ANDREW SULLIVAN ASKS "A Million Mogadishus--The Far Left's Wish?":

This lazy form of moral equivalence is not rare among the radical left in this country. But it is based on a profound moral abdication: the refusal to see that a Stalinist dictatorship, that murders its own civilians, that sends its troops into battle with a gun pointed at their heads, that executes POWs, that stores and harbors chemical weapons, that defies twelve years of U.N. disarmament demands, that has twice declared war against its neighbors, and that provides a safe haven for terrorists of all stripes, is not the moral equivalent of the United States under president George W. Bush. There is, in fact, no comparison whatever. That is not jingoism or blind patriotism or propaganda. It is the simple undeniable truth. And once the left starts equating legitimate acts of war to defang and depose a deadly dictator with unprovoked terrorist attacks on civilians, it has lost its mind, not to speak of its soul.

THAT WAS FAST: The Washington Post reports that "Britain's Mirror Hires Fired Veteran Arnett".

FIRST THE TRIPLETS ALL LEAVE THE DALLAS COWBOYS, now this.

"KNOW THY ENEMY": Fun facts about the Iraqi Republican Guard.

Of course, pretty soon, many of them will be checking in here...

AFTER THE WAR: Pat Tillman plans to return the NFL after his stint in the Army is up in 2005.

GROUP CAPTAIN MANDRAKE PRAISED BY MSNBC, in an article that also mentions Sgt. Stryker and Salam Pax.

Congrats Steve!

JUST UPDATED THE LINKS PAGE to include the new URL for Virginia Postrel's new look Weblog. Click on over and check it out!

AMERICAN AIRLINES AVOIDS BANKRUPTCY, according to AP.

MSNBC "terminates" Peter Arnett "after the journalist told state-run Iraqi TV that the U.S.-led coalition’s initial war plan had failed and that reports from Baghdad about civilian casualties had helped antiwar protesters undermine the Bush administration’s strategy."

I have to give MSNBC credit--Ted Turner didn't fire Arnett for his pro-Iraqi bias in the first Gulf War.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, the US military has kicked out Geraldo Rivera. "According to US news reports, Rivera was told to leave Iraq after an on-air appearance during which he drew a map in the sand revealing information about US troop locations", says this AFP article.

ANOTHER UPDATE: On the other hand, according to Drudge, Rivera "said live on FOX this morning that he had not been expelled, and rival media outlets were spreading rumors". Fog of media war?

VERY SILLY UPDATE: Now it all makes sense!

MORE SERIOUS UPDATE: National Geographic axed Arnett as well. And Arnett really groveled on the Today Show this morning, according to Rod Dreher.

Meanwhile, Andrew Sullivan calls Arnett "a stooge". Fortunately, he's now an unemployed one. And Steven Den Beste has some thoughts on Arnett as well.

ALWAYS FIGHTING THE LAST WAR: In the first Gulf War, Saddam thought Americans were weak because of Vietnam. This time around, he thinks they're weak because of Mogadishu:

If the U.S. cannot be made to halt the war through shame, Saddam hopes to try pain. U.S. military-intelligence officials believe the Iraqi command circulated copies of the movie Black Hawk Down before the war, as a manual for defeating the Americans. The film tells the story of the 18 U.S. Army Rangers who were killed by Somalis while attempting to rescue comrades from two helicopters downed in Mogadishu in 1993. The casualties prompted the U.S. to wind up its military operation in Somalia. The Iraqis may hope that similar scenes of Americans being bloodied in the streets of Baghdad would bring the same result.

Too bad Saddam didn't learn from the French, who built the Maginot Line thinking that World War II would be fought using the same techniques as World War I.

(By the way, speaking of Black Hawk Down, my post about its upcoming deluxe edition DVD on Blogcritics has sparked an interesting mini-debate about America and the UN. Click on over to read it--or participate in it.)

"THE GREATER THE GLORY": Provocative email sent to Andrew Sullivan by one of his readers about how the media will make our victory in Iraq even more impressive, simply because of their habitual underestimation of President Bush:

Once again the media -which is almost genetically anti-Bush- has whipped itself into hysteria fueled by the hope that he will fail. I believe their hatred of him is the motivator and they are indulging in a kind of optimism that this will be his Waterloo. The most obvious comparison is of course Modo and Afghanistan.

But my point is that the more they screech that we are losing, the GREATER the glory of victory.

They are walking into a political trap of their own making. I believe they are about to make utter fools of themselves one more time. On some level, a substantial portion of the public senses this, "gets it" and in the end, this will only enhance Bush. They will be doing him a political favor.

Exactly. But do read the whole thing.

ITS SOUL WAS SOLD A LONG TIME AGO: Jonah Goldberg look sat the ludicrous double standard of the United Nations, in his syndicated column.

THE STEPFORD WIVES THE MURDOCH BLONDES: "Easy Distinction" provides a spotting guide for the blondes that inhabit Fox News. (Including the men!)

"ITS SOUL IS FOR SALE": Steven Den Beste looks at Amnesty International, and does not like what he sees.

And he's right.

UPDATE: Nat Hentoff looks at some of Iraq's terriftying human rights violations, and concludes:

I participated in many demonstrations against the Vietnam War, including some civil disobedience—though I was careful not to catch the eyes of the cops, sometimes a way of not getting arrested. But I could not participate in the demonstrations against the war on Iraq.

Hentoff gets it. Too bad Amnesty doesn't.

"ANY SUFFICIENTLY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY": Sorry for the lack of posting these past few days. Writing for "dead tree" publications just went into overdrive, with numerous articles simultaneously requiring telephone interviews for background material. And our home remodeling efforts, which I've discussed before in this blog, are finally starting to come to fruition. Our contractors have a week or two to go, but there's a light at the end of the tunnel. (And as my wife said, "fortunately, we're close enough to the light that we're sure it's not an oncoming train!")

The contractors have roughed out the telephone and computer network cabling in our home. My wife is eager to get back into her office, so I spent a few hours late yesterday afternoon and evening cutting an opening for a wall plate, and installing a single gang plate that provides her with the following jacks, running off of three Cat-5 cables that I terminated and installed the jacks for:

Line #1 and line #2 of the telephone on one jack
Line #3 of the telephone on another
Fax on another
dial-up modem on another

And because we use a software-based proxy server for the cable modem, there are two LAN jacks in the outlet.

I've written several articles about installing wired and wireless home networks (I've put both in my home), but when I get a hard-wired LAN outlet installed and working, it never ceases to amaze me. Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law is "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." I think my Third Law is "Any sufficiently advanced technology that I can install and make work is indistinguishable from magic"!

I felt so jazzed about getting this outlet in and working that I picked up a copy of Wired on the way back to the hotel where we've been spending nights (getting the plumbing turned on again--major bathroom renovations are also reaching fruition--is part of the light at the end of the tunnel). I don't tend to read Wired every month these days; I only buy it if something leaps off the cover at me. (And their April issue is their tenth anniversary, which, coupled with my network wiring was enough to get me to pick it up.) It's funny, I write three or four technology-oriented articles a month, but I tend to forget the Buck Rogers-like aspect of my life (not the least of which is this blog. People are actually reading my writing on their own computer monitors in their homes and offices. If you had told me that would be happening when I was first experimenting computers back at St. Mary's when I was 12 or 13 years old, that would have been sheer Star Trek-like fantasy!

Sorry to go all Lileksian on y'all--but I did want to explain why there's been less posting recently, despite the war to liberate Iraq. Fortunately, the rest of the Blogosphere has been doing more than share this week. And I'll try to post more this coming week. (Except when I'm wiring up more LAN outlets.)

FIELDSBORO NEW JERSEY "BANS YELLOW RIBBONS": Nice to see this immense show of support for our brave troops from my home state.

No word yet on what Amiri Baraka thinks of the city's gesture.

CLASS ACT: Tiger Woods on Iraq.

PAT MOYNIHAN DEAD AT AGE 76: For our previous coverage of the Senator from New York, click here.

HAMMER TIME: My interview last week with Jan Hammer, the man who composed the Miami Vice soundtrack (other than the hit singles used to create the "MTV cops" feeling of the show) is online at Blogcritics.

Sorry the lack of posting for the past couple of days--I've been on the phone for big chunks of both days, gathering material for upcoming (and mostly dead tree) articles. Watch for more posts soon! (in the meantime, check out all of the usual suspects on the links page for additional--and excellent--real time war coverage.)

RADICAL CHIC, VATICAN STYLE! "Pope Endorses Antiwar Movement", says The Washington Post.

Meanwhile, the Vatican is making de facto endorsements of Palestinian suicide bombers, while still clinging to those old school, pre-postmodern ideas that...suicide is a sin.

Nice to see them able to multitask so well.

"PEACE" ACTIVIST THREATENS REPORTER: Ho-hum, nothing new, right? Except this time around, it's actor Tim Robbins, the husband of Susan Sarandon. Robbins threatened to "find" and "hurt" reporter Lloyd Grove of the Washington Post, for interviewing Sarandon's mother and "outing" her as a Republican.

Shock and Awe indeed: Hollywood actors threatening Post reporters, when they once produced films lionizing them? Now that's far removed!

(On the other hand, I wonder if Robbins is a bit more sympathetic to Newt Gingrich these days? Probably not.)

"GOTCHA! How Reuters transformed an accidental death into homicide": Remember the infamous photo that made the rounds after 9/11 that showed a clueless 20-something standing on top of the World Trade Center posing for a photo on the morning of 9/11 as an Al-Qaida controlled airliner loomed perilously close?

According to David Bedein, Reuters fell for the same type of mocked-up-in-Photoshop shot to "illustrate" anti-Israeli protestor Rachel Corrie just seconds before being hit by an Israeli bulldozer.

Reuters does seem to have a recurring problem with their photos, and their captions lately, don't they?

(Via Andrew Sullivan)

Was last night's Oscar ceremony Hollywood's equivalent of a Free Mumia protest? Let's see. You have a group of people almost entirely against a war that 75 percent of America supports. You have a Best Documentary award going to someone who doesn't support the Constitution's Second Amendment. Plus you have two awards go to a biopic of an unrepentant Stalinst. And worst of all, you have the Best Director award going to a convicted rapist.

Have there been any outcries from feminists over Roman Polanski receiving the Best Director award? (By the way, don't get me wrong--I love Chinatown, arguably the best film to come out of Hollywood in the 1970s. But that was directed before Polanski's conviction for the statutory rape of a 13-year old girl.)

Friviledge indeed: no wonder this ceremony had the worst ratings of any Academy Awards presentation. Talk about being far, far removed from the values of the vast majority of your audience.

RANDOM THOUGHTS, by Thomas Sowell:

Never before in history has the word "unilateral" been thrown around so gratuitously when the issue was war. Only in recent years has there been any question that a sovereign nation takes the solemn step of going to war unilaterally. What a farce to have Cameroon or Portugal deciding whether it is OK for the United States to go to war.

* * * Why do actors -- people whose main talent is faking emotions -- think that their opinions should be directing the course of political events in the real world? Yet it is a mistake that they have been making as far back as John Wilkes Booth. * * * Most people do not realize that Winston Churchill was a pariah in the 1930s, for telling people what they didn't want to hear -- namely that Britain needed to build up its military forces to deal with the threat that Hitler and the Nazis represented. What we are seeing today in the attempts to ridicule or demonize President Bush is nothing new. * * * We can only hope that whoever had the bright idea of dealing with Iraq through the United Nations will be leaving the administration "to pursue other interests," as they say.

On that last one, I'd beg to differ. When we look back on the liberation of Iraq, I doubt we'll focus all that much on the length of the buildup before the War. If Bush has discredited the UN (And as Dennis Miller recently noted, "If you have faith in the United Nations to do the right thing, keep this in mind, they have Libya heading the Committee on Human Rights and Iraq heading the Global Disarmament Committee. Do your own math here."), and banished it to history, then he's done his job.

FROM THE HOME OFFICE IN PITTSBURGH, PA: Dennis Miller has an excellent top ten list for those against the war.

Miller's really come on strong as a rare sane voice in Hollywood. I just hope it doesn't cost him his career.

SEMPER FI: Happy 59th birthday to everyone's favorite drill sergeant, R. Lee Ermey.

DO'S AND DON'TS: National Review Online's Amir Taheri has a checklist for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

MEMOREX: Saddam never mentioned the bombing of his palace or surviving it, Amatzia Baram just noted.

SADDAM'S SPEECH: The bad news: there's enough details in it that he's probably still alive. The good news: as speeches by totalitarian, megalomaniac dictators go, Triumph of the Will, it ain't. "Blah blah blah, Iraq will be victorious...blah blah blah, kill the enemy and enter paradise...blah blah blah, Jihad...blah blah blah...Allah." Those last bits are interesting--calls to Muslims to fight for him.

Did anybody catch the graphic of the Iraqi eagle logo on blue cardboard before and after the speech? PBS in 1968 had better graphics.

(And yes, this time I think it's him, and not a double.)

Whoops--guess I spoke to soon. Walid Phares, MSNBC's Arab expert just said that Saddam didn't mention bombing of Baghdad, captured prisoners, recent battles, meeting of Arab League tomorrow. And this classic--"The bulk of the speech was beautiful Arab poetry." Geez.

MSNBC's man in the field says, "If I had to guess, I would say tape," adding, "Not a clean open" to the speech.

Amatzia Baram, another MSNBC Arab expert says, "This speech is canned." "he knew ahead of time" enough to make canned speech. No mention of prisoners of war. No mention of airplanes down by friendly fire. No mention of battles raging. "Taped maybe even a week before the war started."

Both Phares and Baram agree that no mention of Basra is telling.

By the way, if that was a live speech, Saddam been able to resume his daily paradrop of Grecian Formula--his hair was much blacker than the Saddam we saw on Wednesday night.

Sounds like Memorex to me.

Another man in the field, this time from Qatar: Saddam referenced the commander of the 11th brigade--that brigade has already surrendered.

The US and British "troops will find strong Iraqi troops fighting back", another MSNBC reporter quotes Saddam as saying. Well, they're already fighting back.

FRIVILEDGE: James Lileks, discussing quagmire and the BBC, and the quagmire that is the BBC, is in rare form.

LOVELY PARADOX FOR THE UN noted by Andrew Sullivan, who writes:

In one of the loveliest paradoxes of this battle, the U.N. therefore laid the groundwork for its subsequent self-destruction twelve years later. Without the U.N.'s restrictions on American force twelve years ago, Saddam would not be around today. Any non-U.N., American-led coalition with any sense of military opportunity, would have finished off the old Stalinist more than a decade ago. 1991 was therefore, in one sense, the U.N.'s post-Cold War high-point. Too bad it guaranteed its future nadir.

It didn't have to guarantee that nadir--but the accumulated weight of the UN's actions in the post Soviet 1990s certainly did.

IRAQI FORCES ARMED WITH CHEMICAL WEAPONS, according to this Reuters report, remarkably free of shock quotation marks.

GENIE OUT OF THE BOTTLE DEPARTMENT: Drudge has stills of the footage of captured US POWs originally shown on Al-Jazeera, via Iraqi TV.

(Click here for another example of "the genie out of the bottle".)

FOG OF WAR: Here's more information on the "downed Coalition pilot" being sought in Baghdad--which may or may not be real.

If the footage shown on CNN (look below) is real, didn't the Iraqis just document themselves committing a war crime? Or is it acceptable to shoot at pilots parachuting in from a downed aircraft?

"A FATHER'S WORDS ON GOING TO WAR", is the title of ths MSNBC interview with the original President Bush. I love this exchange, which begins with Bush #41 saying:

What burns me up now are these statements that are critical of the president and of Colin Powell—”failed diplomacy.” The problem they face is so different and so much bigger that I think any comparison is just night and day. It seems to be au courant, if you’ll excuse my knowledge of French, having studied it for 11 years, but I don’t agree with it. I think when history is written people are going to find some very interesting things about the French position. And I’m annoyed at the German position. I don’t talk about it publicly, but I know a lot of German people not in the coalition government with Schroder who are very, very upset about the position of their government.

MSNBC: What do you think is going on with France?

GHWB: [Pause] They’re French.

When asked "What do you say to critics who say the president doesn’t care what the rest of the world thinks?", the elder Bush replied, "in the final analysis, you’ve got to do what’s right, and that’s why I have great respect, not just love and affection, but great respect, for the president because he can make those tough decisions, and for Colin Powell, too, I might add. I hate criticism of Colin Powell from any quarter."

FIVE REASONS WHY MISTREATING US POWS IS A VERY BAD IDEA.

SUNDAY WITH BLOGGER: For some reason, Blogger's archive of Sunday posts usually doesn't start working until after 12 noon. I'll have to change the times of all of the posts that don't have archieved posts, and I'll do so later today.

(Originally posted at 10:24 AM)

UPDATE (1:54 PM): I think I have everything moved--everything I posted this morning should have working links--as well as correct original post times.

BBC: "Given the amount of resistance you've been receiving, has this in fact been more difficult than you expected?"

Lt. Gen. John Abizaid: "No."

Nice to see the Rumsfeld doctrine for handling reporters is filtering down through the ranks.

(Originally posted at 11:43:16 AM)

IRAN SAYS THE MISSLE THAT LANDED INSIDE THE IRANIAN BORDER WAS IRAQI, NOT US, according to CNN.com.

(Originally posted at 11:41 AM)

US GENERAL JUST GAVE AL-JAZEERA REPORTER A DRESSING DOWN for his media showing images of our captured troops. "This is absolutely unacceptable", Lt. Gen. John Abizaid said, during US press conference shown on CNN (and I assume Fox).

Good for him.

UPDATE (12:02 PM): CNN has made the decision not to air the footage (again?), with the exception of one very blurry still with no soldiers' faces shown.

(Originally posted at 11:36:27 AM)

IRAQI ARMED FORCE FALLS TO US ADVANCE: "Late Saturday, the brigade encountered dozens of Iraqi vehicles armed with machine guns and fought with them until dawn Sunday, destroying 15 vehicles, killing at least 100 Iraqi soldiers and capturing 20. The Iraqis were believed to be members of the ruling Baath party militia, loyal to one of Saddam Hussein's sons.

(Originally posted at 10:55:24 AM)

HAVE WE CAPTURED AN IRAQI CHEMICAL PLANT? Needless to say, great news (for all sorts of reasons) if it's true.

(Originally posted at 10:42:05 AM)

IRAQI FOOTAGE SHOWS CAPTURED AMERICAN SOLDIERS. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says television footage of those POWs violates the Geneva Convention.

Steven Den Beste comments that "Last week the US government announced that Iraq had acquired uniforms like the ones our men were wearing":

I wonder if maybe we just discovered what those uniforms were really intended for? The Iraqis just showed interviews on TV with five people they claimed were captured US servicepeople, and showed a morgue full of dead bodies, all of whom were wearing American uniforms. Hmmm...

I hope so. Otherwise it means something really bad just happened.

Den Beste also links a sign carried by the anti-war protestors last week to the "fragging" incident that occurred yesterday.

(Originally posted at 10:38:13 AM)

DID THE RUSSIANS SELL IRAQ NIGHT VISION GOGGLES?

(Originally posted 10:21:26 AM)

EMBEDDED JOURNALISTS: Good post from the Cut on the Bias blog. See also the post below it about a soldier from Maine killed.

(Originally posted 10:12:55 AM)

RAF AIRCRAFT "HIT BY US MISSILE".

UPDATE (10:15 AM): Not surprisingly, Glenn has links to more information.

(Originally posted 12:02:49 AM)

ARE THE IRAQIS FAKING NEWS FOOTAGE? Wouldn't surprise me in the least. Strange video of Iraqis shooting into a river (The Tigris?) at "a downed US pilot" just shown on CNN with a surprising amount of incredulity from Wolf Blitzer, with numerous "reporters" clicking away with still camera. Hopefully CNN has learned their lesson from the Peter Arnett "milk factory" debacle during the first Gulf War.

The US is claiming that no US planes went down in Iraq. And I tend to believe them, given our overwhelming (near total) air superiority.

UPDATE (6:16 PM): John Derbyshire has an important tip for the Iraqis shooting into the water: "Memo to those idiots shooting into the Tigris, hoping to spot two downed American airmen: Airmen who survive the downing of a military fighter jet do so with the aid of p-a-r-a-c-h-u-t-e-s. Which f-l-o-a-t."

THE DISTANCING OF HOLLYWOOD FROM ITS AUDIENCE CONTINUES: I guess if you support the war, they don't want your money, similar to Apple's recent highly politicized hiring and uber-PC ad campaigns.

The studio moguls who ran Hollywood in its golden era were very, very wise to carefully manage their stars' images. Yet paradoxically, I'll bet the majority of celebrities back then were far more naturally careful to avoid controversy.

And its nice to see such a diversity of opinion on display isn't it?

Incidentally, what's with all the stars who've said they'll sit out the Oscars tomorrow? Is it simply because they fear for their safety (of course, I doubt Cary Grant, John Wayne, or Bette Davis ever missed an early 1940s Oscar awards for fear of a Japanese attack on the theater), or is it the weird belief that "if enough of us don't show, America will wonder why and turn against the war?"

Hey Martha, I don't see Meryl Streep and Will Smith! That's it, this war stinks. I'm joining the protestors!

Update: The Washington Post article linked to above is no longer on the WaPo's site, but was reprinted here.

I WONDER HOW THIS WILL BE COVERED BY CNN.

UPDATE (6:40 PM): Well that didn't take long to find out the initial take. The reporter embedded with the troops in Kuwait interviewed by Larry King has been asked "not to release certain details about the soldier" by the US military. Wonder what happens when those details are released.

UPDATE (9:10 PM): I can understand how both the US military, and the press, for very, very different reasons, want to keep a lid on this story. But the genie is out of the bottle, boys. Everybody who reads blogs knows what that the accused soldier is both black and a Muslim--and it's starting to filter into Internet discussion forums.

Not surprisingly, Charles Johnson has a post on this, and the comments section is quite long and interesting, also not surprisingly.

Back in the early 1990s, I remember watching a show on PBS with a reporter from the New York Times commenting on how the first Gulf War made CNN. "But if all you did was get your news from TV, you didn't get anywhere near the full story, he said. This time around, if you're not reading a variety of blogs and other Internet news sources, you're really not getting the full picture (especially if all you do is watch CNN and read the Times!).

UPDATE (10:40 PM): This AP article reports that one soldier is now listed as dead. And no details about the accused solider other than that he's "an engineer".

UPDATE (11:53 PM): Wow, very interesting newsreading, with lots of long pauses by Anderson Cooper(?) on CNN's Headline News: After giving details about the grenade tossing incident, he said "He is...I'm hesistating to report something, because I'm not sure I can at this point" and a moment later, after a few more details, added "a young american soldier who is described as having recently converted to Islam is in custody".

TERRORIST ATTACK INJURES 10 US TROOPS IN KUWAIT: "From our reports it appears that a terrorist penetrated Camp Pennsylvania, one or more terrorists threw two hand grenades into a tent," said George Heath, spokesman at Fort Campbell, home base of the 101st", who added that 10 people were wounded, six seriously.

IS IRAQ REPOSITIONING ITS MOBILE LAUNCHERS to lob missiles at troops moving north? That's the gist of this New York Times article.

ONE OF THESE THINGS IS NOT LIKE THE OTHER! One of these things does not belong. Spot which one, in this latest series of AP headlines on my My.Yahoo page:

500 Cruise Missiles Hit Iraq: Pentagon

Iraqi TV Declares Saddam in Control

Allies Seize Airport, Bridge in Basra

Of course, Iraqi TV may simply be using their own copy of the the software that runs the Marc Herold polypseudomathicator to analyze their situation.

"DO WE KNOW HEROES WHEN WE SEE THEM?": Good article by Peter H. Gibbon on the growing gap between reality and rhetoric in our schools:

War is a terrible thing. Students should know its dark side. But they should also be asked to consider that America goes to war reluctantly, only after agonized debate or after years of provocation by reckless tyrants. We do not have to love war to understand that some wars may be necessary or to appreciate the soldier’s values: self-sacrifice, honor, loyalty, and endurance.

Read the whole thing.

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "You're late. What took you so long? God help you become victorious...I want to say hello to Bush, to shake his hand!"

Meanwhile, this story is a must read.

CHECK OUT THIS ASTONISHING EXCHANGE between the BBC and General Tommy Franks, as spotted by a reader of Andrew Sullivan.

Sullivan continues his thorough job of cataloging the excesses of the BBC and the New York Times.

In another example of the growing gap between reality and rhetoric, not surprisingly, the Village Voice has been caught using the D-word.

TODAY'S PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: While no method is 100 percent safe, if you're going to get in bed with France, make sure you wear protection!

Since, as Rod Dreher recently noted, for the left, "every war is Vietnam", let's look at how Vietnam has led directly to our current state of affairs. Reading this recent post by The Volokh Conspiracy, and watching the protestors last night, I figured I'd discuss a geopolitical theory that I'm surprised I didn't post yet (and because this a blog, this is going to be grossly simplified--I'm just trying to connect the dots, not paint a detailed landscape): how Vietnam is related to our current war on terrorism.

On TV last night, I saw a guy in his late 40s or 50s (he looked trim, clean shaven, with a nicely cut shock of graying hair) protesting in San Francisco, when he was asked by an interviewer, "why are you here"? He replied, "Well, we made a difference during Vietnam, and I think we're making a difference now."

As for the latter, it's hard to say how--except, as Andrew Sullivan and Glenn Reynolds have recently noted, making your cause look distinctly bad to the rest of the country. As to the former, yes, you may have made a difference, but it wasn't the one that you think.

Its possible to tie 9/11 all the way back to Vietnam if you wanted to: the combination of Johnson and MacNamara's "carrot and stick" tactics because they were scared witless that the Soviets would enter the war, causing us, especially during the critical early phases of the war to hold back our strength, not bomb critical military targets, etc.

This, slow, grinding style of warfare, coupled with the 1960s protestors, caused many to be demoralized by the war, causing that era's Democratic Congress to cut the budget for fighting the war, causing our eventual pullout. (Read Stephen Hayward's excellent document of that era, The Age of Reagan: Volume One, to put that period in perspective.)

Watergate was tied directly to Vietnam, via Nixon and his "Plumbers'" reaction to Daniel Ellsberg leaking the Pentagon Papers, and Watergate would of course cause Nixon to resign, but not before his appeasement of the dictatorial Soviet Union and China. America's appearance of weakness, both post-Vietnam, and (after Gerald Ford had a quick cup of coffee at the White House) under the uber-dovish Jimmy Carter, led directly to one of America's lowest periods: letting the Shah of Iran fall, the takeover of Iran by a radical Islamic regime, and the Iranian hostage crisis.Perhaps the lowest point was Carter's response to it: lots of nail biting, the bungled Desert One rescue mission, and even more nail biting.

While Reagan's build up of our defense, and our liberation of Kuwait helped our rep in the Middle East a little (and yes, I know I'm really simplifying here for the sake of space), leaving Saddam in power, those dreadful images of American soldiers dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, and Clinton's lack of military response to the first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center kept us looking largely as a paper tiger, especially when it came to responding to Islamic terrorism.

And we all know the rest.

As Alvin Toffler wrote in War and Anti-War, the American military's tactics were radically changed after the debacle of Vietnam. How different things might be today had we fought that war to win--and didn't abandon the country afterwards.

LIFE IMITATES THE ONION: "Don't Hurt Zoo Animals in Iraq War, Pleads UK MP".

Malcolm Muggeridge, call your office.

(Via The Brothers Judd.)

FUNNY NUMBERS: Orrin Judd looks takes a look at wartime polling data.

PROPPING UP THE HOME FRONT: Stephen Green shows support for the war in a way that only he can do.

ON THE OTHER HAND, GIVE LIZ CREDIT FOR SOMETHING: She at least identified a link between Saddam and terrorism on American soil, something that much of the left has been unable to do.

FOUND IN A DAILY VARIETY FROM JANUARY 1942: I was going through some of my father's old World War II-era memorabilia, and was flabbergasted by this article, which began, "Up and coming childhood starlet Elizabeth Taylor shocks Hollywood by her pro-Hitler remarks:

The beautiful young brunette from National Velvet said, "What the [bleep] are the Americans doing by saying to Hitler, 'Pack up your bags, hop a train, and get out of town!' What if someone said that to Roosevelt?

"You don't think Nazis are going to retaliate? You don't think they're going to bomb the s--- out of us? It's going to be terrifying."

You probably guessed it--that's not from a sixty year old Variety, it's from the New York Daily News today, with Saddam and Bush changed to that era's mustachioed totalitarian butcher and American president.

Whatever Hollywood stars or starlets had anti-war views after Pearl Harbor, they kept them to themselves, for fear or damaging both their careers, and the war effort.

Amazing how times change, huh?

FUN WITH PHOTOSHOP: The The Command Post Blog catches CBS doctoring a photo of B-52s over Baghdad.

Be sure to read the comments.

THREE BLIND DEAD MICE: ABC reports, "Three Key Iraqi Leaders Believed Killed", including "Chemical Ali", Saddam's cousin.

8000 (YES EIGHT THOUSAND IRAQI SOLDIERS SURRENDER: AP reports, "Entire Division of Iraqi Army Surrenders".

Fantastic.

IS SADDAM DEAD? Steven Den Beste puts the week's events, along with Saddam's command structure in crisp perspective in this excellent post.

COULD SADDAM FIND EXILE IN AFRICA? Stephen Green says its possible.

GOOD QUESTION: Andrew Sullivan looks at one group of protestors who've defecated(!!) on a San Francisco sidewalk and writes, "If these Saddam-enablers are ticking off Bay Area liberals, can you imagine what the rest of the country thinks?"

NOT ONE IRAQI PLANE OR SAM LAUNCHED, according to Fox military expert. Scuds launched into Kuwait yesterday were the only Iraqi missiles launched.

Now that's my definition of US air superiority.

UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan writes, "No use yet of any biological or chemical weapons; and only relatively "minuscule" sabotaging of the oil wells. Early days yet - but these tactics were expected early on as well."

LOVE IS THE DRUG: Eric Olsen writes that British pop star Bryan Ferry of the legendary group Roxy Music, is getting divorced from his wife, who's replaced another woman who left him for another man: Jerry Hall, who dumped Ferry for Mick Jagger, in 1979.

Olsen has lots of details on Ferry and Roxy Music, who've made some great--if criminally under appreciated in the US--albums in the 1970s and '80s.

PERFECT: This is a riot.

In other important strategic news, I'm pretty sure that John Gibson and Kent Brockman share the same barber.

And Tom Daschle just can't seem to get anything right.

(Daschle and Helen Thomas links via Andrew Sullivan, who has lots of other good--and serious material up today.)

D'OH! Brit Hume: "General, when did the B-52 first fly?", General, "about 1948, 1949, Brit."

Hume: "But it's jet powered now, right?"

Oy.

LOTS OF SURRENDERS: The Times reports, "The commander of Iraq's 51st division and his top deputy surrendered to United States Marine forces today, according to American military officials", in an article whose headline says, "Military Sees Indications That Other Division May Give Up".

Meanwhile, "Hundreds of [other] Iraqis eagerly surrender".

And on Tuesday, the French bought themselves a rare clue:

Liberation reported that Dominique Dord, a deputy from the majority UMP party, said during Tuesday's assembly debate, "We would look really stupid if Iraqis applaud the arrival of Americans."

Exactly.

ROCKET HITS OIL REFINERY DEPOT IN SW IRAN, according to this Reuters article.

Wow--I didn't realize that Barbra Streisand programmed guidance systems!

UPDATE: Stephen Green has some plausible--and even more worrisome--explanations.

MORE VIETNAM: A female reporter just asked Ari Fleischer about "will the massive bombing" require massive additional humanitarian efforts. Fleischer told her that the destruction of some of Saddam's palaces doesn't necessarily equate to massive civilian hardship.

No wonder the media has such sympathy for the "peace" protestors--they seem stuck in 1969 along with them.

And why on earth are these reporters fixated on how much TV coverage President Bush watches??

Fleischer just reminded one reporter that freedom is a basic human desire. I'd love to see him throw some of these questions back to the reporters, or even a simple, "Don't you agree, Helen?" just to see their responses.

BAGHDAD BY MONDAY, says H.D. Miller , who also owned the story on Uday's "hemorrhage", long before the rest of the media picked up on it.

WELL THAT DIDN'T TAKE LONG: In the middle of recieving emails from other bloggers, I just opened my first X-rated spam with the headline of "Shock and Awe". Bet it won't be the last!

GEEZ--Some reporter just mentioned Haiphong Harbor in a question to Rumsfeld. What an idiot.

UPDATE: The other reporters around also sound like they're stuck in 1972, covering the Linebacker II mass B-52 bombing of Hanoi.

Rumsfeld is handling them deftly. It must be seem strange to be a 40-something reporter listening to a 69-year-old man who's more modern than you are.

MORE TO COME: Myers said, "Several hundred military targets will be hit in the coming hours".

GOOD FOR RUMSFELD: He's slagging the reporters who compared the bombing of Baghdad to WWII bombing campaigns.

In other words, this isn't Dresden, Brian.

RUMSFELD BRIEFING FROM THE PENTAGON: First words: sympathy for US soldiers killed yesterday from Donald Rumsfeld. When and if a transcript is available, we'll post it here. Rumsfeld is joined by Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Rumsfeld's comments were very similar in their phrasing to President Bush's recent pre-war speeches. He mentioned that our efforts will allow the people of Iraq "to chose their own leader", but didn't actually say the word "democracy", which is disappointing, of course.

Gen. Myers did tell the Iraqi soldiers to stop fighting "so that you can enjoy a free Iraq". Good deal.

DRUDGE: "A senior U.S. official said the escalation of the aerial campaign might not be as intense as originally planned because U.S. surrender talks with senior Iraqi officials were continuing..."

BOMBING CONTINUES IN OTHER IRAQI CITIES: Meanwhile, there appears to be a lull in the bombing in downtown Baghdad.

"I HOPE KIM JONG IL IS WATCHING THIS RIGHT NOW": Great line by a retired general who's one of Fox's military experts.

NBC HAS DRAMATIC FOOTAGE OF SADDAM'S MAIN COMPOUND with a huge black cloud of smoke and intense red flames rising from it.

SKY NEWS SAYS ABOUT 30 BOMBS HAVE FALLEN: (Sky is Fox's sister network.) And Shepard Smith says Saddam's main palace is in ruins, as about 12 bombs fell on it.

MUSHROOM CLOUD SHAPE RISING: Some kind of bunker buster bomb?

IF YOU'RE NEAR A TV, TURN IT ON NOW--astonishing images from Baghdad, and I don't know how long they'll last, until the power gets cut, satellite uplinks get blown, or Saddam cuts communications.

BIG EXPLOSIONS IN BAGHDAD ON FOX: Looks like Shock and Awe to me.

UPDATE (10:19 AM): AP: "U.S. Launches Massive Air Strikes on Iraq".

JUST CURIOUS: I wonder if all of the lights on in Baghdad is a sign that Saddam and his lieutenants have lost control.

UPDATE (10:22 AM): Fox's general-in-residence says that we haven't targeted Baghdad's electrical generator, to signal to Iraqi people that are battle with Saddam, not with them, even though it increases risks to our pilots.

REUTERS: LARGE EXPLOSIONS HEARD WEST OF BAGHDAD, according to Fox News Ticker.

NBC SAYS CRUISE MISSILES LAUNCHED TOWARDS BAGHDAD.

WILL THE TURKS ATTACK THE KURDS? Are they beginning to do so right now? Interesting (and very speculative) post by Rich Lowry, transcribing a phone call from David Pryce-Jones.

PENTAGON DECLARES "SHOCK AND AWE" OFFICIALLY UNDER WAY, according to Fox. So far everything looks calm in Baghdad, but the shock and awe could hit the fan at any moment...

UPDATE (9:47 AM) Lots of anti-aircraft fire coming from Baghdad. And apparently a few bombs have already been dropped.

SATELLITE SCOOP: Virginia Postrel notes that a blogger "picked up Iraq's torching of southern oil wells three hours before CNN."

The "is it or isn't Saddam" meme was also all over the Blogosphere hours before the rest of the media picked up on it, thanks to NRO's Corner, Stephen Green, and our little corner of cyberspace.

Obviously, this early information is going to be raw, and frankly, often wrong--but no more wrong than some of the gaffes that the media have made. But just as CNN came of age during the first Gulf War, then this will be the war that makes Blogs.

As to some of the reasons why, if you haven't read it already, be sure to check out my essay from early 2002 in SpinTech.

"IF I'VE LOST AARON BROWN, I'VE LOST THE IRAQI PEOPLE!" That seems to be what Saddam is thinking, as four CNN reporters were expelled from Baghdad today.

For a look at what it was like for reporters under Saddam, click here.

JUST CURIOUS DEPARTMENT: How would the left react if a couple of B-52s or B-2s made a detour to drop a few ordinances into North Korea's nuclear facilities? Or if a cruise missile or two went a bit off course, and ended up there.

Would they say, "finally Bush, we kept saying you had to do something about North Korea", or would they turn on a dime and condemn the man?

As I said, just curious.

Hans Blix may have actually found an actual by-God violation of Iraq's agreement with the UN yesterday!

Here's a flashback to April Fool's day of last year, when in the midst of all sorts of silliness and cutting up in the Blogosphere, I posted:

MUGGERIDGE'S LAW: When Malcolm Muggeridge was the editor of the British satirical magazine Punch in the early 1960s, Khrushchev had announced he was going to tour England alongside its prime minister. Muggeridge wrote up a list of the silliest tour stops he could think of, and then put the article to bed, ready for publication. When the actual tour list was drawn up. he had to massively rewrite the article. At least half the tour stops in his satirical piece were actually on Khrushchev and the British PM's agenda!

Which is why Muggeridge's Law is: there is no way that a writer of fiction can compete with real life for its pure absurdity.

Especially when it comes to the UN--and Hans Blix.

THIS PRO-WAR RIOT in California's Central Valley is just as idiotic as the "peace" protests yesterday in San Francisco, Berkeley and LA. As Joanne Jacobs writes, "What's next: Firebombing a French's mustard plant?"

MEANWHILE, OVER IN IRAN: Glenn Reynolds has some thoughts on why students at Tehran University seem rather pleased that the "Great Satan" is setting up shop next door.

AXIS OF EVIL, SOUTHEAST ASIA BRANCH: A reader of The Corner on National Review Online has some thoughts on what Kim Jong Il is thinking as he watches CNN this week. Scroll up to the next post for Jonah Goldberg's reaction.

DECAPITATION: James S. Robbins writes:

Beyond logic and utility, targeting dictators is a moral approach to war. If it must be fought, this is a very humane way to do it. No innocent Iraqis should be killed by Coalition arms in pursuit of their liberation. Some probably will be, but striking at the leadership decreases the probability that innocents will die. In fact, it limits both civilian and military casualties, on both sides. And if successful, it ends war quickly, which also spares lives and decreases destruction overall. It is much more humanitarian than resorting to mass slaughter on the battlefield, or destroying the infrastructure of cities and creating tens of thousands of refugees.

It is worth noting that this technique is only effective against dictatorships, in which a single person or small group comprise the center of gravity, the focus and source of power. It would not be effective against a liberal democracy like the United States, because in our system, power is fundamentally divorced from personality. The system itself is the power, and clear rules of succession guarantee that the government will continue to function regardless of changes at the top. Dictators rarely focus on making lines of succession clear, because it only encourages the successor to speed up the process, and the enemies of the heir apparent to try to preempt the transfer of power. The infighting between Saddam's sons is a case in point — both suffered assassination attempts when considered the leading candidate to take over power. (Note that there is a report that the elder son Uday suffered a brain hemorrhage yesterday after an attack by a member of the Saddam Fedayeen militia he commands. He was also alleged to have been killed in the decapitation strike.)

The fact that the US media--and presumably the media of other nations--was chattering away all day that Saddam may be dead has got to be increasing the sense of confusion that the Iraqi troops are facing--meaning that "decapitation" has its benefits even if Saddam wasn't actually killed.

FOX TICKER: B-52s LAUNCHED FROM RAF BASE IN UK: "Group Captain Mandrake" actually mentioned the first of the "BUFFS" taking off earlier yesterday.

TOM DASCHLE IS ON FOX RIGHT NOW, playing it very close to the vest, and initially saying nothing in perfect political non-speak. When pressed about his remarks on Monday, he smiled, flashed those dead eyes of his, and stressed that "a unified message" is important to our troops, with only a hint of nervousness about being pressed.

"So at this point you stand behind the President and our troops?", the blonde Fox talking head asked him.

"Absolutely."

William Kristol just remarked "I think Senator Daschle is retreating faster than the Iraqis".

Jacques Chirac, if you ever need a running mate, here's your man.

FIRST COMBAT CASUALTY REPORTED: "U.S. Marine Killed in Iraq Combat". Kathryn Jean Lopez reports from NRO's Corner that "In his memory, the U.S. flag flies over the seaport town [of Umm Qasar] now."

SHOCK AND AWE: Just woke up for a few minutes in the middle of the night and saw my stats. "Wow!" doesn't even begin to cover the jump in traffic. A warm thank you to everybody's who's logged in here yesterday and late Wednesday night--and thank you to everyone who's linked to us, and especially to Glenn and Stephen, for mentioning us in your Weblogs, whose stats counters are probably reading tilt! right about now.

If you're new to our site, be sure to use the navigation buttons to the left, check out our faqs and about us pages, Google Search, and our links page, where lots of other great bloggers and journalists await as well.

And if you like what you see, why not hit the tip boxes and visit the stores on the left? Your contributions help to keep this site online--thanks.

FOLLOW THE MONEY, says Stephen Green.

DARING RIVER BOAT RAID DEEP INSIDE IRAQ: HBO's currently showing Hot Shots: Part Deux right now.

Best line? Phone rings, Charlie Sheen answers, and then hands Saddam the phone and says, "It's your wife, Hillary Rodham Hussein".

It doesn't really answer my earlier question though, as their Saddamalike is most definitely on tape.

Also in the "art imitates life imitates art department" (or something like that), last night TNT showed Dave, a film about a world leader being impersonated by an actor.

ARMY'S 3RD INFANTRY DIVISION IS IN DMV, quickly moving into Iraq. Fox's Greg Kelly is one of the reporters "embedded" with the troops. I think he was the reporter streaming the images mentioned in the post below.

FOX IS SHOWING LIVE IMAGES FROM US TANKS, via a reporter's videophone. Very cool looking stuff, as we march towards Baghdad.

UPDATE (7:17 PM) Shepard Smith is drooling over the technology behind these images, and the US military's authorization to allow these images to be shown.

16 DEAD: 12 American, four British soldiers killed in Marine helicopter crash in Kuwait.

UPDATE (4:09 AM 3/21/03): This number has been revised downward to 12 dead:

[The first known U.S. or British military casualties were reported early Friday, however, in the crash of a Marine CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter in the Kuwaiti border area just south of the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr, at the head of the Persian Gulf. Marine officers said the aircraft, carrying four U.S. crew members and eight British Royal Marines, went down after encounter- ing haze from burning oil as it sought to reinforce a British position on the Faw peninsula. All aboard were reported killed.]

Needless to say, that's 12 too many. But I'm always happy to revise casualty figures downward.

BLESSED BY THE GODS DEPARTMENT: Or goddess, in this case, as Postrel linked to my piece on Hollywood stasists versus Silicon Valley dynamists in Tech Central Station. Stasists and dynamists were of course the terms used by Postrel in her book, The Future and its Enemies, and as I've written before, Postrel's Weblog was one of the main inspirations for this blog.

Thanks!

Virginia Postrel is none too thrilled that Al Gore joined the Apple Board:

Maybe I'm nuts, but trying to grow your market share by excluding everyone who doesn't share hippie-dippy Bay Area politics strikes me as a dumb strategy. Of course, there is a way to make amends: diversify those black-and-white portraits.

She's taking nominees.

Hey, Rush Limbaugh has said for years that he loves Apple. Talk about thinking different: Apple's PR firm would have never, ever considered him to be featured in their campaigns. And as I wrote a few months ago, I doubt this guy's name ever came up in the boardroom, either.

UPDATE (3/21/03): For those people clicking through Virginia's link, here's what I emailed her yesterday:

Want a nominee for the Apple portraits? I hate to sound like Floyd R. Turbo, but Rush Limbaugh comes immediately to mind. The guy's probably sold more Apples to conservatives by simply mentioning repeatedly how much he likes their computers on his radio show than Apple ever would have through their ad campaigns. (At least, he always used to mention he was an Apple man when I listened to his show more regularly a few years ago--I don't know if he's now a PC user, but I would doubt it.) Yet there's a not a shot in hell that they'd consider using him in their advertising.

By the way, they can keep John (he wrote some wonderful songs with the Beatles; frankly, I don't mind if they lose Yoko), but Virginia's absolutely right--why not a little diversity in their images? Or, as she wrote yesterday, maybe they do want to exclude everyone "who doesn't share hippie-dippy Bay Area politics".

There's only so much coverage of protestors I can watch, when the local stations break away from Fox and other network coverage, so I went surfing, and came across a devastating piece on ESPN about how brutally Iraq treats its Olympic athletes--Uday Hussein led its Olympic program. One former volleyball star says that Uday is insane, and "urinates on athletes". He's showing the scars he has from being chained to the wall for days at a time. A former top soccer player says, "I was lucky: I was only tortured four times", including once after his team lost, when "we're were beaten, and nobody knows why." When he tried to quit, his feet were whipped 20 times a day, and he was dragged on his back until it was bloody.

I think it was taped some time ago--here's a companion piece from December of last year from their Web site.

LOTS OF GOOD STUFF--and even more links, via James Taranto and Best of the Web Today.

KTVU ANCHORMAN DENNIS RICHMOND SPEAKS BEAUTIFULLY PRECISE ENGLISH: So why the "uh" every time he says "the war in Iraq"?

Just curious.

I'M WITH STOOOPID, PART DEUX: "San Francisco protesters stage a 'vomit in'".

Glenn's right: Karl Rove has to be behind this--no "sane" protestors would do something this idiotic.

GLASGOW KNOWS HOW TO HANDLE PROTESTORS: Group Captain Mandrake reports:

Anti-war protestors in the UK earlier stopped the London to Glasgow train, by sitting in front of it when it was stopped at a station.

They moved when several Glasgow football supporters, travelling to watch their team, had an err, polite word with them.

People outside the UK may not know that Glasgow is a tough city, and it is generally best not to annoy football fans there.

I've never followed rugby, but given this, and Mark Bingham's role in preventing Flight #93 from attacking Washington on 9/11, this sport--and its fans and participants--is starting to look better and better.

I'M WITH STOOOPID: KTVU just mentioned that a protestor took a swipe at one of their cameramen.

Err, guys, TV is on your side--they live for those images! You don't want to upset them.

UPDATE (3:30 PM): Ken Wayne of KTVU just mentioned some looting occurred today, possibly connected with the protesting. There's a shock!

Wayne also mentioned that a number of the protestors are "upset with the type of coverage they're receiving". They certainly shouldn't be upset with the quantity of coverage they're receiving, however.

FOG OF WAR: Steven Den Bestes notes a photo misidentified by CBS.

US TROOPS CROSS INTO SOUTHERN IRAQ.

MSNBC NEWS INFO-BABE Natalie Morales (and she is a babe) just compared Al Jazeera with MSNBC. That's not a comparison I'd want to make.

DANIEL PIPES: "Why the Left Loves Osama [and Saddam]".

"MORONS ANNOY LOS ANGELES" is the title of this post by Charles Johnson, who has a photo of their riot du jur.

FOX NEWS ALERT: Neal Cavuto reporting that traces of "Ricin" posion were found in a Paris railway station.

Gee, and Chriac thought staying out of the war would keep France safe.

UPDATE: (2:05 PM): Here's a WaPo article on it.

UPDATE: (3:41 PM): Chris Regan says there's an Iraqi connection to this story. "Ironically enough!", as Reuters (and James Taranto when he tweaks them) would say.

AIR RAID SIRENS IN KUWAIT CITY: William La Jeunesse, the Fox News man in the field (and hopefully his cameraman) has his gas mask on.

UPDATE (a couple of minutes later): All clear signal sounds, gas mask comes off.

WE'RE GONNA PARTY LIKE IT'S 1969! Several shots of protestors in tied-dyed T-shirts from KTVU, channel #2. Guys, the 1960s are over. As I wrote in December:

Vietnam is doubly instructive here--it was the high-water mark of the anti-war movement, which gained traction because the US military was ineffective in Vietnam, partially due to using tactics developed 25 years earlier in World War II. (And yes, that's a gross simplification, and Robert McNamera, Westmoreland, and Johnson's rules of engagement didn't help things. But you get the idea.)

But each component of the military radically changed its tactics after Vietnam. The anti-war movement is still stuck in a 30 year old timewarp.

And it's got to feel strange for them, to find the military's thinking more modern than theirs.

Several related links in the original quote, by the way.

UNILATERAL UPDATE: Here's a list of all of the countries that are supporting us, as well as those who supported us during our last go-around in the Gulf.

"YAWN": Brian of Eminent Brain has some thoughts on the SF riots.

GEEZ: Channel 2 just reported that one jail in San Francisco is completely full with protestors, and they're opening up another jail for all of them.

The video is astounding: nothing like watching "peace" protestors taking swipes at cops. Whatever happened to passive resistance?

FOX TICKER: "Air raid sirens heard in Mosul", Iraqi city located on border of Syria and Turkey (I think I heard Sheppard Smith say--I'm trying to type as fast as they're talking--and losing.) Key city with important oil reserves--and "substantial air fields", Fox's man in Northern Iraq says.

SADDAMALIKE: Andrew Sullivan writes, "The more I look at it, the likelier it seems."

UPDATE (12:33 PM): But Fox ticker says, "Admin officials: it was Saddam on TV last night".

UNILATERALISM UPDATE: CNN ticker just announced that President Bush says that 40 nations support us.

DIANE FEINSTEIN'S MINI-ME WORKS FOR CNN: Just watching Barbara Starr, their Pentagon reporter.

SADDAM IS DOOMED: Optimus Prime is on his way to the Middle East.

No, really!

(Link via The Corner.)

MORE TICKER: "Captured town [Umm Qasar] is only major seaport for goods to enter Iraq."

GREAT QUOTE from the Fox ticker, which says "Pentagon: 'If you have to ask, it's not shock and awe'."

NBC NEWS' Pete Williams is announcing that law enforcement officials are looking for an Al-Qaeda terrorist named Adnan G. El-Shukrijumah "who could be here, or could be anyplace in the world". And he's a pilot. Apparently from Yemen, he speaks English fluently, carries multiple passports with a variety of aliases, who could be involved in planning a terrorist act against the US, or overseas.

US LAUNCHES SECOND ATTACK ON BAGHDAD, according to AP, and dramatic video on the networks.

HEAVY FIGHTING, MASSIVE DISRUPTIONS IN INFRASTRUCTURE BREAK OUT...in San Francisco.

Check out this quote:

"We don't want to alienate people. I hope people realize that political murder merits action that inconveniences them," said Quinn Miller, 32, who took the day off from his job for a banking company and said he expected to be arrested for the first time in his life.

And charged with committing unintentional self-parody in the first degree, hopefully.

UPDATE: Prof. Reynolds is on the case as well.

UPDATE: Geez--just watching the video on San Jose's Channel 2, and it looks like the rioting outside the 1968 Democratic Convention. Most definitely not Medium Cool.

WAS SADDAM'S ELDER SON UDAY in the bunker that we struck yesterday? Interesting post by H.D. Miller, who says that Uday suffered a brain hemorrhage "following conflict with a member of Saddam's Fedayeen on Thursday." Miller adds, "Sound to me like Uday just suffered a 2,000 pound, JDAMS-guided hemorrhage."

Heh.

JOHN McCAIN REBUTS ROBERT BYRD on the Senate floor.

Here's a link to Byrd's comments, and our take on them.

BOMB SCARE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE: Expect more of this stuff over the next few days--all of them fakes, God willing.

HOT SHOTS PART TRES: Do we know the whereabouts of this man?

(Very funny interview with the original "Saddamalike", Jerry Haleva, from the Hot Shots movies. "Now I will kill you until you die from it!")

INSTAPUNDIT DOES MELLOW MUSHROOMS, or something like that.

GROUND WAR BEGINS, according to this AP report:

The U.S. 3rd Infantry Division's artillery opened fire Thursday on Iraqi troops with Paladin self-propelled howitzers and multiple launch rocket systems in the first stage of the ground war.

Maj. Gen. Bufourd Blount, the division commander, had said that the artillery barrage would signal the first phase of the ground war against Iraq.

Meanwhile Iraq has launched several of the Scud missiles that Hans Blix insists that they don't have.

MORE UNILATERALISM: AP reports that "Turkey OKs U.S. on Airspace".

INTELLIGENCE: Rich Lowry posts an email from a reader who says that it's working quite well: "we flushed out [Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq] Aziz, followed him, and made him drop a dime on Saddam without him knowing it."

WHY DID PETER JENNINGS BURY A POLL showing increased support for the war?

ABC seems to be doing a lot of stuff like that lately.

(For our previous coverage of Peter, click here.)

When you have to resort to language, tactics and visuals like this, you've already lost the argument, as Eric Alterman recently noticed.

UPDATE: But this protest could certainly succeed.

"A DIFFERENT KIND OF FRENCH KISS": Dave Barry is doing his best to patch-up US-French relations.

Maybe Bush should start a conversation with Chirac in French. Something like... "'Parole! Vous ne sentez pas demi aussi de mauvais que j'ai prevu!''

He'd get through immediately, if he just tells him that he's Jerry Lewis...

HANDY FACT-PAGE ON GULF WAR I, or the real start of the war last night, or whatever you want to call it, via Matt Welch.

It's a CNN page cached by Google, whose highlighting makes it obvious how many countries fought in the first Gulf War: 34. No wonder CNN was flashing tickers that said (paraphrasing) "Bush claims over 35 nations backing U.S."--that's one more than the last go around.

Of course, based on this definition, we're still unilateral.

UPDATE: Or maybe unilateral simply means any coalition that Madeleine Albright doesn't approve.

THERE'S A BOTTLE OF BAILEY'S WITH MY NAME ON IT: Night all.

SIDE BY SIDE PHOTOS OF Dr. Evil and Mini-Me, Saddam (with Dan Rather on February 26) and "Saddamalike" (click on each photo to enlarge):

(Photos via NRO's The Corner.)

UPDATE (3/20/03 6:40 AM): Just for the record, I don't buy fully into the idea that it's a double--as Andrew Sullivan noted, it could simply be Saddam feeling about as woozy as I do right now. As somebody (who was it again?) once said, "we report, you decide". But this would be lots of fun, to tweak him--or them.

I SHALL CALL HIM MINI-SADDAM: Stephen Green writes, "Until we can postively comfirm that any public appearance by Saddam is really Saddam, I'll be calling him Saddamalike."

2.5 MILLION PROPAGANDA LEAFLETS DROPPED ON IRAQ in the past day or so, with information on where and how to surrender, what radio stations to tune into, and a reminder not to use WMDs, according to CNN's Frank Buckley, reporting from the USS Constellation. (Isn't that the one that William Windom commands?)

WOLF BLITZER IS QUESTIONING at least the date of when Saddam's tape was shot.

AT WAR: IRAQ: Timely graphics--and timely articles--now up on National Review Online.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS: This bumper sticker, and other products with that noble and timely message are available via Patrick Ruffini.

BET THIS KID GROWS UP TO BE THE NEXT ANN COULTER, purely out of spite.

RAINES WATCH: Andrew Sullivan is monitoring the Times "focus on dissent at home", and is seeking emails from readers who spot it as well.

NICE TO SEE: "A bit of sanity from Eric Alterman".

LIVE OR MEMOREX: Was that really Saddam on TV? John Podhoretez says "it's not him. It's a double. I'm sure of it."

Read the posts below it, also.

UPDATE (11:10 P.M.) Read the post above it as well-there are links to compare photos of Saddam with Dan Rather and "Saddam" today.

NBC's Lester Holt reporting that the initial attack in Baghdad involved a pair of F-117s, which each dropped two GBU-27 bunker busters, with satellite guidance in Baghdad. (Lester seemed to have problems with the right designation of the bomb--hopefully he--and I--got it right.

SURPRISED I DON'T HAVE MORE FROM FNC? Me too. But I'm stuck in a hotel room tonight, as our home is being remodeled, and we have no plumbing. The hotel doesn't have Fox News. Only the local Fox station, channel #2, which alternated from 7:30 until 8:30 tonight with Fox News and CNN. Then switched over to American Idol.

Of course.

LOVE THE PHOTO: Click on over to James Lileks.

NBC NEWS TICKER: "US Special operations forces have begun work in Iraq".

NOT TOO SURPRISING: "Bush Put In Long Day Leading to Iraq War".

MINOR CRITICISM: AP ran a headline earlier today on Yahoo that read "Bush claims over 35 countries support US". CNN's ticker just read "Bush: "Over 35 countries support us".

Why the equivocation? Why not, simply: "OVER 35 NATIONS SUPPORT THE US"?

Just curious.

USA UP ALL NIGHT: Stephen Green has a list links to of first strike bloggers.

ADVANTAGE VODKAPUNDIT! Gen Wesley Clark, on CNN, just reiterated the same thoughts that Stephen Green posted earlier tonight: That Saddam's generals really don't want to tell him any bad news.

TAKING A BREAK--BACK IN ABOUT A HALF HOUR.

UPDATE (9:55 P.M.): Back.

AIR RAID SIRENS IN BAGHDAD, ACCORDING TO CNN.

CNN IS SHOWING F-14s and other Navy aircraft launching from the USS Lincoln live, via their reporter with a videophone. According to Aaron Brown, they're routine flights to guard the no-fly zone, though.

SADDAM TO ADDRESS IRAQI TV SHORTLY, according to CNN. But will he be live, or
Memorex?

"HIDING FROM REALITY" Great point by Stephen Green.

DRUDGE: "NBC: Saddam was having a meeting with his Generals; Bunker Buster bomb was dropped..."

UPDATE (8:35 PST): The Brothers Judd have links to a couple more articles on this.

UPDATE: (8:45 PST): Stephen Green examines the above MSNBC article and comments, "Nighthawks launched off a carrier? I don't freakin' think so."

SEN. BYRD: "Today I weep for my country".

I guess, given Byrd's advanced age, and background as an ex-KKK Grand Dragon, that "my country" would be the Confederate South of 1862.

TOP WHITE HOUSE ANTI-TERROR BOSS RESIGNS: "The top National Security Council official in the war on terror resigned this week for what a NSC spokesman said were personal reasons, but intelligence sources say the move reflects concern that the looming war with Iraq is hurting the fight against terrorism", according to UPI.

WE'VE CAPTURED IRAQI RADIO, APPARENTLY. Brilliant move--it will allow us to contrast the images broadcast out of Iraqi TV, which we haven't taken control of...yet.

DEN BESTE: "There are going to be mass surrenders; that's beyond dispute. The real question now is how many will actually hold on and try to fight, thus forcing us to kill them. Because the last thing they all believe about us, beyond any doubt, is that we keep our word."

RTWT.

LOOKING FOR LINKS ABOUT THE WAR? Steven Den Beste lists his favorite sources, and links to them. Good list to refer, as things heat up. And be sure to check out our links page as well.

Speaking of which, Drudge is reporting that "President Bush will be speak to the nation at 9pm ET..."

UPDATE (7:26 PST): Obviously, Bush went on at 10:15 EST, not at 9:00. And we've apparently launched cruise missles--or guided bombs from F-117 stealth fighters at a target--possibly senior Iraqi officials--in Baghdad.

I loved Bush's lines that "This will not be a campaign of half measures" and that "we will accept no outcome but victory". In other words--this will not be Vietnam part II.

UPDATE (7:55 PST): Here's the text of Bush's speech.

UPDATE: (8:15 PST): Here's an AP article about the opening salvo.

"SADDENED" BY TOM DASCHLE'S COMMENTS: Jonah Goldberg's syndicated column is now online.

AL GORE JOINS APPLE COMPUTER BOARD: No word yet (but I'll bet it's coming) on what avid Apple user Rush Limbaugh thinks of this.

SENATE REJECTS DRILLING IN ALASKA REFUGE.

For our previous look at the rhetoric versus the reality of opening up America's vast pestilential wasteland, click here.

I JUST LIVE HERE FOLKS. Don't blame me for these two bozos.

UPDATE: Stephen Green has posts (with comments) about each of these two incidents.

AS A LONG TIME TIME FAN OF STANLEY KUBRICK, I think he'd very much enjoy this.

Don't know if the French would, however....

LET'S ROLL.

Good luck to all of the brave men--and women--fighting overseas.

HOLLYWOOD STASTISTS VS. VALLEY DYNAMISTS: My latest piece is up on Tech Central Station, applying Virginia Postrel's Future and its Enemies "meme" to the entertainment industry.

LE MATRIX: The Jacques Chirac/Cypher Connection.

For a previous look at The Matrix and 9/11, click here, then be sure to follow the link. As Virginia Postrel wrote, "What are the odds of a National Security Advisor who'd look good in a catsuit?"

SMART MOVE: "NYPD on lookout for terrorist takeover of TV outlets".

There's a lot of terrorist-bang-for-the-buck that could be obtained through taking over just one studio in a TV facility. (Heck, they've already taken at least one Weblog*.) And just as the killing of Daniel Pearl sent shockwaves through the media community--arguably far more than any other single terrorist related death--so could broadcasting 24 hours a day from a TV studio increase what Charles Paul Freund, writing on the day of September 11, 2001, described as "The scale of potential terror [as it] meets the scope of available media".

And I wonder if the NYPD are just being cautious, or if this is based on information from Khalid Shaikh or one of our other captured terrorists.

(*Yes, I'm joking of course about the blog.)

"SALUTE TO A VISIONARY FOUNDER": It's difficult to imagine what more Joe Coors could have achieved with his life as an entrepreneur--and then some.

GREAT MOMENTS IN EBAY HISTORY: For the man who blogs just a little...too much, I give you item number 2916669204 in the eBay catalog...The Instant Girlfriend Kit!

KEY DEFINITIONS TO HELP UNDERSTAND the media's coverage of the war bettter, courtesy of Juan Gato.

FIRST SHOTS FIRED, "killing at least one Iraqi during a suspected operation to mine the waters off Kuwait", according to the Times of London:

But that opening skirmish is about to be dwarfed by the most formidable military assault in modern warfare: 250,000 British and American troops — backed by more than 1,000 aircraft, 400 tanks and a 110-strong armada — are poised to unleash their awesome power on Saddam Hussein’s Iraq the moment the order is given.

In other news, only because this is such a fantastic headline..."Stix Nix Blix Trix!"

GUESS TONY BLAIR IS KEEPING HIS JOB: Britian's Parliament Votes 412-149 For War.

VIRGINIA POSTREL SPOTS A POSSIBLE AL QAEDA TARGET, and comments that "the L.A. Times stinks" (literally).

UPDATE: Do the Oscar folks read The Scene? Latest Drudge headline reads, "SOURCES: OSCARS LIKELY TO BE POSTPONED... ACADEMY SETS 4 PM PT PRESS CONFERENCE..."

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE: "Academy Awards show producer Gil Cates says the red carpet arrivals portion of the pre-show will be 'truncated' this year."

IRONY OVERLOAD II: Nice to see a member of Congress "disappointed" at Tom Daschle's remarks for a change.

UPDATE: Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) adds, "I think that Senator Daschle clearly articulated the French position".

ANOTHER UPDATE: Here's more on Hastert and Santorum's take on Daschle's remarks, from the Washington Times.

IRONY OVERLOAD: InstaPundit on Janet Reno.

David Koresh and Elian Gonzalez unfortunately (and for various reasons), couldn't be reached for comment.

WHY REPORTERS DON'T GET THE PRESIDENT: Great post by Orrin Judd on GWB's modus operandi:

This weekend, Daniel Schor was on NPR expressing bewilderment at how the President could demand a vote on an 18th resolution on Monday and by Friday be telling Tony Blair it was fine by him if it was just withdrawn. Mr. Schor said he'd never seen an administration that could reverse course so easily and make so little of it. It seemed as though it had never occurred to Mr. Schor that the President could do so because he genuinely didn't care one way or another about the UN--having them along, at least rhetorically, would have silenced some peoples' concerns, but the UN has no role to play in the actual waging of the war and is too debased an institution to offer a meaningful moral imprimatur. The important thing, from Mr. Bush's perspective, is and has been to remove Saddam. No amount of background noise was ever going to deflect him from that aim.

And, at the end of the day, once again, he's achieving his goals. Mr. Broder, though he may be alone, appears to have figured this out. Whether he's correct that Mr. Bush did not anticipate all the side effects--like the delegitimization of the EU and the UN--we'll only know for sure in a few years. But, considering that the President stocked his administration with advisors who are hostile to such transnational institutions and considering that they now done them significant damage, it seems like Mr. Broder might want to consider that this too was a goal that was within the President's sights.

The other great post on Bush's efforts was Steven Den Beste's classic on "making them an offer they can't accept" (OTCA--hey, I invented an FLA!). Since Bush just did exactly that when he urged Saddam and sons to leave Baghdad, it's worth linking to it, and providing an excerpt:

George Bush has now, for the third time, used a diplomatic gambit. The first time it happened, I referred to it as "making them an offer they cannot accept". He didn't invent this, but he's proved rather adroit at using it.

About a year ago, he presented the Taliban with an ultimatum: Turn bin Laden over to us; shut down all al Qaeda facilities; eject all forces associated with al Qaeda from your country. Otherwise you'll face the consequences.

Since bin Laden effectively was the ruler of Afghanistan at the time, and since al Qaeda forces represented the most trustworthy core of the Taliban field army fighting against the Northern Alliance, this was something that the Taliban couldn't do. So what appeared to be a reasonable offer was in fact couched in terms which could not be accepted.

He did it again a few months ago, to the Palestinians. In the most significant change of American policy toward the Palestinians in decades, he declared that the US would no longer seriously negotiate with them until they implemented serious political reforms, including removing Arafat from power. (And he was roundly condemned for it. And it seems to be working. But the real point of it was to disentangle the US from that situation so it could start concentrating on Iraq again, despite the efforts of various bodies to simultaneously make that situation intractable as possible and to claim that we couldn't even think about Iraq until after we'd solved it.)

Now he's doing it again, only this time with the UN.

As Den Beste goes on to note, Bush has already done that with Hussein, by offering him a chance for peace by handing him a laundry list of demands, that included destroying all WMDs and missles, as well as ending support for terrorism. As Den Beste dryly noted at the time, "if Saddam did these things, he'd be dead within six months through military coup, or trial and execution for crimes against humanity. The problem is that Iraq can't do these things without revealing that it's been lying for years."

And his latest OTCA?

AP headline: "Iraq Rejects U.S. Ultimatum for Saddam".

YOU DON'T SAY! Reuters headline: "Computer Virus Writers Mostly Obsessed Males -- Expert".

THE PRICE OF "PEACE": "What will cost America more, taking the war to our enemies, or continuing to let our enemies take the war to us?", asks Nicholas Stix, in an interesting economic essay.

EXCELLENT SPEECH: Firm resolve, no histrionics, or podium pounding. And very smart of Bush to call for Iraqis to surrender with honor. As Stephen Green just wrote, "Expect more incidents like last week's "premature" surrender to British troops."

I think the shortness of the speech is commendable--I suspect Bush knows he will change few minds. At this stage of the war, whoever's for the liberation of Iraq has made up their minds, and whoever isn't--for whatever reason--is unlikely to change.

UPDATE: Not surprisingly, Glenn Reynolds has an Insta-take on the speech, as well as several links to other bloggers.

For the Corner's take on the speech, start here and scroll up and down as appropriate.

STEPHEN GREEN IS DOING LIVE BLOGGING OF PRESIDENT'S BUSH'S SPEECH: Click on over.

48 HOURS: The Washington Post says, "Bush to Give Saddam 48 Hours to Flee Iraq".

Talk about giving them an offer they can't accept: Saddam will be in his bunker rather than leaving Iraq.

And Iraq, which Hussein swears has no weapons of mass destruction (but did at one time. Whoops--we don't know what happened to them!) may be arming its troops with chemical weapons.

GREAT DRUDGE HEADLINE JUXTAPOSITION:

DASCHLE: 'This president [has] failed so miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war...'

LIEBERMAN: 'It's time to come together and support our great American men and women in uniform and their commander-in-chief...'

Speaking of great juxtapositions, check out this quote from the CNN article from the above link:

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle lashed out at President Bush on Monday, saying he had "failed so miserably" at diplomacy in the crisis with Iraq that the United States now stands on the brink of war.

"I'm saddened," Daschle, D-South Dakota, said in a speech to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. "Saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war. Saddened that we have to give up one life because this president couldn't create the kind of diplomatic effort that was so critical for our country. But we will work, and we will do all we can to get through this crisis like we've gotten through so many."

In October, Congress passed a resolution authorizing the use of force, if necessary, against Iraq. Daschle was one of those who voted for it.

(Emphasis mine.) CNN reports that "Bush was scheduled to brief congressional leaders at the White House this evening, including Daschle, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California."

Oh to be a fly on the wall when Daschle and Pelosi chat.

UPDATE: Jonah Goldberg writes:

Um let's be clear: If we had a diplomatic triumph at the UN, if Bush succeeded completely, we would still be going to war! We just would have the French and other UN members fighting with us. Does Daschle think that the only definition of diplomatic success is Saddam willingly disarming?

I'm very disappointed. Nay...saddened...by Tom's response, especially at this time.

HAS NPR CONCEDED THAT THEY'RE NOT OBJECTIVE in covering the war? Andrew Sullivan says yes.

And of course, back in February, CNN already used the Q-word--almost a month before the war started. (And it hasn't yet!)

STEVEN DEN BESTE HAS AN EXCELLENT lengthy and at times surprising "post game analysis" of what we gained by six months of dickering with the UN.

THE BROTHERS JUDD HAVE ASSEMBLED an excellent "Background for the War to Liberate Iraq". Let them know if there's anything missing.

THE IRAQ-AL QAIDA CONNECTION GROWS. Read this, and this.

PAT MOYNIHAN IN CRITICAL, BUT STABLE CONDITION, recovering from an infection after an emergency appendectomy. Click here and here for our previous coverage of the former Senator from New York.

THE LAFFER CURVE MEETS THE MARLBORO MAN REDUX: Around this time last year, we linked to a Bruce Bartlett article in National Review Online that examined the correlation between higher cigarette taxes and lower income to cities and states. Bartlett continues the same theme and runs with it, in The Washington Times.

IS THERE A LINK BETWEEN SCIENTOLOGY AND SATANISM? Camile Paglia says yes.

Doesn't surprise me a bit, to be honest.

THE EXCHANGE RATE: Group Captain Lionel Mandrake has good news and bad news regarding Canada's assistance in the war on terrorism.

WHAT THE INTERNET WAS MADE FOR: Perpetual bubble wrap!

ISRAELI BULLDOZER KILLS US PROTESTER: Sorry, I can't get too agitated over this. When you protest on the frontlines of a war you risk getting killed, even accidentally.

Jonah Goldberg wrote an essay in the summer of 2001 about Lori Berenson, the classic "sandal-ista" who dropped out of MIT in the 1980s to, as Goldberg wrotes "bum around South America with lefty and Communist-backed groups in El Salvador and Nicaragua." She was eventually arrested in Peru "after a 12-hour shootout, killing two terrorists and one police officer. Once inside, the police found 8,000 rounds of ammunition, 3,000 sticks of dynamite, some uniforms belonging to the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (known by its Spanish acronym, MRTA)". The Peruvian government gave her a life sentence, which they reduced in 2001 to 20 years, minus the five she's already served.

As Goldberg wrote:

I'm a big believer that some people are "asking for trouble." When stunt skydivers die, I admit, I feel less sorrow than when kids get hurt in a car accident. When snake-handlers get bitten by poisonous vipers, I'll often say, "Well, you know, that does happen sometimes to people who handle snakes for a living." And, when a young woman decides to play Marxist terrorist in war torn South American countries, I don't get too worked up when she gets thrown in jail.

And I don't get too worked up over anti-Israel, or anti-US protestors killed in war zones.

Besides, isn't this what the whole human shield movement is all about?

DID AN ARAB AUTHOR AT FREELEBANON.ORG PLAGIARIZE a hard-hitting essay on Arab culture written by Steven Den Beste?

We report, you decide.

FRITZ QUITS? Bob Novak writes that "National Democratic campaign operatives are convinced that Sen. Ernest F. (Fritz) Hollings, the fourth most senior U.S. senator and a onetime presidential aspirant, will not seek election in South Carolina for the seventh time next year at age 82":

Although Hollings announced in 2000 that he would be running again in 2004, he has kept a low political profile and done no fund-raising. If he did run, he would face an uphill race after the 2002 Republican sweep in South Carolina.

Rep. Jim DeMint, a 51-year-old former marketing executive first elected to Congress in 1998, will be the Republican candidate. Hollings would face tough going against DeMint, who would be an overwhelming favorite if Hollings bowed out.

For our previous coverage of Hollings, dubbed "Cash and Carry" Hollings by the esteemed InstaPundit, click here.

TOMORROW: "Monday deadline looms for agreement on Iraq".

DID THE NEW YORK TIMES fire their company physician for refusing to allow her employers access to patient records? Fascinating post on Blogcritics.

"SOMETIMES YOU'VE GOT TO KILL TO STOP THE GUNS": Excellent review of Seargent York by Sydney Smith, on Blogcritics.

"EVER WANT TO FISK A CARTOON?" This is one of the most morally repugnant cartoons I've ever seen. Talk about cheapening the memory of those who died on 9/11.

Truly vile stuff.

SADDAM'S UPHOLSTERED TOMB: Steven Den Beste examines a Hitler-like (and built by a German firm!) bunker that may end up as Saddam's final residence--prior to Hell, of course.

HEY, THAT'S NOT MICHAEL DUKAKIS, it's Peter Jennings, doing his best Dukakis impersonation, as he interviews General Tommy Franks, commander of all U.S. troops in the region.

For another photo of an anchorman playing dress-up in the Middle East, click here.

TOO MUCH GREAT STUFF In the Journal's "Best of the Web Today" column to link to any one item, so go check out the whole thing!

DOING WELL BY DOING GOOD: Steven Den Beste looks at the 1970s TV series Emergency and the benefits it brought, by introducing the concept of paramedics to a national audience.

Simultaneously, Tim Cavanaugh of Reason looks at the opposite end of the spectrum and asks, "If violent entertainment makes violent teenagers, does that mean Dirty Harry is to blame for rogue cops?"

NOW IT ALL MAKES SENSE: UN Chief weapons inspector Hans Blix says, "I'm more worried about global warming than I am of any major military conflict."

Nice to see a man who has his priorities in order, isn't it?

CHUTZPAH: Bill Clinton, in a speech from "a packed auditorium at the 92nd Street Y on the upper East Side", according to the New York Daily News, said, "We need to be creating a world that we would like to live in when we're not the biggest power on the block."

That pretty much sums up his administration in a nutshell: selling sensitive technology to the Chinese, looking the other way while North Korea acquired nuclear weapons, and waffling during the first attack on the WTC in '93.

Given the direct line from Clinton's lack of response to the first attempt at destroying the WTC, to 9/11, that's real chutzpah to make a statement like that--and an equally astonishing city to be saying in.

The fact that Clinton received several "standing O's" helps to explain this, though.

SLASH IN LEBANON: Graphic photo (via Drudge) of "Shiite Muslim men [cutting] their heads with swords during the annual ritual to mark Ashoura Day in the southern Lebanese town of Nabatiyeh".

Hari-kari--it's not just for samurai any more!

SLASH IN CHICAGO: The Bears landed Kordell Stewart.

LE TERMINATOR: Amazing how Chirac just naturally morphs into Saddam Hussein, isn't it?

The Sun of England is calling the French President a "blood bother" of Hussein, which certainly makes Steven Den Beste's theories about the French (as endorsed by Bill Safire!) make a helluva lot of sense.

WORKING ON THOSE NIGHT MOVES: You know, it's not easy, when a young man--or woman--feels certain urges. Certain stirrings. Those primal emotions kick in, and you know there's no going back to the innocence of childhood. Often during these times, it's nice to be able to talk to somebody older, who survived the process intact--maybe even grown from it.

In other words, Orrin Judd has some thoughtful words for folks "as they face their forbidden conservative urges and eventually come out of the closet to join the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy".

"DOESN'T THIS DEFEAT THE POINT OF COMMUNISM?", asks Alex Knapp, who reports that "pro-capitalist groups in China's 'People's Congress' are pushing for a Constitutional amendment to protect property rights".

Hey, next thing you know, somebody will call for the banning of China's mobile execution vans!

INSPECTIONS OF KEY AEROSPACE HARDWARE STUBBORNLY REJECTED: in this case, by NASA, unfortunately:

Two or three days after the space shuttle Columbia's liftoff, a group of NASA engineers asked the shuttle program manager to request the aid of United States spy satellites in determining the extent of debris damage to the shuttle's left wing, but the manager declined to do so, a senior NASA official said yesterday.

Hubris? Short-sightedness? Fear of rocking the boat? It's hard to understand how someone could say no to such a request. The Times article quotes an unnamed NASA official who says, "When a group of engineers puts forward a request, they're not doing it for grins and giggles. Within their minds, they thought that was a path that would resolve some final concerns. I don't know if it was a cost issue, a timing issue. I don't know if assets could not be arranged."

FOLLOW THE MONEY: "Actors Protest War's Threat to Their Incomes".

That may be why Janeane Garofalo has said that she might quit protesting--a relatively new profession for her, as she's admitted that "It wasn't very hip" to protest war when Bill Clinton was president.

AMERICAN FLAG VANDALS BREAK WINDOWS TO PROTEST WAR: Scott Ott has the details.

"UGLY TIMES, and they just got uglier", Andrew Sullivan writes, describing an astonishing piece of anti-semitism by Pat Buchanan. I'm truly glad that Buchanan is no longer associated with the Republican party when I read bile like this.

If Buchanan makes another Reform Party run for the Presidency, maybe he could tap this fellow to be his running mate.

WHO'S YOUR DADDY? Saddam Hussein was “looking remarkably relaxed, almost paternal,” according to CBS reporter Lara Logan on the Tuesday Evening News, as this Media Research Center post describes, with a bit of ironic counterpoint in the next paragraph:

Saddam Hussein was “looking remarkably relaxed, almost paternal,” reporter Lara Logan asserted from Baghdad on Tuesday's CBS Evening News as she described his “daily appearance on Iraqi TV” to lecture “his top military commanders to prepare their men for war.” Logan added that men are coming to Iraq “from across the Middle East to defend the capital and carry out suicide bombings against U.S. forces.”

Meanwhile, over on the NBC Nightly News, Jim Miklaszewski saw a far less intimidating Hussein as he reported that “entire units” of the Iraqi army “already possess white flags to prepare for a quick surrender.”

Miklaszewski's report certainly sounds believable in light of these recent articles.

I'm sure that prior to the outbreak of WWII, it's possible that there may have been one or two US or British reporters who sucked up to Hitler. But I'm having a hard time picturing Edward R. Murrow or William L. Shirer on the radio describing Hitler as being "almost paternal" to listeners back home. So why did Laura Logan's report pass muster yesterday?

Of course, she probably made her Iraqi handler quite cheery.

THE MAN WHO LED ZEPPELIN: My review of Chris Welch's new biography of Zep manager Peter Grant is now online at Blogcritics.

STAN BRAKHAGE DIED: I remember seeing one of his films, Dog Star Man, in college. I've always had a thing for experimental films and their makers, and am sorry to learn that this pioneer passed on.

Curiously, the producers of the South Park TV series and movie were students of Brakhage's course at the University of Colorado!

HOW ON EARTH did this guy get to be nominated as the Bush administration's assistant secretary of transportation for transportation policy??

DOES THE TIMES HAVE A PROOF-READER, PART XXXVVVVIII: This is a classic, as discovered by Glenn Reynolds.

"SPOT THE DIFFERENCE", says Andrew Sullivan, discussing Bush versus Clinton when it comes to Iraq:

Here's a simple pop-quiz. Who said the following: "What if [Saddam] fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction? ... Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal."

Full marks if you guessed Bill Clinton. It was 1998. But I wonder how many of you did. The political amnesia of so many in Europe with regard to the Iraq crisis is one of the most striking aspects of the whole current trans-Atlantic divide. To read the papers, to watch the "anti-war" protestors, to listen to the BBC, you'd easily imagine that out of the blue a belligerent and brand new American administration had just torn up the old rule book and started a new foreign policy utterly unconnected to the old one.

* * * [T]he point is: the foreign policy of Bush is not so drastically different from Clinton. On Iraq, in particular, there isn't a smidgen of principled difference between this administration and the last one. In fact, Bush came into office far less interventionist than Clinton and far more modest than Gore. His campaign platform budgeted less for defense than Al Gore's did. And his instincts were more firmly multilateral. That, of course, changed a year and a half ago. 9/11 made him realize that American withdrawal from the world was no longer an option. But even then, the notion of Bush's unilateralism is greatly exaggerated. To be sure, last spring, the Bush White House argued that taking out Saddam's weapons was non-negotiable, implying that it would be done with or without U.N. support (a position, by the way, that Bush had announced in the 2000 primaries). But by last September, as the world knows, Bush decided to pursue the policy of disarmament through the United Nations, despite the risk of falling into the inspections trap that has proved so intractable. And now, even after a unanimous resolution supporting serious consequences if Saddam refused to disarm immediately and completely, he's still going back to the U.N. for further permission to enforce the resolution by military means. His reward for this multilateralism? Contempt and derision.

Now compare that policy to Clinton's similar dilemma with how to deal with the Balkan crisis throughout the 1990s, culminating in the Kosovo intervention. Did Clinton go through the United Nations to justify his eventual NATO bombardment of Serbia? No he didn't. He didn't go through the U.N. because the Russians pledged to veto such a military engagement. So where were the peace protestors back then? In terms of international law, those American bombs in Belgrade - even hitting the Chinese embassy - were far less defensible than any that will rain down on Baghdad. Serbia had never attacked the U.S. No U.N. mandate provided cover. But Clinton ordered bombing anyway. And the same people who now viciously attack Bush as the president of a rogue state - Susan Sontag anyone? - actually cheered Clinton on.

Sullivan concludes:

What the world, after all, is afraid of is not the deposing of the monster, Saddam. What the world is afraid of is American hyper-power wielded by a man of very American faith and conviction and honesty. Bush's manner grates. His style - like Reagan's - offends. But, like Reagan, he is not an anomaly in American foreign policy - merely a vivid and determined representative of a deep and idealistic strain within it. And history shows that the world has far more to gain from the deployment of that power than by its withdrawal. If the poor people of Iraq know that lesson, what's stopping the Europeans?

Good (if entirely rhetoric) question.

LILEKS ON WE WERE SOLDIERS: Read the whole thing.

(Then send a copy to Chrissie Hynde.)

THANKYOU. THANKYOUVERYMUCH: Blogcritics has won the Best Weblog About Music Award from the 2003 Bloggies!

The prize includes a cash remuneration of $20.03. My lawyer will be in touch with Mr. Olsen first thing tomorrow morning for my percentage.

Seriously though, Eric has done a wonderful job assembling the site, one that for myself, and all of the other contributors there, is a tremendous amount of fun to write for.

POST-BOOM LIFE IN SILICON VALLEY: Good Reuters piece on life after the Dot.Coms went bust. (Here's one reason why they did.) For additional perspective, check out this recent Virginia Postrel post. And Thomas Sowell has some thoughts (which unfortunately, will probably go unheeded) on how to reduce the cost of Bay Area housing, which remains astronomical, despite the recent bust.

DON'T SAY HE'S HYPOCRITICAL, SAY RATHER THAT HE'S APOLITICAL: If a Republican said that he wanted to see Bill Clinton and his advisors dead, he'd be called mean-spirited, or worse (probably worse--far worse). But check out this quote from Tom Lehrer, a big hit on college campuses in the early 1960s:

"I'm not tempted to write a song about George W.Bush. I couldn't figure out what sort of song I would write. That's the problem: I don't want to satirise George Bush and his puppeteers, I want to vaporise them."

The writer of the above quoted article on Lehrer from the Sydney Morning Herald says, "It would be wrong to assume, however, that Lehrer, 74, is bitter and twisted. He proves quick-witted, lively and extremely friendly."

If that's friendly, I'd hate to see him when he's miffed.

Lehrer's quote perfectly illustrates what Dale Amon of Samizdata wrote in November, that "Political Correctness is not a matter of what is said; it is a matter of who says it. The annointed are 'allowed' freedoms of speech unavailable to the hoi polloi. Had it been myself...making the same remark, I would be pilloried for it."

Exactly.

AFGHANISTAN TO LAUNCH INTERNET COUNTRY CODE:

Equivalent to a country code for telephone numbers, the .af suffix has now been reserved for private and official e-mail and web users in Afghanistan, the U.N. Development Program (UNDP), which gave legal and technical support to the program, said in a statement on Sunday.

"For Afghanistan, this is like reclaiming part of our sovereignty," the UNDP quoted Communications Minister Mohammad Masoom Stanakzai as saying.

"It is the country's flag on the Internet," the minister, who will formally activate on Monday the new top level domain as Internet country codes are known, said.

Somewhat surprisingly, Reuters states that "All non-governmental use of e-mail services and Web Sites was punishable by death during the rule of the fundamentalist Taliban," who they also described as merely "purist" in the lead paragraph.

WHEN IT COMES TO GOVERNMENT WARNING LABELS, why can't wineries get a fair shake?

FASTER THAN A SPEEDING BULLET, MORE POWERFUL THAN A LOCOMOTIVE...it's super-majority, one of the best ways to impose tax limits, and therefore, some semblance of fiscal responsibility on state governments.

I THOUGHT ONLY THE FRENCH DID THAT: A dozen of Saddam's soldiers try to surrender...before the shooting starts!

No word yet if they were carrying copies of this magazine, however.

FROM THE HOME OFFICE IN WASHINGTON, DC: Human Events has a top ten list of the most outrageous government programs, as assembled by "a diverse group of 18 conservative public policy experts".

Human Events writes, "There were some interesting patterns":

President Richard Nixon, a Republican, helped create five of the programs on the list, including Number 1 LSC. Most of the listed programs also are relatively new. Republican President Herbert Hoover signed the oldest program, the Number 3 Davis-Bacon Act (which forces government contractors to pay higher wages), in 1931. But eight of the programs were initiated, wholly or in part, in 1970 or later.

"Hopefully, none will last as long as Davis-Bacon", they add. Sad to say, I'll bet more than a few of them will.

GIVEN HOW THICK THEIR SKULLS ARE, IT MIGHT JUST WORK... Rich Lowry looks at the silliness of the human shields in Iraq, or as he calls them, "the Western kids who flocked to Iraq hoping to stare up at the business end of B-2 bombers", but decided to come home, when Saddam actually wanted them to defend military targets:

About half of the 200 shields have quit after realizing, as one kid told The Washington Times, "No humanitarian sites were made available to us." Even the Iraqi government isn't stupid or anti-American enough to think that the United States will deliberately target hospitals, mosques and schools. For that sort of poisonously out-of-touch view of American power, you must turn to left-wing Westerners.

Other shields are still stationed at electrical plants, water-pumping stations and oil refineries. Thus, the world gets the spectacle of the same people who complain about America's military-industrial complex trying to save parts of Iraq's.

Lowry adds:

The operational theory of the shields never made much sense: that they could stop a war that would be heedlessly waged against civilians by presenting the U.S. military with the possibility that it might hit a few civilians. Top shield Ken O'Keefe, an American, addresses this paradox by arguing that only white civilians matter to the United States, so the shields can stop bombs even as Iraqi civilians are killed.

So O'Keefe (reachable either at Baghdad's Palestine International Hotel or at the Daura Electrical Plant) has been guilty of discriminatory recruiting: treasonous black left-wing zealots need not apply. If there were justice in the world, O'Keefe would have to return home and report directly to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Johnny Cochran, call your office!

In the meantime, read the whole thing. And check out Tim Blair's recent post on the subject.

WAS IT P.J. O'ROURKE WHO SAID that you could tell which party was winning, based upon who had the better looking women? (Or something like that. See this recent David Frum post, and this John Derbyshire essay from a couple of years ago for the basic gist). If so, consider these two photos, taken, respectively, at recent pro-Saddam and anti-Chirac protests for a comparsion:

DON'T WORRY, I'm not planning to follow suit.

DID THE BBC LIE when they said "the educated are mainly anti-war"? Andrew Sullivan says yes, and has the stats to prove it.

INTERNET SPEED RECORD SMASHED: Be sure and check out our look at America's Internet2, and Canada's Canarie high-speed Internet projects, here.

GIANTS RELEASE JASON SEHORN: Angie Harmon couldn't be reached for comment.

DID PRESIDENT BUSH LOOK TIRED LAST NIGHT? Virginia Postrel weighs in, along with links to comments by David Frum, Glenn Reynolds, and Andrew Sullivan. Postrel's take? "Last night's performance seemed calculated to counter the 'Bush is a blustering cowboy' meme. He was firm and fatherly, not the smirking frat boy or the quick-on-the-trigger Jacksonian American of antiwar stereotypes."

NEW LED ZEPPELIN LIVE DVDs and CDs COMING IN MAY: I have details on Blogcritics.

HEH.

(Link via Patrick Ruffini.)

ABOUT TIME: Helen Thomas snubbed during Bush's speech last night.

I guess he had more important issues on his mind than her rabid non-stop hectoring.

For our previous coverage of the woman who gives hobbits a bad name, click here.

UPDATE: Here's a few more details.

MARCH 17 is the deadline du jour.

Hans Blix of course, would prefer March 17, 2023.

THE NEW THREE AMIGOS.

FOUR MIDDLE-CLASS WHITE GUYS WRESTLE OVER IRAQ, at Blogcritics.

Man, I hope they don't mess up the furniture!

THE ART OF STEELY DAN: My brief review of a new book about the classic 1970s rock/pop/jazz group of the 1970s is now up over at Blogcritics.

GNAT LILEKS, GENIUS FINANCIAL ANALYST:

“how much did it cost to fill up, daddee? Because if it’s over twenty bucks for the first time in a long time you’re less inclined to go inside the station to get some high-profit items like soda or jerky, or buy a car wash ticket, right? And since the profit margin for gas on the retail level is constantly miniscule, and since high-profit items help repay the loans to the oil company that fronted you money for pumps, upgrades, canopies and the like - then aren’t these high oil prices hard on the individual stations, increasing their likelihood of defaulting on their loans from the company? Granted, they can take the hit from losing a station here or there, but might not this continual erosion of the consignee’s profit margin tempt them to switch to another brand who’d pay off the old loan, leading to market-share erosion? I mean, people think high gas prices are great for gas companies, but that’s a rather simplistic take. Isn’t this side-effect of high gas prices on the stations completely ignored by the press, which sees Big Oil as a monolithic octopus yanking all the levers with ingenious synchronization?”

Now that's one smart kid!

Jeff Brokaw has a link to his 1953 obituary in the New York Times, which is as close to necrophilia as the Times as ever come.

And Andrew Sullivan has a link to The Onion's "1953" Stalin obit, which he describes--quite accurately--as "better than the New York Times'".

Meanwhile, ABC News' Peter Jennings yesterday, reported that "more than 3,000 people met today at the Soviet dictator’s grave adjacent to Red Square. Many of them said Russia could use a leader like Stalin again":

But at least Jennings described Stalin as “one of the world's most brutal dictators” and pointed out that “he murdered millions of his own people.”

After relaying how a 14-year-old boy claimed that though “Stalin had many sins,” they “were justified,” Jennings powerfully concluded: “There are still no memorials to the people Stalin had killed.”

Jennings concluded the March 5 World News Tonight: “Finally, this evening, a lesson about remembering. As the Bush administration contemplates trying to get rid of Saddam Hussein, who President Bush has always referred to as a brutal dictator, we take note of an anniversary. It is 50 years ago today that one of the world’s most brutal dictators died: Josef Stalin.”

For Peter Jennings, I suppose, that's progress.

HOWARD OWENS SELF-BLOGS: Err, that sounds a bit icky doesn't it? But he's done an excellent job of rounding up the best of his posts on the coming-very-soon war with Iraq into one meta-post on Blogcritics.

IS THERE A LINK BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTALISM AND RACISM? Interesting essay by Ronald Bailey of Reason.

There certainly seemed to be more than a twinge of it at last year's U.N. Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.

ON THE OTHER HAND, is Iraq merely a sideshow or tune-up for the coming war with North Korea, as Stanley Kurtz argues?

UPDATE: Or is this the next front?? (Link found via Team Stryker.)

"SHOCK AND AWE": Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is quoted by the The Washington Times as saying, "If asked to go into conflict in Iraq, what you would like to do is have it be a short conflict. And the best way to do that would be to have such a shock on the system the Iraqi regime would have to assume early on that the end is inevitable."

:Gen. Myers spoke to reporters during a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor newspaper.

He provided the first peek at the military's war plan for Iraq, which would involve massive strikes with precision-guided bombs and missiles.

"It would not be the template of Desert Storm," said Gen. Myers, referring to the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

"And we can't forget that war is inherently violent and people are going to die."

Pentagon war planners will try to minimize civilian casualties and damage to nonmilitary structures, but that "will occur," he said.

The four-star general said the war plan will employ a concept dubbed "shock and awe" to finish a conflict quickly. "Some of those techniques will be used," he said.

Harlan Ullman, a former Navy pilot and National Defense University specialist is a key architect of the shock and awe concept, which calls for achieving "rapid dominance" on the battlefield.

It calls for intense bombing that inflicts both physical and psychological damage on an enemy, including both high-explosive bombs and electronic-pulse weapons designed to cause widespread electronic failures.

Gen. Myers did not provide operational details of the war plan but said a key difference is the goal of disarming Iraq and disabling the Iraqi leadership.

"Shock and Awe" rolls off the tongue quite nicely. And makes far more sense than the slow, grinding carrot and stick approach that bogged us down in Vietnam.

THE COMPLETE MILITARY HISTORY OF FRANCE, courtesy of Group Captain Lionel Mandrake.

MAN BITES DOG: Steven Den Beste agrees with Saddam Hussein.

No really!

BRILLIANT! Scrappleface reports that under extreme pressure from both sides of the argument, the " 9th Circuit Court Solves 'Under God' Debacle".

As athiest Michael Newdow is quoted as saying, "This ruling is the answer to all of our prayers!"

A LOVE SUPREME: My review of Ashley Kahn's new "making of" book, on John Coltrane's classic album, is up on Blogcritics.

THEN AND NOW: Gerald Posner writes:

Thirty years ago there was never a question of North Vietnam attacking America or its civilians around the globe. Our often-misguided peace demonstrations inadvertently assisted the communists in brutally reuniting the country. But today’s peaceniks, who seem to be more interested in protecting Saddam than in trying to prevent the massive loss of life on American soil if terrorists get their hands on weapons of mass destruction, are playing with much more dangerous consequences. They are deluding themselves to the post 9.11 realities, and in so doing, their success would put the country at considerable risk.

Great essay. RTWT, as the TLA (actually FLA) goes.

THE TURKISH STOCK MARKET DROPPED TEN PERCENT in response to Saturday's vote, according to Steven Den Beste, who writes, "I think the Prime Minister is going to have some questions to answer. I must say that it's rather difficult to feel much sympathy for him."

(Love the URL on his post, by the way.)

SNUBBING TURKEY: Did US State Department missteps play a part in Saturday’s embarrassing vote? Joel Mowbray thinks so.

"PRESENT AT THE CREATION" Patrick Ruffini has first-person details about President Bush's landmark speech on Iraq at the AEI institute last week because he was there in the first person, personally.

Lots of other good material on his blog as well!

MISTER ROGERS, FAIR USE ACTIVIST: Nice post about the late Fred Rogers, by Eric Olsen.

And nice to Blogcritics.org working again!

"Swedes trash myth of refuse recycling".

Yeah, right. Next you'll be telling me that the New York Times once ran an editorial titled "Recycling is Garbage".

It sometimes seems that for many, environmentalism, and the rituals that go with it, such as an obsession with recycling, have become a replacement for religion. It reminds me of this story told by Jay Nordlinger:

In his article for the forthcoming NR on the Jo-burg jamboree, Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute tells a story about Julian Simon, the late and great economist.

He was at some environmental forum, and he said, “How many people here believe that the earth is increasingly polluted and that our natural resources are being exhausted?” Naturally, every hand shot up. He said, “Is there any evidence that could dissuade you?” Nothing. Again: “Is there any evidence I could give you — anything at all — that would lead you to reconsider these assumptions?” Not a stir. Simon then said, “Well, excuse me, I’m not dressed for church.”

I love that story, for what it says about the fixity of these beliefs, immune to evidence, reason, or anything else.

Exactly.

IS THE VATICAN ANTI-SEMITIC? Glenn Reynolds has lots of links, letters from readers, and this photo, which he describes as "damning", and as a (somewhat lapsed) Catholic, I concur.

AP HEADLINE: "Iraq Links Missile Destruction to Peace".

If Iraq's referring to these missiles, for once, I agree with them.

YOU'VE PROBABLY READ THIS ALREADY (I found it via InstaPundit), but this post by Tim Blair on the human shields who are fleeing Iraq, because they were told "deploy to the 'strategic sites' hand-picked by the government or leave immediately"!

As Blair writes, "Betrayed by the Iraqi government itself! Who could ever have predicted such a thing?"

Blair also notes the shields' leader, Ken Nichols O'Keefe, took his mother(!) with him to Iraq.

Here's more on the human shields.

YOU DON'T SAY! E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post writes, "whatever the cause may be, the fact is that the link between liberalism and patriotism is not as automatic in the public mind now as it was in FDR's day. In the wake of 9/11, that's a genuine problem for liberals."

FDR's day was almost sixty years ago. And liberals haven't been perceived as being patriotic beginning with George McGovern, thirty years ago. Besides, it's ever so hard to combine patriotism and postmodernism.

UPDATE: No sooner did I write this, then I came across this essay on Blogcritics, which pretty much proves Dionne's point.

RECKLESS ABANDON: That's how Redskins owner Dan Snyder is diving into free agency.

IS THE SIERRA CLUB RACIST? That's the provocative title to a post on the Townhall.com Blog by Jennifer Roberts.

TALKING TURKEY: What does Turkey's decision on Saturday not to allow US troops (at least for now) mean? Steven Den Beste has two excellent essays on the topic, here and here.

UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds (not surprisingly) has more.