this case it’s, unfortunately, the only available method to get an estimate.

Simply put, the methods used by the study are valid, but in Iraq’s case, where the level of violence is not consistent throughout the country, I feel that the study should have been done differently. 654,965 excess civilian deaths is an absurd number. My personal guesstimate would be half that number, but the total count is not the point now.

Zeyad goes on to say:

One problem is that the people dismissing – or in some cases, rabidly attacking – the results of this study, including governmental officials who, arguably, have an interest in doing so, have offered no other alternative or not even a counter estimate. This is called denial. When you have no hard facts to discredit a scientific study, or worse, if you are forced to resort to absurd arguments, such as “the Iraqis are lying,” or “they interviewed insurgents,” or “the timing to publish this study was to affect American elections,” or "I don't like the results and they don't fit into my world view, therefore they have to be false," it is better for you to just shut up. From the short time I have been here, I am realising that some Americans have a hard time accepting facts that fly against their political persuasions.

Now I am aware that the study is being used here by both sides of the argument in the context of domestic American politics, and that pains me. As if it is different for Iraqis whether 50,000 Iraqis were killed as a result of the war or 600,000. The bottom line is that there is a steady increase in civilian deaths, that the health system is rapidly deteriorating, and that things are clearly not going in the right direction. The people who conducted the survey should be commended for attempting to find out, with the limited methods they had available. On the other hand, the people who are attacking them come across as indifferent to the suffering of Iraqis, especially when they have made no obvious effort to provide a more accurate body count. In fact, it looks like they are reluctant to do this.

The whole post is well worth reading. I am not in a position to assess the accuracy of Zeyad's claims, but his writing is clear, well-reasoned, and supported with solid information. If I were forming my opinion on the basis of these two posts alone, I would find Zeyad's analysis more credible than Omar's.

I have consciously kept the focus of this post narrow, and confined to my thoughts on the two Iraqi bloggers' reactions to the Lancet study. I'll add other rebuttals, critiques, and rejoinders to the study as my schedule permits. Also, there are a couple of other recent posts on the Iraqi blogs that I want to talk about, but I'll have to save that for another time.

Morning Report: October 19, 2006

Good news, bad news. Bad news first: The Islamic fascists may be crazy, but they're not stupid. Now the good news: They're still crazy.

Friday October 20th warning. Alan Peters in Anti-Mullah: 'Buzz in CT (Counterterrorism)/security community is Friday may be big day of violence as Muslims celebrate Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day -- when Big Mo (Mohammed) was supposedly wafted up to Paradise from al-Aqsa mosque. Friday is also juma prayer (special prayer). Then Eid Fetr (Muslim holiday you've seen the U.S. postal stamp) follows on Tuesday. CIFA (Counterintelligence Field Activity): Pentagon looking for even higher terror op tempo in Iraq and Afghanistan on those 2 days. Additionally, increase in Iraq violence intended to drive USA elections into Democrat hands and by terrorists perceptions to their advantage, also expected.' (Anti-Mullah)

Ahmad Batebi back in jail. Iranian activist Ahmad Batebi (the T-shirt guy) is back in jail after two days. Azarmehr: 'Ahmad Batebi, Iranian student and prisoner of conscience and honorary vice-president of the NUSis back in jail after two days leave. Batebi was released after having spent several weeks in solitary confinement. The condition of his leave from prison was a large bail and the promise not to talk to media.' (Azarmehr)

Bank Saderat president fired. Iran Focus: 'The head of an Iranian bank which the United States recently imposed tough sanctions against has been sacked, state-run press reported earlier this week. Hamid Borhani, who headed Bank Saderat Iran, was fired for failing to cooperate with the government on credit provisions that have been pledged by hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as part of his populist platform. Borhani was appointed chairman and managing director of Bank Saderat Iran in November 2005. ... “Bank Saderat facilitates Iran's transfer of hundreds of millions of dollars to Hezbollah and other terrorist organisations each year. We will no longer allow a bank like Saderat to do business in the American financial system, even indirectly”, said Stuart Levey, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (TFI).' (Iran Focus)

Iran prevented Gilad Shalit release, report says. JTA: 'Iran reportedly bribed the top Hamas leader to prevent the release of an Israeli soldier being held in the Gaza Strip.
Israel and the Palestinian Authority were recently on the verge of sealing a deal for the recovery of Corporal Gilad Shalit, but an Iranian delegation paid Hamas´s supreme leader, Khaled Meshaal, $50 million to scupper it, Yediot Aharonot reported Thursday.' Meanwhile, Debka reports the names of five al-Qaeda-linked terrorists connected to the kidnapping: 'They were identified in the course of an investigation into the murder on Sept 16 of Mahmoud Abbas’ top security officer Col. Jad Tayeh for which they were also responsible. DEBKAfile reveals their names for the first time: The Al Qaeda cell commander is Muataz Durmush, cousin of Zakariah Durmush of the Popular Resistance Committees of Gaza. The others ae Mahmoud Bastal; Taher Atawa; Ahmed Azzam and Ibrahim Kahil. They sign The Muslim Army on all their bulletins on the kidnapped Israeli soldier. Senior Israeli officers complain that the al Qaeda cell is operating unscathed by Israel, Egypt or the Palestinian Authority’s security services, a sign that affairs in the Gaza Strip have slipped out of control.' (JTA, Debka)

Human Rights Watch: Hezbollah fired cluster bombs at Israel. Yes, you read that right: HRW is shocked to learn that the evil zionists weren't the only ones using cluster bombs. Ha'Aretz: 'Hezbollah fired cluster rockets into civilian areas of northern Israel during the recent war, Human Rights Watch said in a report on Thursday. Israel has itself been condemned by the New York-based group and other campaigners for its use of cluster bombs during the 34-day conflict. Human Rights Watch said it had been told by Israeli police of more than 100 documented cases of cluster rocket strikes. Hezbollah made no immediate comment. "We are disturbed to discover that not only Israel but also Hezbollah used cluster munitions in their recent conflict, at a time when many countries are turning away from this kind of weapon precisely because of its impact on civilians," said Steve Goose of Human Right Watch in the report.' (Ha'Aretz)

Harper: Never neutral. Via Israellycool, the National Post reports: 'Prime Minister Stephen Harper mounted a vigorous defence on Wednesday of his government’s Middle East policy. Speaking to a B’nai Brith dinner, Harper made no apologies for his government siding with the Jewish state during this summer’s fighting between Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerrillas. “When it comes to dealing with a war between Israel and a terrorist organization, this country and this government cannot and will never be neutral,” Harper said in a speech to the Jewish human rights group.' (Israellycool, National Post)

Sudanese regime, army directing genocide. Or Does It Explode: 'Ex-Janjaweed Reveals the Obvious: Sudanese Regime and Army are Directing Genocide. "I tell you one fact. Janjaweed don't make decisions, the orders come from the government." The BBC is treating this as a bombshell. And in a way it is. But on the other hand, the ex-janjaweed fighter - currently seeking asylum in England - tells us nothing we didn't know before. Here's the gist: A man identified only as "Ali" told the BBC's Newsnight programme that Sudanese ministers gave express orders for the activities of his unit, which included rape and killing children...' Here's the BBC link. (ODIE, BBC)

Commentary. Apparently the mullahs believe that a terror attack on the US before an election will help them. Maybe. But then again, Ahmadinejad seems to think he can win a confrontation with the United States. Again, maybe, provided you accept a definition of "winning" that includes the concept of "going out in a blaze of glory". James Lewis at The American Thinker thinks Ahmadinejad is setting a trap:

It’s quite likely that Ahmadinejad is looking forward to his own martyrdom, as part of a larger plan to draw other nations into disastrous warfare. Ahmadinejad may actually believe, as Mao Zedong once said, that Iran can sustain multiple nuclear attacks while the West could only tolerate one.

There are military and strategic answers to these dilemmas. But they should be planned for with the utmost psychological and military care. This guy is not your normal looney-tunes leader; he’s Pol Pot with nukes, rather than Brezhnev or even Kim. Unlike Kim, he may not care if he survives. And he may have a fullfledged backup military government set up if he does not survive a major air strike, with redundant media facilities, for example, so he can claim victory even in physical defeat. Add that to agents of influences planted throughout the Western media, and you get a very formidable and dangerous opponent.

So Ahmadinejad may be planning a trap. But even worse, he may be putting the West into a cleft stick, so they lose if they avoid the trap, and lose if they fall into it. It’s a standard chess gambit, and Ahmadinejad is perfectly capable of executing it.

Well, indeed. He's a formidable and dangerous opponent, and he's nuts. What part of this didn't we know before? If the balloon goes up - make that when the balloon goes up - it won't much matter whether Ahmadinejad and his fundamentalist fascist friends think they're going to get wafted up to paradise. What will matter is sending them on their way.

Morning Report: October 18, 2006

Mark your calendar. Armageddon is tentatively scheduled for this weekend.

Europe vs. Israel. Debka:

Italy to sell Lebanon sophisticated ground-to-air Aster 15 missiles to stop Israel’s aerial surveillance of hostile movements. Israeli aircraft monitor illegal Hizballah movements and arms smuggling - in the absence of any Lebanese army and UNIFIL preventive action to implement UN Resolution 1701. According to DEBKAfile’s Rome sources, prime minister Romano Prodi has instructed his defense ministry to negotiate with the Fouad Siniora government the quick sale of an Aster 15 battery, the only Western surface-to-air missile with an active guidance system capable of last-minute corrections of targeting at the moment of interception. As a joint Franco-Italian product, the sale also needed - and obtained - approval from French president Jacques Chirac. Our sources report the Aster 15 will be accompanied by Italian instructors to guide Lebanese troops in their use. Since 50% of those officers are Shiites loyal to Hizballah or Amal, the Shiite terrorists are looking forward to gaining access for the first time to top-of-the-line Western anti-air missile technology. On Oct. 13, Lebanese chief of staff General Michel Suleiman informed his officers posted on the Lebanese-Israeli border of the Beirut government’s “indefatigable efforts” to obtain anti-air missiles to hit patrolling Israeli aircraft. He added that very soon, Lebanon would also acquire long-range anti-tank rockets to prevent Israeli tanks again crossing the border. Commanders of the French UNIFIL contingent have threatened to fire on Israeli warplanes in Lebanese skies, according to Israel defense minister Amir Peretz in a briefing to a Knesset panel Monday, Oct. 16. Israel has so far refrained from protesting to Rome against the Aster 15 sale - any more than it has to Washington, the UN Security Council or UNIFIL over illegal Hizballah movements and arms-smuggling. The Aster 15 is manufactured by France’s Aerospatiale and Thompson-CSF; its guidance system by the Alenia/Finmeccanica of Italy. Launched from seaborne or land bases, it is designed to hit “maneuverable targets” - aircraft, helicopters, drones or missiles. With a warhead of 3.20 kilos of explosives, the missile has a range of up to 30 km and a maximum speed of 3,600 kph. Aster 15’s two stages are a solid propellant booster and a “dart” equipped with a seeker, a sustainer motor, a proximity fuse and a blast fragmentation warhead. DEBKAfile’s political sources once again note the Olmert government’s virtual concealment of the impending threat, its blind eye to UNIFIL’s impotence and its failure to raise an outcry against the missile’s impending delivery to Beirut. Israel’s leaders are strongly motivated by their need to stick to the empty boast of military gains in the Lebanon War and the portrayal of the international force’s deployment in the South as a diplomatic triumph. In contrast, the teams investigating the IDF’s performance in the war are coming up daily with findings of gross mismanagement. The Israeli missile ship hit by an Iranian anti-ship C-208 cruise missile July 14 - for the loss of four men - was found in the latest report to have omitted to activate the ship’s four missile defense systems, including the Barak anti-missile missile. The ship sailed dangerously close to the Beirut coast with none of the 80 officers and crew manning lookout or attack positions. The panel concluded that there was nothng to stop Hizballah sinking the frigate by ramming it with an explosives-laden boat.

Meanwhile, France says UNIFIL will fire on Israeli planes: 'Commanders of the French contingent of the United Nations force in Lebanon have warned that they might have to open fire if Israel Air Force warplanes continue their overflights in Lebanon, Defense Minister Amir Peretz told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday. Peretz said that nevertheless, Israel would continue to patrol the skies over Lebanon as long as United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 remained unfulfilled, adding that such operations were critical for the country's security, especially as the abducted IDF soldiers remain in Hezbollah custody and the transfer of arms continue.' (Debka, Ha'Aretz)

Russian foreign minister: Iran no threat. Ha'Aretz: 'Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Wednesday said international action over Tehran's nuclear program must be in proportion to the real situation in Iran, which he added does not appear to include a threat to peace and security. "It is necessary to act on Iran but that action should be in direct proportion to what is really happening," the RIA news agency quoted Lavrov as saying. "And what is really happening is what the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] reports to us. And the IAEA is not reporting to us about the presence there of a threat to peace and security," said Lavrov.' (Ha'Aretz)

China won't search North Korean ships. Jerusalem Post: 'China is balking at stopping and searching North Korean ships for banned weapons and materials, creating tension with Washington over UN Security Council sanctions for the North's nuclear test. Beijing fears that such searches might trigger military clashes, and that the US may use them to police wider shipping, analysts said Tuesday. "If intelligence can prove the ships are loaded with dangerous material, I don't think Beijing would be opposed to stopping them," said Zhu Feng, a professor at Peking University's School of International Relations. "But we just worry that the United States will abuse its naval power."' (JPost)

Wretchard on Louise Arbour and the problem of evil. The Belmont Club: 'If the United Nations is benevolent then it cannot tolerate the existence of a Rwanda, Congo, North Korea or a Darfur. But if it attempts to stop these atrocities then inevitably it must inflict some collateral damage which will cause some people to die and that, according to [Arbour], is a War Crime. There is no way out of the paradox and the system is in logical self-contradiction.' (Belmont Club)

"Our cycle of warnings has been completed." Via Atlas Shrugs: '"I am saying that Muslims must leave America, but we can attack America anytime," he said. "Our cycle of warnings has been completed, now we have fresh edicts from some prominent Muslim scholars to destroy our enemy, this is our defending of Jihad; the enemy has entered in our homes and we have the right to enter in their homes, they are killing us, we will kill them." The article cites yet another threat 'warning all Muslims to leave the U.S. in anticipation of a major terrorist attack before the end of Ramadan.' The Jawa Report has the latest on nuclear terrorist Adnan Shukrijumah: 'The Taliban have issued another warning that Muslims should leave the U.S. immediately before a major attack is launched. The warning implies that the threat will be from a dirty bomb and that it will come before next Monday.' Read the rest at the link. See also previous Dreams Into Lightning roundup on Adnan Shukrijumah. (Atlas Shrugs, The Jawa Report)

Zoe: Wilful blindness. Zoe at A.E.Brain: 'veryone with two neurons to fire consecutively could predict what would happen - what has happened. If Mary Robinson, former head of the Human Rights Council's predecessor "hoped that the Human Rights Council would act in a human rights way" with the current batch of dictatorships and tyrannies that compose the majority of the commission, it can't be lack of intellect. It requires wilful blindness ...' Read the rest at the link. (A.E.Brain)

Commentary. Now, you might be reading this post and wondering: "Why did I get out of bed this morning?" Well, that makes two of us. But let's keep a couple of things in mind. The "Hiroshima" rhetoric around the "dirty bomb" threat is hyperbole - a dirty bomb, by definition, is a conventional explosive that's rigged to spew radioactive stuff. Very nasty, but no mushroom cloud.

I would not be surprised if terrorists attempt another mass-casualty attack on American soil in the near future. Maybe within the week. How successful it is, is another story. The other question is whether this is going to coincide with a hot war in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East. No crystal ball here, but again, I wouldn't be surprised if there's coordination with Syria and Iran.

Need something to lift your spirits? Well, it seems there's been some self-reflection among the Hamas inteligentsia:

A senior figure in Hamas, the Islamist group that heads the Palestinian government, published an article on Tuesday condemning internal violence and questioning whether it had become a "Palestinian disease."

Where this epiphany will lead, it's hard to say. But Morning Report is reminded of these gentlemen.

Pro-Israel Muslim Editor Beaten, Denied Justice

Via IRIS:

A Muslim journalist facing charges of sedition for advocating ties with Israel was recently attacked and beaten by a crowd in Bangladesh that allegedly included leading officials of the country’s ruling party, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, editor of the Weekly Blitz newspaper, an English-language publication based in the Bangladeshi capital of Dhaka, was working in his office on October 5 when nearly 40 people stormed the premises. The mob beat Choudhury, leaving him with a fractured ankle, and looted cash that was kept in the company safe. Choudhury was briefly hospitalized.

...

No arrests were made, and police refused to allow Choudhury to file charges against his attackers.

Reuters Cameraman Faces Trial

Arutz Sheva:

On Tuesday, a Reuters cameraman was remanded to prison until trial for his part in rock-throwing attacks on security forces in Bil'in, where the separation fence is a constant target of protesters.


The cameraman, Imad Muhammad Intisar Boghnat, was arrested and charged as a result of violent riots in the Arab village of Bil'in, in the Modi'in region, on October 6, 2006. A videotape that the prosecution presented to the judge shows Boghnat encouraging and directing rioters in Bil'in to throw large chunks of rock at Israeli vehicles in such a way as to cause maximum damage. The accused is heard shouting, "Throw, throw!" and later, "Throw towards the little window!" ...

Read the rest at the link.

Australia: Jew Beaten by Anti-Semitic Football Thugs

Arutz Sheva:

An Australian Jew was viciously beaten in front of his young children this week by a group of drunken Australian football players, according to a report by Australian news agencies. The attackers grabbed 33 year old Menachem Vorchheimer’s yarmulka and hat when he approached their minibus to find out the name of the team after the men hurled anti-Semitic remarks at him and his children.

Vorchheimer said the group of 20 men yelled epithets and “Go to the Nazis” before motioning as if they were shooting a machine gun at him and his terrified, crying 3 and 6 year old children before punching him in the face. Witnesses surrounded the bus and prevented it from making a getaway until the police arrived and apprehended the attackers.

Although Ocean Grove Football Club president Michael Vines apologized to the victim, the team’s coach, Matthew Sproule called the incident an “accident”.

Words fail me.

We're doomed.

Wretchard on the prevalence of ignorance.

Columbia and the Future of Education

Does the Columbia University fiasco portend a crisis in the future of American education? And if the traditional universities lose their credibility in teaching critical thinking - as the establishment media are losing their credibility in news reporting - how will that void be filled?

For readers who have been spending the last two weeks in a cave, let me recap the Columbia University debacle (with help from the indispensable Kesher Talk). Earlier this month, Columbia announced that two ex-terrorists and an ex-Nazi would be speaking on October 11; the ex-terrorist was none other than Walid Shoebat. But on the night of October 4, Jim Gilchrist, founder of the anti-illegal-immigration posse Minutemen, was mobbed by thugs while attempting to speak at Columbia (video at Little Green Footballs). Following that incident, the craven officials at Columbia un-invited many guests who had signed up to attend the Shoebat event. Needless to say, a lot of people were not pleased. Follow the links, or go to the KT homepage, for updates on that sorry tale.

How is it that our universities, which are supposed to encourage creative thinking and free debate, have turned into madrassas where students are to be indoctrinated rather than having their views intelligently challenged?

Here's the funny thing. I think the real center for meaningful discussion has shifted to the internet and the blogosphere. I know I've sharpened my critical thinking skills by reading the blogs and following the comment sections; it wouldn't surprise me if this is true of many other people as well. Just as internet journals have taken over much of the function of the MSM in news reporting and analysis, so too, perhaps, have they stepped in to fill the role that the universities have abdicated. If the universities want to remain relevant, they must pay attention to what is happening in the wired world.

Update

Posting has been light due to work pressures and a busy personal life, not to mention the Jewish holidays. I expect to get one or two opinion pieces up tomorrow, and hopefully resume Morning Report on a semi-regular basis.

A new episode of "The Queen's Courtesan" is up. The story to date is here: The Queen's Courtesan. The new episode is The Investigation.

I'm planning a trip to the East Coast around Thanksgiving time.

On Women Leaders

In a recent Morning Report, I cited a post by Tammy Bruce on the Foley scandal (and on men in power generally). Tammy wrote:

Here's one comment which will remind you of my Authentic Feminist foundation--while we all complain that politicians are politicians, here's one thing we can be sure of--with all the page scandals, the intern scandals, and girls who worked for politicians turning up dead (think Kennedy/Kopechne and Condit/Levy), none of the politicians involved have been women. A woman lawmaker has never been accused of sexually harassing an intern, or of making passes at a page, nor has a woman in office been linked to an office worker's death.

So perhaps it's not Washington, DC, power or politics that is the common thread here--maybe it's the sort of man [TB's emphasis] attracted to that environment. There are women serving on both sides of the aisle, and no matter what you think of Hillary Clinton, as an example, we can be pretty darn sure she's not chasing an intern of either sex around her office. The same can be said about Elizabeth Dole, and Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, or Barbara Mikulski. Because it's not about homosexuals, but about men, gay and straight, young and old, and what they do with power.

Is it possible to have the same peace of mind with men in Congress as we do with the women in Congress, at least when it comes to their personal deportment? Is that too much to ask? I certainly don't think so.

Let's admit it--women handle power differently. And as pundits on the left and the right point fingers and complain about who is more corrupt--perhaps it's time to see this as an opportunity to decide to really do things differently, and vote for women, for a real change.

In my Comments, Jeremayakovka expressed reservations about Tammy's post, and I agreed:

I think Tammy makes some great points but I think the issues need to be addressed more clearly. She weakens her argument by conflating two or three points which I believe are distinct from one another: (1) the assertion that women tend to have a different style of leadership from men, quite possibly true in itself; (2) the fact that men tend to display *certain forms* of sexual aggression that are less prevalent (though not necessarily absent) among women; and (3) the lack of (and continuing discrimination against) women in leadership roles.

Also it's important to remember that just as men and women tend to have different styles of leadership, so too do women and men have different ways of engaging in conflict and aggression. Phyllis Chesler wrote an excellent book on female/female conflict.

So, let me elaborate a little here. Individually, I believe Tammy's points are all valid, but I think it would be misleading to suggest that one should vote for women with the expectation that women will be better leaders. Of course, that's not what Tammy is saying; she says, "women handle power differently" (my emphasis), not necessarily "better". But it's not too much of a stretch to read her post and think, "I should vote for women because they will be less likely to harass their pages and will therefore be better leaders". Which of course is wrong thinking.

One of the assumptions of old-school feminism has been that if women leaders were given a fair chance, they would prove less aggressive, less violent, less susceptible to "testosterone poisoning", and generally better leaders than men. Now for all I know, this may very well be true! Given the continuing paucity of women leaders on the international scene, it is far too early to make any kind of empirical assessment.

But we should not predicate our support for women leaders on these assumptions, because they may prove to be false. To put it another way, it would be unfair to put women on any kind of a pedestal based on pre-conceived expectations. And even if a putative future generation of women world leaders did prove to be less predatory and warlike in the patriarchal fashion, might they not make up for it with other vices? Again, as Phyllis Chesler has so ably demonstrated, women are quite capable of their own forms of cruelty.

Do vote for women because women leaders bring many things - character traits, abilities, and experiences - to the political world that men lack. Do vote for women because women have had the deck stacked against them by a sexist, patriarchal society for generations.

Don't ever vote for a woman just because she's a woman, or because you think women can do no wrong.

Do vote for women because of what women can do.