Archive for June, 2006

The New F Word…

June 30, 2006

Firefox Fan film.

R.I.P. Jim Baen

June 30, 2006

Publisher Jim Baen, of Baen Books, died on June 28, 2006 after suffering a strong on June 12, 2006.

Jim Baen introduced several bestselling authors, including David Weber and John Ringo. He was a champion of the unencrypted ebook publishing model and made it work.

Toni Weisskopf and Dave suggest that people who wish to make a memorial donation purchase copies of THE WORLD TURNED UPSIDE DOWN and donate them to libraries or teenagers of their acquaintance.

He’s got a point…

June 30, 2006

Looking back on five years of war against Islamofacism.

June 29, 2006

Austin Bay takes an insightful look:

In 2001, bin Laden was promoting a “global caliphate.” The Islamist terror bombers who committed mass murdered in Madrid intended to restore Spain (Al Andalus) to Islam. A week before Iraq’s historic January 2005 democratic elections, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi declared a “fierce war on this evil principle of democracy.”

Iraq now has a democratically-elected government. Bin Laden hides in a cave. Spain remains subject to terrorist threat, but Catalonian-led regional separatism is a far bigger political threat to Spain than Al Qaeda.

Read the whole thing.

That Lion of Juda thing…

June 29, 2006

The Israeli military is taking proper action against terrorists.

They also delivered a wake up call to the President of Syria, a known supporter of terrorists.

The MSM view of Iraq as Vietnam

June 28, 2006

Jack Kelly has a good article on how and why the MSM & liberals view Iraq through Vietnam colored glasses:

The one great similarity between Vietnam and Iraq is that our enemies, despairing of victory on the battlefield, sought to win with a propaganda campaign.

In Vietnam, this strategy succeeded. If it fails in Iraq, it will be chiefly because of the emergence of the new media.

The turning point in Vietnam was the Tet Offensive of February, 1968. It was a crushing defeat for the Viet Cong.

“Our losses were staggering and a complete surprise,” said North Vietnamese Army Col. Bui Tin in a 1995 interview. “Our forces in the South were nearly wiped out. It took until 1971 to re-establish our presence.”

“The Tet Offensive proved catastrophic to our plans,” said Truong Nhu Tang, minister of justice in the Viet Cong’s provisional government, in a 1982 interview. “Our losses were so immense we were unable to replace them with new recruits.”

The news media reported this overwhelming American victory as a catastrophic defeat.

“Donning helmet, Mr. Cronkite declared the war lost,” recounted UPI’s Arnaud de Borchgrave. “It was this now famous television news piece that persuaded President Lyndon Johnson…not to run for re-election.”

Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media’s complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened “convinced him America’s resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi’s grasp,” Mr. de Borchgrave said.

Journalists are repeating in Iraq the errors (or worse) they made in Vietnam. Earlier this month, the Army sponsored a conference for retired general officers at Fort Carson, Colorado. They were addressed by recent returnees from Iraq, including Col. H.R. McMaster, commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

“All returnees agreed we are clearly winning the fight against the insurgents but are losing the public relations battle,” said a retired admiral in an email to friends.

A disturbing anecdote from Col. McMaster illustrates why. His 3rd ACR broke the insurgents’ hold of the city of Tal Afar last September in an operation which generated these effusive words of praise from the town’s mayor:

“To the lion hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets…(you are) not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism.”

Time magazine had a reporter and a photographer embedded with the 3rd ACR. When the battle was over, they filed a lengthy story and nearly 100 photographs.

“When the issue came out, the guts had been edited out of the reporter’s story and none of the photographs he submitted were used,” said the admiral, quoting Col. McMaster. “When the reporter questioned why his story was eviscerated, his editors…responded that the story and pictures were ‘too heroic.'”

Go read the whole thing.
HT to the Gay Patriot.

Hell, even Andrew Sullivan gets it:

But if we do pull out too soon, and Maliki is too weak to survive, we will have to deal with the Jihadist-riddled failed state that may emerge (and already has emerged in an embryonic form) in Iraq. Those forces will not decide to leave us alone because we have left. if anything, the reverse is true. They will claim victory and press the war further onto our shores and elsewhere. The one thing we have to keep in mind is that, however screwed up the Iraq policy has become, the enemy has not gone away. Withdrawal from Iraq would not mean that this existential struggle is over. It would mean that the enemy has been strengthened and ready to take the war against the West (and “heretical” Islam) to a more lethal stage.

70’s TV trivia

June 27, 2006

I just watched an early (first season) of the old TV show Kung Fu. John Saxon played a bounty hunter after Caine.
At the time, he was probably a better martial artist than David Carradine.

Bad News for the Taliban

June 27, 2006

The Strategy Page reports:

June 25, 2006: Battles with the Taliban have left 80 of the rebels dead in the last few days, and over 150 dead in the last two weeks. Afghan and Coalition dead have been much lower (a few dozen). While the Taliban claim to have over 10,000 armed men in action across southern Afghanistan, it is believed that there are only about 2,000 of them. Actually, there may now be less than that, since morale among the Taliban is getting shaky.

…many of the tribes in southern Afghanistan are actively opposing the Taliban, and Taliban terror tactics are not working to change minds. Most Taliban gunmen are in it for the money, but the Taliban isn’t paying enough to justify the increased risks.

Guess who wrote this…

June 27, 2006

Back in late 2001, the following appeared in a major US Newspaper:

Organizing the hijacking of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon took significant sums of money. The cost of these plots suggests that putting Osama bin Laden and other international terrorists out of business will require more than diplomatic coalitions and military action. Washington and its allies must also disable the financial networks used by terrorists.

The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America’s law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies.

That was the NY Times. Now their editorial policy appears to be aiding those terrorists is OK as long they get to take a cheap shot at the President.

HT to Cold Fury.

It is a tribute to the American government and its support of the 1st Amendment that the NY Times was able to publish the details of a major government anti-terrorist operation, which could lead to the deaths of American service personnel and civilians. The US Government knew of the story in advance, and while requested the story not be run (members of the government asking the story not be published included 9/11 Commission Chair Ben Hamilton, a liberal democrat Clintonite), it did not even stoop to the Clinton era tactic of threatening to cut off government access to try and stop the story.

The real question is why the NY Times chose to publish a story aiding the Islamofacist terrorists whose stated goal is to kill Americans and other proponents of basic Human Rights and freedom. The kindest theory is an advanced case of BDS.

The Ann Coulter Grateful Dead Interview…

June 27, 2006

A long time Deadhead with more than sixty shows under her belt, here is Taylor Hill’s interview with Ann Coulter solely about the Grateful Dead.