Choosing the Wrong Muslim Partners

M. Zuhdi Jasser at Family Security Matters:
On January 10, 2007, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, met with “American Muslims” which included the organizations-- the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), the Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), and the Arab American Institute (AAI). A quick, random, browse of just their websites shows heavily political organizations with an underlying religious movement for the first two and Arab movement for the last. Their combined product is a heavily political-religious movement. It has some following, but represents only a minority of the Muslims in America who mostly remain unaffiliated.

One would be hard pressed to find precedent in the U.S. of our security agencies and leadership “partnering” with manifestations of a national and global political movement within the United States. Simply put, it seems our government is being duped, through political correctness, into partnering with organizations which present themselves as being purely religious (Muslim) or ethnic (Arabic) but are actually upon even a brief review rather solidly religio-political and Arab-political movements.

It is not that these organizations have not condemned terrorism as an act or a means to an ends. It is, rather, that they have not condemned political Islam (Islamism) and its theocratic foundations as an ends. Islamism is the end-game of our enemies and its ideological antidote is Americanism and its multi-religious and mulit-ethnic pluralism. ...

Read the rest at the link.

Remarks. Please see the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) website for more information about this fine organization. And while you're at it, get on their mailing list and donate a few dollars if you can.

The Real Peace Movement - November 2004


Mark Daily: "A Force of Good in the World"

I actually lost a girlfriend because I had the audacity to believe this very thing:
"I genuinely believe the United States Army is a force of good in this world"
The immortal words of 2LT Mark Daily live on. The Los Angeles Times has picked up the story: "Mark Daily wrote on MySpace that he joined the Army to help the suffering people of Iraq. In death, his words have become a call to service."

A small sample:

In a 2005 videotape of his officers' commissioning ceremony, Daily told the crowd that the U.S. Army is one of the few militaries in the world that teach not only tactics but also ethics. "I genuinely believe the United States Army is a force of good in this world," he said. ...

In Mark Daily's own words:
So that is why I joined. In the time it took you to read this explanation, innocent people your age have suffered under the crushing misery of tyranny.

Don't forget that human beings have a responsibility to one another and that Americans have a responsibility to the oppressed. Assisting a formerly oppressed population in converting their torn society into a plural, democratic one is dangerous and difficult business, especially when being attacked and sabotaged from literally every direction.

So if you have anything to say to me at the end of this reading, let it at least include "Good Luck."

Go to Michelle Malkin for more.

Remarks. It gets better. Here's more from the LA Times story:
"Anyone who knew me before I joined knows that I am quite aware and at times sympathetic to the arguments against the war in Iraq. If you think the only way a person could bring themselves to volunteer for this war is through sheer desperation or blind obedience then consider me the exception."

Mark Daily, born on the Fourth of July, grew up in Irvine's Woodbridge Village, on a street of spacious homes and well-manicured lawns. His father, John, is an aerospace project manager; his mother, Linda, an audiologist.

His family says he became a registered Democrat who read voraciously and delighted in fervent debate. He read liberal intellectual Noam Chomsky, conservative Sen. John McCain of Arizona and everything in between.

His first passions were animal rights and environmental protection, prompting him to become a vegetarian and Green Party member in high school for a few years. He defended American Indian rights so loudly in one backyard debate that Linda Daily imagined the neighbors would think it a family brawl. His heroes were immigrants because "they risk their lives to achieve better ones," he wrote on his MySpace page.

Damn. I think I know this guy.
After the 9/11 attacks, Daily was not convinced that a military response was the best option. In his MySpace essay, he runs through the gamut of reasons he used at one time or another to argue against confronting the Taliban and Saddam Hussein: cultural tolerance, the sanctity of national sovereignty, a suspicion of America's intentions. Weren't we really after their oil? he wondered.

Somewhere along the way, he changed his mind. His family says there was no epiphany. Writings by author and columnist Christopher Hitchens on the moral case for war deeply influenced him. A 2003 phone conversation with a UCLA ROTC officer on the ideals of commitment and service impressed him.

Ultimately, his family says, Daily came to believe that his lifelong altruistic impulses and passions for the underdog had to extend to Iraqis crushed under decades of oppression. It was time to stop simply talking about human rights and actually do something to help secure them.

"There was no epiphany" - only a gradual, reasoned evolution of views. He considered every viewpoint in the debate, and he took the time to inform himself about the facts. Are you listening, Jay Dixit?
Daily touched down in Iraq on Nov. 19 and was sent to the northern city of Mosul. In calls and e-mails home, he began asking for presents for his new Iraqi friends: cigars for the soldiers, candy and soccer balls for the children. He vividly described his adventures with them: a Thanksgiving Day game of musical chairs, a rooftop cigar session; his first Kurdish meal, his first local haircut.

In one video he sent, Iraqi soldiers surround him with grins, crowning him with a turban as a gesture of friendship.

In typical fashion, he sought out new points of view. In one discussion, he wrote that he asked a Kurdish man whether the insurgents could be viewed as freedom fighters. The man cut him off. "The difference between insurgents and American soldiers," Daily said the man told him, "is that they get paid to take life — to murder — and you get paid to save lives."

"That Kurdish man's assessment of our presence means more to me than all of the naysayers and makeshift humanists that monopolize our interpretation of this war," Daily wrote in a Dec. 31 e-mail.

Daily was killed by a roadside bomb on January 15, one day after sending an e-mail to his parents saying, "All is well. More war stories then I can fit in this e-mail. Having the time of my life!"

Morning Report: February 18, 2007

A political storm brews in Washington, while boots hit the ground in Baghdad.

ITM: Baghdad attacks down 80 percent. Iraq the Model: 'Since the multiple bombings in Shroja market district on the 12th, Baghdad hasn’t seen any major attacks and there’s a tangible decrease in all kinds of attacks. Not only official statements say so (Defense ministry officials said today that attacks are down by 80% in Baghdad). It’s a reality I live in nowadays, at least in my neighborhood and its surroundings. It is also what I hear from friends and relatives in other parts of the city. We are hearing fewer explosions and less gunfire now than two weeks ago and that, in Baghdad, qualifies as quiet.' (ITM)

Kesher Talk posts Lieberman address. Kesher Talk posts the text of Senator Joseph Lieberman's speech opposing the anti-surge resolution in the Senate. 'Congress has been given constitutional responsibilities. But the micro-management of war is not one of them. The appropriation of funds for war is. I appreciate that each of us here has our own ideas about the best way forward in Iraq, I respect those that take a different position than I, and I understand that many feel strongly that the President's strategy is the wrong one. But the Constitution, which has served us now for more than two great centuries of our history, creates not 535 commanders-in-chief, but one—the President of the United States, who is authorized to lead the day to day conduct of war.' Read it all. (KT)

Gay Patriot: "Congressional cowards give up on the troops." Gay Patriot links to Ralph Peters in the New York Post: 'The "nonbinding resolution" telling the world that we intend to surrender to terrorism and abandon Iraq may be the most disgraceful congressional action since the Democratic Party united to defend slavery. The vote was a huge morale booster for al Qaeda, for Iraq's Sunni insurgents, and for the worst of the Shia militias. The message Congress just sent to them all was, "Hold on, we'll stop the surge, we're going to leave - and you can slaughter the innocent with our blessing."' GP adds: 'Luckily, the Senate vote against the “non-binding” resolution on Saturday was a devastating defeat for the Democrats…. and there are number of vulnerable House freshmen Democrats who must have their pins stuck in their Nancy Pelosi voodoo doll this weekend.' (Gay Patriot, NY Post)

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Infidel. Ayaan Hirsi Ali speaks on her new book, "Infidel". Video at the link. (AEI)

General explains troop surge strategy. Via CENTCOM, MND-B commander Major General Joseph Fil explains the strategy:
The security plan includes an increase in Iraqi and coalition forces in Iraq’s capital, a push to rid the city of violent extremists and the creation of joint security stations throughout Baghdad, Fil said.

Once the streets are cleared of extremist elements, the coalition and Iraqi security forces will assert control of each neighborhood and move further toward transition, he said.

“After an area is cleared, we move into what we call ‘control operations.’ Together, with our Iraqi counterparts, we will maintain a full-time presence on the streets. We’ll do this by building and manning joint security stations,” said Fil, who assumed responsibility for MND-B three months ago. “The effort to establish these joint security stations is well underway.”

As Iraqi security forces assume control of the day-to-day operations of Baghdad’s joint security stations, coalition forces will move out of its neighborhoods, but still respond to requests for assistance from Iraqi security forces, if needed, he said.

In addition to the joint security stations, Fil said the new strategy will also have an economic component to spark the Iraqi economy.

“During these three phases, efforts will be on-going to stimulate local economies by creating employment opportunities, initiating reconstruction projects and improving the infrastructure,” he explained. “These efforts will be spearheaded by Neighborhood Advisory Councils, District Advisory Councils and the government of Iraq.”

General Fil emphasized that it would take time for the operation to work. Full text at the link. (CENTCOM)

Haider Ajina on troop surge. Haider Ajina at Mudville Gazette posts two articles translated from the Iraqi media and comments: 'The long awaited new security plan for Baghdad has now started in earnest. These Iraqi unites trained by us and the UK are performing well. As I have mentioned many times. It is hard to train Iraqi security to serve, protect and enforce the rule of law in three short years, when all they have known previously is oppression and dictatorship. Think about how long it takes for us to train our military, and our men and women have grown up in a society of rule of law and democracy. Democracy and rule of law has only been a dream for Iraqis up until four years ago. The training of the Iraqis is thus doubly challenging. The new security operation looks and sounds good with Iraqis performing well. What is also interesting is the media campaign the Government has launched to support this operation. Extra billboards displaying hotlines numbers for tips, TV & Radio adds denouncing terrorism etc… Popular and political support for this operation is the highest I have seen for any operation to date. Iraqi Arab Sunnis and Shiites as well as Kurds, who in Iraq are mostly Sunni, and Christians all support and have high hopes for this operation. Sentiment and hope is especially high amongst the displaced families who are now hoping they can return to their homes sooner rather than later.' (Mudville Gazette)

IraqPundit on Murtha's stealth surrender. IraqPundit quotes an editorial in the Washington Post:
Murtha “would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site MoveCongress.org, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to ‘stop the surge.’ So why not straightforwardly strip the money out of the appropriations bill -- an action Congress is clearly empowered to take -- rather than try to micromanage the Army in a way that may be unconstitutional? Because, Mr. Murtha said, it will deflect accusations that he is trying to do what he is trying to do. ‘What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with,’ he said.”

IraqPundit adds: 'Are the Democrats seriously intending to curtail the U.S. effort in Iraq by political sleight of hand? The Post's point about stripping out the funding is exact. Congress has the power to do that. But instead of attempting that, the Democrats prefer to try to run the military, in the hope that they can undercut the war with a minimum of criticism.' (IraqPundit)

Israpundit: The Democratic Party's octopus. The palindromic billionaire behind the Democrats is like an octopus, says Israpundit, diagramming the multifarious connections of George Soros. 'George Soros, like his creation MoveOn.org, is part of the cancer that infests the Democratic Party at the expense of mainstream Democrats. George Soros has reputedly destroyed nations’ currencies to enrich himself while using his network of NGOs like MoveOn.org, Open Society Institute, International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA, run by Soros minion Rebecca Peters), and so on to perpetrate his visions of internationalism at the expense of national sovereignty. He has similarly used his enormous wealth to subvert, polarize, and marginalize part of the Democratic Party to the point where it no longer represents anything in which decent Americans believe. This includes the working people who have relied on the Democratic Party to represent their interests against abusive big businesses and special interests. The Democratic Party must accordingly treat its Soros-infested wing like malignant cancer, which must be excised before it destroys the party entirely.' Details at the link. (Israpundit)

Ramadi mayor solving problems. MNF-Iraq: 'AR RAMADI – Ten city directors and representatives met with the mayor here Monday to discuss city problems and solutions.
The meeting was the second of its kind to be held since the appointment of Mayor Latif Obaid Ayadah in early January, and served as a forum for the leaders. Representatives from Ramadi’s water department, sewage and sanitation department, electricity department, municipality department, and a few supervisors of other areas attended the morning meeting. The collection of professional leaders addressed a variety of topics during the meeting, all focused on increasing the quality of life for Ramadi citizens. The main topics of discussion for the meeting were the importance of electricity and water for the upcoming summer months, obtaining smooth communication between city departments and Iraqi Army units, providing honest jobs for the citizens, and identifying the “bad elements” of city departments.' Mayor Ayadah declared that "all of Ramadi must become a Green Zone." (MNFI)

Israel: Datiyot more likely to become officers. Israelity reports: ' According to a study commissioned by Israel’s Knesset (parliament), while only a fifth of religious women enroll in the army, those enlisted are more likely to opt for officer’s training than are their secular counterparts. “The army is interested in enlisting religious recruits because they are high achievers, and has therefore opened a versatile range of courses for them…” The Knesset Education Committee Chair said.' Article here. (Israelity, YNet)

Commentary. Take note: this troop surge is the make-or-break, decisive campaign that must bring an end to effective terrorism in Baghdad. And it is precisely this success that certain cowards in Washington know they must stop, lest the face of true courage be revealed, and put them to shame.

Senator Gordon Smith Votes Against Victory

Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon was one of seven allegedly Republican senators who voted against the Iraq troop surge.

Here is Gordon Smith's statement on the troop surge:
“Iraqis need to be their own street cops, not U.S. forces,” Senator Smith said, “This is the President’s Hail Mary pass. Now it is up to the Iraqi Army to catch the ball. We are extending an ineffective tactic to further the status quo. Iraqis must be the ones to settle their own peace.”

“One thing remains certain, as long as the Commander in Chief orders our armed forces into harms way, the Congress should extend blue chip financing to our troops. De-funding their bullets is dishonorable and deadly.”

Got that? We are extending an ineffective tactic to further the status quo. Now here's Iraq the Model:
Since the multiple bombings in Shroja market district on the 12th, Baghdad hasn’t seen any major attacks and there’s a tangible decrease in all kinds of attacks.

Not only official statements say so (Defense ministry officials said today that attacks are down by 80% in Baghdad). It’s a reality I live in nowadays, at least in my neighborhood and its surroundings. It is also what I hear from friends and relatives in other parts of the city.
We are hearing fewer explosions and less gunfire now than two weeks ago and that, in Baghdad, qualifies as quiet.

I agree with what some experts say about this lull in violence being the result of militants keeping their heads down for a while. It is also possibly the result of the flight of the commanders of militant groups. Grunts left without planners, money or leaders wouldn’t want to do much on their own.

During my tour in Baghdad today I had to pull over to be searched at several checkpoints — something that has rarely happened to me before. When you are searched soldiers or policemen check the identity cards of passengers, and the registration papers of the vehicle along with a thorough physical search. Checkpoints deal even more strictly with large vans and cargo trucks.

The interesting thing about new checkpoints is the constant shifting of their location. One hour the checkpoint would be here and two hours later it would relocate to another position within the area. I think this helps security forces avoid becoming targets instead of hunters.

But Senator Gordon Smith isn't interested in success; he's interested in failure. He's interested in portraying the war effort in Iraq as a "failure" - as he does in this press release explaining his vote against the nomination of General George Casey for Army Chief of Staff - and then ensuring that the results of the effort meet this expectation:
“While I am certainly grateful for his service to our country and admire his patriotism, General George Casey presided over the failed policy in Iraq. A failure should not result in a promotion. I have expressed frustration with the Administration’s strategy in Iraq. General Casey’s leadership is part of the status quo and we must go in a new direction.”

In reality, it is not General Casey, but Senator Smith who is working for American failure in Iraq.

Kat at The Middle Ground:
It is a fallacy to believe that this "reduction" will force a depletion in missions thus keeping our troops out of harms way. To believe that is to completely misunderstand or purposefully ignore the types of missions that would still have to occur in order to supply our forces that will still be in theater as well as support the Iraqi Army and police, even if they were in a position to stand up in the manner and number necessary to do the job our forces have been doing.

Our troops are out routinely sweeping the roads for IEDs, watching for ambushes and doing reconnaisance. None of which goes away because we have "reduced" the number of troops in the field.

Tammy Bruce:
If we continue to have success in the War on Radical Islamists, it means it will indeed continue for some time to come. If we "fail," or cut-and-run, it means people like the Clintons will once again have the White House remade into Animal House. After all, who wants to deal with serious issues when there's so much fun to had and so many more interns to, uh, have.

... None of these Mal Nars [malignant narcissists], of course, ever speak of victory or success. Instead, they want it to be like a television show, which ends at a specific time, regardless of result. Imagine had we fought World War II that way.

Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon seems destined to have his name recorded in the roster of shame at Victory Caucus - White Flag Republicans.

Oregon voters, remember: No matter what double-talk you may get from Senator Smith, he does not support the troops - or America's victory.

Return of The Middle Ground

I'm very pleased to announce that Kat at The Middle Ground is back from her hiatus, and keeping an eye on those Copperheads. Go check out her latest posts. And don't forget to bookmark The Middle Ground on your browser!


Al-Qaeda, you are our bitches!

The Jawa Report tells it like it is:
Coalition forces in Iraq have delivered a series of stunning blows to al Qaeda in Iraq in the last 48 hours.

A key aide to Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the man who replaced Abu Musab al Zarqawi as the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, has been captured south of Baghdad. As A.J. Strata notes, the trail to the al Qaeda leader is fresh: the captured aide admitted to meeting with al Masri yesterday.

Since Taji is north of Baghdad, these two al Qaeda IED cell leaders captured by the U.S. in West Taji are not the same as those above. That's four al Qaeda leaders captured.

But four is such a lonely number. A facilitator of foreign fighters was captured by the Iarqi Army on the Syrian border. And foreign fighters tend to mean al Qaeda.

Not to be outdone by the IA, the U.S. struck two houses where foreign fighters had gathered---13 jihadis dead. An "individual" associated with foreign fighter facilitation was in the targeted area.

But wait, that's not all. Coalition Forces conducted an air strike Wednesday targeting an al-Qaida in Iraq-related vehicle-borne improvised explosives devices network near Arab Jabour. Intelligence reports indicated that this network is responsible for a large and devastating number of VBIED attacks in the Baghdad area. They are also responsible for IED and sniper attacks conducted against the Iraqi people and Iraqi and Coalition Forces. Building destroyed, everyone inside presumably dead.

And another terrorist was captured in Taji. In addition to leading a bombing cell, he is also believed to be involved in taking Iraqis hostage and murdering them. Which would mean that he is either al Qaeda or one of the related organizations under the umbrella of the "Islamic State of Iraq".

So, we have 6 al Qaeda leaders captured, and possibly dozens more killed. All in the last 48 hours.

Do you see a pattern here? The little bastard al Masri better run and hide. Al Qaeda, you are our bitches!

MNF-Iraq has the latest:

BAGHDAD – Coalition Forces conducted an air strike Thursday evening after receiving heavy enemy fire during a raid targeting al-Qaida in Iraq terrorists and foreign fighter facilitators.

While receiving enemy fire from several directions, ground forces called in for air support. Eight terrorists barricaded themselves inside one of the buildings and continued to fire at the ground forces. Coalition aircraft dropped precision bombs on the building, resulting in its destruction and the deaths of the eight terrorists.

No Coalition Forces or innocent Iraqis were injured during the air strike.

The operation was part of ongoing efforts to eliminate terrorists and disrupt their operations in the Arab Jabour area.


Carmela Bousada, 67, Gives Birth to Twins ...

... without Cathy Seipp's permission. LA Times reports:
Carmela Bousada, a 67-year-old retired Spanish department store clerk, gave birth to twin boys Dec. 29 in Barcelona. Over the weekend, the single mother admitted to European reporters that she had deceived [Dr. Vicken] Sahakian [of the Pacific Fertility Center] in order to become pregnant.

Cathy Seipp responds:
Yet did any honest reader come across that story this week about the 67-year-old Barcelona woman who just gave birth to twins - by lying about her age to a Los Angeles fertility doctor - and not relexively think: Freak show?

Actually my first, "reflexive" thought was: Wow, good for her. Oh, but wait, I forgot - Cathy Seipp can read minds. I am not being "honest".

Cathy explains what's really bothering her:
Leaving aside all the increased health risks to these older mothers and their babies, the cold, hard reason your life and health insurance premiums rise each year is that the longer you live, the more likely it is that the passage of time means you will, in the near future, sicken and die.

Is that a fact? Gosh, sure wish I'd thought of that. I'll bet that 67-year-old woman never thought of it either. Now how about this for a concept: As we grow older, we often become more acutely aware of our own mortality, and of the need to leave something of ourselves behind to carry on. I would have thought that the right-hand side of the blogosphere, which has been sounding warnings about the falling birthrate in Western countries (interspersed with stern admonitions about the "selfishness" of failing to "be fruitful and multiply") would get this; can't we leave the mom-bashing to the left-wing moonbats?

Now, I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of Dr. Sahakian, or of the clinic's director, Dr. Richard J. Paulson. The clinic's policy of not wanting to be party to a risky pregnancy is, from their standpoint, only prudent. But Bousada passed their health screening, knew the risks, and accepted them of her own free will. And even Paulson opposes a government-imposed age limit:
"As soon as you get into an area of zero tolerance, it's easy to find a case when regulation becomes wrong or harmful," Paulson said in an interview Monday. "To go and try to interfere with someone's reproductive rights is a very touchy area."

A more serious issue is the question of "who will look after the kids?" The LA Times article notes that Bousada is a single mother, and that the clinic's policy is not to treat either single women over 55 or married women when the combined age of the couple is 110. So by my math, Bousada could have avoided the whole mess by marrying a 42-year-old man before going to the clinic. As it is, though,
Bousada said she is looking for a younger man to marry and be the father of her sons.

- which seems sensible enough.

So, what is Cathy Seipp's issue with all of this, exactly?
Sure, older men can still marry younger women and father children. We all know about Tony Randall et al. But why spend tens of thousands of dollars to raise the odds that a child will grow up motherless?

So, it is not simply a parent (i.e. a surviving younger husband) that is essential, but, specifically, a mother. By this reasoning, then, no woman with a terminal or life-threatening disease ought to consider getting pregnant, for fear of bringing into the world a child who will be left motherless. (Presumably a stepmother through the husband's remarriage doesn't count.)

But wait! That's not the real problem either, apparently:
Those aging celebrites like Geena Davis and Angela Bassett you see giving birth in their late ’40s and beyond can afford expensive fertility treatments. If they die before the babies grow up, at least they have enough money to make sure their children will be well provided for.

So according to Seipp, the "motherless child" objection can be offset by a sufficient bank account.

No, the real problem for Cathy Seipp is that she just thinks it's gross. She makes that clear with her initial assessment of the situation - "freak show" - and with her column title: "A new low."

Having a baby at 67, "a new low"? Maybe, but not as low as this 90-year-old woman:
18:11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, and well stricken in age; it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.--

18:12 And Sarah laughed within herself, saying: 'After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?'

18:13 And the Lord said unto Abraham: 'Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying: Shall I of a surety bear a child, who am old?

18:14 Is any thing too hard for the Lord. At the set time I will return unto thee, when the season cometh round, and Sarah shall have a son.'