Some people have the idea that all wars are optional. Or at least a vast majority are for America. This especially includes Iraq.

Some wars are matters of survival. i.e. it is not always possible to choose your enemy. Sometimes the enemy chooses you.

It is possible to choose how to fight the enemy. Boots vs. bombs. However, boots can discriminate targets better than bombs can. They can also perform other useful tasks such as making friends and gathering intel. However, boots are limited by those in the military age range in any year. In the US we get about 1 million men entering that age range every year (which forms the main recruiting pool). The military gets about 10% of that pool every year. About the maximum possible in an all volunteer force. To increase the size of the force moderately rapidly (20,000 a year say), you would need to greatly increase retention rates. For that to be feasable you would need that many adequate performers who would like to be retained but are not due to Congressional force size limitations. Which I do not believe is the case.

Then you have the question of punitive expeditions vs transformative expeditions. One is quick, but often leaves a mess with the high likelyhood of having to cover the same ground repeatedly. Our you go in for a transformative expedition where your time horizon is much longer. All this affects troop man days spent in the field.

And lots of similar questions. Some political, some military, some economic, some cultural, some turning on social structure, some logistical, some technological, some related to infrastructure, etc., etc., etc.

All of this is complicated by the need to keep the oil flowing so civilization doesn't collapse.

On top of that there is reaction. The enemy is always adjusting strategy, tactics, and war aims in response to our moves as we adjust same in response to his. And then there is the problem of keeping alliances together and disrupting enemy alliances.

Which is what makes the whole question a wicked problem. You can't easily isolate the factors the way you can in a physics problem.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

After remarking that "EVERYONE COMES DOWN to Barcelona eventually," Jose Guardia opined that he was unphotogenic!

I took issue with this, as I don't think he is at all. But still, I thought I should make an offer of proof.

Here it is, taken today at Dali's castle in Pubol, Spain:

I'd say that if that's the best I can manage at a, um, Gala occasion, I think it's beyond debate that I'm clearly the least photogenic person on Earth.

So with that, I'm off to Barcelona's New Year's revelry.

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!

This is an open thread for all Classical Values readers who might wish to pass on New Years greetings (or any thing else) to each other.

Have a Happy and Dangerous New Year. And, be careful out there.

I'm loving Barcelona so much that I've been too busy to keep in touch with the outside world, although news like Saddam Hussein's execution is difficult to ignore -- even while on vacation.

In all honesty, I did not expect Saddam to be executed any time soon, much less today.

Considering Barcelona's left-wing reputation (it's similar to San Francisco in many ways), imagine my surprise to find myself toasting the tyrant's death here today!

But that's just what happened:

Toasting with me is Pajamas Media's Barcelona Editor José Guardia (also of Barcepundit), and the location is a fantastic restaurant called Galería Gastronómica, where Jose took me to lunch.

Not that we needed Saddam Hussein's death as an excuse to celebrate, but it didn't hurt. The tapas were to die for, as was the seafood paella, and the art by Lorenzo Quinn (actor Anthony's son). So if you're ever in Barcelona don't miss it!

And if you can't make it to Barcelona for the wonderful food, don't miss Barcepundit. Seriously, I think it's fair to call José the Instapundit of Spain.

Today he's not only been posting about the execution of Saddam, but about the terrorist car bomb which exploded at the Madrid airport. It appears to be the work of Basque separatists, and José sees it as a byproduct of government appeasement policies. (I agree with José, and not only am I not surprised, I think there's a lesson for Americans in this.)

I'd love to drink a toast to the end of terrorist appeasement in the West, but I'm afraid that will have to wait.

Today was a thoroughly delightful treat, and my thanks to José, whose gracious hospitality made it a special occasion all the way around!

AFTERTHOUGHT: Hey, speaking of the Madrid airport, I just remembered that I was just at the Madrid airport a few days ago! I guess I've been having too much fun to waste time being afraid. (Probably the hospitality!)

MORE (01/31/06): "EVERYONE COMES DOWN to Barcelona eventually," says Jose.

To which I say "Heh."

However, I must disagree with Jose's assessment of himself as unphotogenic. (I'm the king of that department, and I consider most of the photos I post of myself to be awful.)

On a more serious note, I should add that despite Barcelona's reputation as an anti-American, leftwing place, I have found the people uniformly friendly and helpful (aside from an occasional crazy sign or graffiti), and notwithstanding my sophomoric celebratory remarks, I'm sure that the average Barcelonan is just as supportive of Saddam Hussein's execution as David Kaspar (via Glenn Reynolds) reports.

I awoke this morning to find that a number of search engines/web portals were down: Google, Yahoo, and MSN were the big ones. Live's front page loads, but searches time out. Ask.com seems to be fully functional.

In addition, of the smaller search sites some are up, some down, some incredibly sluggish. What does it all mean?

Did the butler do it? Or someone more nefarious?

For those who have been following the Duke "Rape" Case you will know that it is a case of egregious prosecutorial misconduct. And yet there are similar cases every day in the USA. Why don't such cases recieve wide publicity? Simple - if such procedures were shown to be widespread the "justice" system in America would collapse.

Ankle Biting Pundits are outraged at the misconduct in the Duke case. Yeah. Sure. The outrage is palpable. No doubt.

Now tell me why testilying in drug prohibition cases is so common that we have a name for it? Alan Dershowitz in testimony before Congress said:

Police perjury in criminal cases - particularly in the context of searches and other exclusionary rule issues - is so pervasive that the former police chief of San Jose and Kansas City has estimated that "hundreds of thousands of law-enforcement officers commit felony perjury every year testifying about drug arrests" alone.

BTW any one notice how alcohol prohibition corrupted our justice system? I thought not.

In other words save your phoney outrage for the ignorant. What Nifong (the DA in the Duke case) did is an outgrowth of what goes on in America every day in every jurisdiction. Who will call for a clean up of that? Or is it another case (like Nifong) where jobs depend on it?

Christopher Slobogin in the University of Colorado Law Review shows why testilying is so corrosive:

Perhaps most importantly, police lying intended to convict someone, whether thought to be guilty or innocent, is wrong because once it is discovered, it diminishes one of our most crucial "social goods" -- trust in government. First, of course, the exposure of police perjury damages the credibility of police testimony. As the aftermath of the Fuhrman debacle has shown, the revelation that some police routinely and casually lie under oath makes members of the public, including those who serve on juries, less willing to believe all police, truthful or not. One comment that a New York prosecutor made about the impact of the Simpson case illustrates the point: "Our prosecutors now have to begin their cases defending the cops. Prosecutors have to bring the jury around to the opinion that cops aren't lying. That's how much the landscape has changed."

Police perjury can cause other systemic damage as well. Presumably, for instance, the loss of police credibility on the stand diminishes law enforcement's effectiveness in the streets. Most significantly, to the extent other actors, such as prosecutors and judges, are perceived to be ignoring or condoning police perjury, the loss of public trust may extend beyond law enforcement to the criminal justice system generally.

First, a revealing story of police misconduct from The Journal Inquirer in North Central Connecticut:

A Hartford police detective arrested days after his retirement in 2004 on charges of falsifying an arrest warrant has been granted a special form of probation that could lead to his arrest record being expunged.

The decision came after a hearing in which [Sgt. Franco] Sanzo's lawyer, Jake Donovan of Middletown, called another retired officer who said that police frequently sign their names to warrants - and swear before judges - that they've seen things they haven't.

So basically Sanzo's defense was that this type of misconduct is a matter of routine at his department. And it worked! I don't know if I'm more shocked that a defense attorney would offer an argument so contemptuous towards the Fourth Amendment, or that a judge would actually be persuaded by an attempt to rationalize police misconduct.

Here ia another case where the town fathers are trying to steal a man's business based on trumped up drug charges:

This is the story of David Ruttenberg, the totally law-abiding owner of Rack N' Roll billiards in Manassas, Virginia, who for years now has been targeted in repeated and fruitless attempts to link his business to drug activity. His livelihood is now almost completely destroyed and most of the cops and public officials in Manassas seem to be in on it. Motivated by an apparent desire to build an off-track betting facility on the property, Manassas police and others have spared no expense in this otherwise inexplicable series of bizarre events.

My favorite part is when Ruttenberg tries to explain his plight to a local news reporter at 1:00 in the morning and the Mayor suddenly jumps out of the bushes and tells the reporter not to trust to him.

Balko's research illustrates the ease with which ambiguous allegations of drug activity can be used by politicians as leverage against their enemies. Still, I suspect that the only thing unique about this story is the fact that someone as meticulous as Balko took an interest in it. His work on the Cory Maye case similarly illustrates the improbability of severe police corruption coming to light absent the involvement of a politically savvy blogger from Washington, D.C.

When business owners can be held liable for activities they had no knowledge of, it becomes painfully easy for corrupt officials with ulterior motives to capitalize on malfeasance.

If you were trying to screw over a business owner, how would you do it? Think about how easy it is to frame someone for drugs. Think about it, then ask yourself how often it happens.

Public Integrity has pages, and pages, and pages of this stuff. Probably just a few bad apples.

Here is just a bit from one of the articles at Public Integrity:

It is impossible to know for sure how often a specific prosecutor (or a specific defense attorney, judge, police officer, etc.) bends or breaks the rules. In most jurisdictions, at least 95 percent of the cases that pour in from the police never reach a jury, which means any misconduct occurs away from public view. The only trial those defendants receive takes place in the prosecutor's office; the prosecutor becomes the judge and the jury. The prosecutor is the de facto law after an arrest, deciding whether to charge the suspect with committing a crime, what charge to file from a range of possibilities, whether to offer a pre-trial deal, and, if so, the terms of the deal.

Katherine Goldwasser, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who served as a prosecutor in Chicago before joining academia, suggested that misconduct often occurs out of sight, especially in cases that never go to trial. Those cases by definition do not generate appellate opinions (and thus are for the most part beyond the scope of the Center study). Goldwasser told the Center. "It is not a safe assumption that cases ending with guilty pleas are absent prosecutorial misconduct."

Here is the case of James E. Richardson, Jr.:

In September 1996, a Kanawha [West Virginia- ed.] circuit judge overturned Richardson's conviction based on allegations that state police chemist Fred Zain fabricated evidence and that prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Commenter passerby took exception to some of the things I said in The Origins Of Islamic Rage. Here is my reply to his question about the rise of tribalism in the west. I don't actually answer his question (directly), but I do look at what I consider a subset of sociobiology - politicobiology.

===

As long as we are human we will have the alpha male problem.

If you look at human history - freedom is not much in evidence. No matter how desireable for the individual it is unusual. It takes effort.

Tribalism is the natural state of humankind. It is what you would expect from genetics. The closer the genetic connection, the more trust given to the individual.

A place or a world where Jewish/Christian values predominate is a better world in my opinion. "All men are created equal" is an anti-tribalist statement. However, it is not natural. The Islamics are correct. Their system is more in accord with humans as they exist in a state of nature.

As to the sexual theories etc. You need to look into my work on PTSD. Start with:

Heroin

PTSD and the Endocannabinoid System

Men with PTSD are more prone to violence than men without. Sexual assault on children is a good way of creating a person with long term PTSD problems (providing the genetics are correct).

If violence against children is endemic, you then have a resevoir of angry males for jihad. i.e. some one has to pay for the torment of the individual. Since we are genetically biased against looking at the evil of our parents it then must be ascribed to some outside source.

When we start getting the connection between biology and politics (monkey politics) we will get better political systems.

When Kissenger said "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac" he wasn't kidding. That is only one example of the relation between biology and politics.

Sociobiology is more or less accepted. What I am looking at is a subset of that. Politicobiology. Thus, power and control.

My recent piece on drug prohibition It Was Never About The Drugs is another example of NORMAL human behavior. Dividing the ins from the outs.

Or try How To Put An End To Drug Users. Which discusses (in a round about way) how the impulse for genocide is wired into the human system. It discusses how that wiring is activated.

So near to the gods. So close to the devils. Between heaven and hell.

Why? Because, Power and Control gives a reproductive advantage.

Politicobiology explains why there will always be an opposition party. It is the way we are wired.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Reader Paul sent me this interesting item on the decline in belief among Muslims in Russia.

This latest research deals a severe blow to plans by Russian Muslim leaders to wrench concessions from the Kremlin. These Muslim leaders are pushing for the creation of a new high-ranking position in the government just for so-called `Muslim Affairs', and they are also trying to have Islamic law officially accepted in those areas of the country where ethnic Muslims dominate.

So-called `ethnic' Muslims --- people traditionally seen as Muslims, such as Tatars, Bashkirs, Chechens, and Ingush --- account for about 15 percent of the total Russian population, or 20 million people. The fact that only 6 percent of the total Russian population, about 9 million people, claimed to be Muslim means that more than half of `ethnic' Muslims have abandoned the Mohammedan cult practiced by their forefathers.

This is also a very good example whereby Muslim leaders deny any freedom of choice to `their' peoeple. They claim as their own anyone born into an ethnic group that is perceived to be `Muslim', and under no circumstance will they let go of these people. According to Muslim leaders: once a Muslim, always a Muslim. Islam is all about violence, coercion and the absence of freedom.

The VTsIOM poll is very encouraging news. True, more and more mosques are opening in Russia, but not many people are attending them. Indeed, many Tatars and Bashkirs have become Orthodox Christian; or simply do not have any religious affiliation. Islam in Russia, however, remains most virulent in the North Caucasus among the Chechens and Inghush, whose inclination toward violence and terrorism is well-known.

What we need now is a survey team to go in and find out how this happened. Is it a local phenomenon or can it be replicated?

Clayton Cramer thinks that Islam may have been a proxy for nationalism in those regions. With the Soviets gone no need for nationalism as a resistance movement, thus the decline of Islam. Certainly a testable thesis. If it is true it means that it is of limited application because our current problem is with transnational Islam.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Commenter A. Jacksonian posted the following in the comments to Not Enough CO2. He has some nice easy to understand charts and graphs at the link below.

=========

One of the great things about being a geologist is being able to actually get that 'long term perspective'. So, when you want a long-term perspective on climate and weather you do NOT go to meteorologists... you go to geologists. Thus, my view on global warming which still stands. Without taking the larger, geological context of things like the speed of plate tectonics, orogeny (mountain building) and the sudden loss of inland seas, no one can make any basis for discriminating between relatively short term variations in a chaotic inter-glacial period that has typically seen fast and steep temperature variations, larger global effects and the effects of mankind. CO2 levels are at a historic LOW and there is no correlation between CO2 and global temperatures except at the very low end. And even *that* does not take into account break-up of the last supercontinent and the loss of inland seas due to the continents moving faster and riding higher on the mantle.

The Earth has even had sudden, intense, glacial periods that ended just as abruptly with NO change in CO2 that was appreciable and the picking up the exact same warm period right after the glacial period.

And let us not forget that Mars is also undergoing a warming spell... so insolation also plays a part in all of this...

But that is what you get when you ask climatologists to speculate on a mere 100 years worth of data and not on 4.2 billion years worth. It is not their field.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Jerry Ford has died. As always when you mention the life of Ford, the question of Nixon comes up. I have lots of beefs with Nixon's career. This is my biggest. Using not just private henchmen, but the power of government to kidnap and injure your political opponents under color of law.

Nixon said to Elvis:

"You know," Nixon said, " those who use drugs are the protesters. You know, the ones who get caught up in dissent and violence. They're the same group of people."

Nixon said something similar to Haldeman on the Nixon tapes with the additional proviso that he thought pot was no worse than the martini he was drinking.

For Nixon, the drug war was never about drugs. It was a scheme to attack his political opponents based on some cultural characteristic.

It has always been thus. Alcohol prohibition was in part an attempt to destroy the Democratic Machine which organized in saloons. Laws against smoking opium were instigated because Chinese smoked opium. White folks, who traditionally drank opium had no such prohibition.

Sadly the pattern hasn't changed much. Blacks, buy, sell, and use drugs in aproximate proportion to their population. About 12%. They make up something like 50 to 60% of the prison population.

I'm with Milton Friedman on this one. This whole stinking pile we call the drug war is totally immoral. It is about persecuting the unfavored, strictly power and control. Sadly we are getting that way with tobacco users as well. What? Forcing people out into the cold to have a smoke isn't persecution? Give me a break.

Let me quote Professor Whitebread form the last link. From a speech he gave in 1995 when tobacco prohibition was just gathering steam. What he said seemed at least moderately fantastic at the time.

And so, yeah, we will continue the War on Drugs for a while until everybody sees its patent bankruptcy. But, let me say that I am not confident that good sense will prevail. Why? Because we love this idea of prohibition. We really do. We love it in this country. And so I will tell you what I predict. You will always know which ones are going out and which ones are coming in. And, can't you see the one coming right over the hill? Well, folks, we are going to have a new prohibition because we love this idea that we can solve difficult medical, economic, and social problems by the simple enactment of a criminal law. We adore this, and of course, you judges work it out, we have solved our problem. Do you have it? Our problem is over with the enactment of the law. You and the cops work it out, but we have solved our problem.

Here comes the new one? What's it going to be? No, it won't be guns, this one starts easy. This one is the Surgeon General has what? --Determined -- not "we want a little more checking it out", not "we need a few more studies", not "reasonable people disagree" -- "The Surgeon General has determined that the smoking of cigarettes will kill you."

Now, all you need, and here is my formula, for a new prohibition every time is what? We need an intractable, difficult, social, economic, or medical problem. But that is not enough. There has to be another thing. It has to divide by class --- by social or economic class, between US and THEM.

And so, here it comes. '

You know the Federal Government has been spending a lot of money since 1968 trying to persuade us not to smoke. And, indeed, the absolute numbers on smoking have declined very little. But, you know who has quit smoking, don't you? In gigantic numbers? The college-educated, that's who. The college-educated, that's who doesn't smoke. Who are they? Tomorrow's what? Movers and kickers, that's who. Tomorrow's movers and kickers don't smoke. Who does smoke? Oh, you know who smokes out of all proportion to their numbers in the society -- it is the people standing in your criminal courtrooms, that's who. Who are they? Tomorrow's moved and kicked, that's who.

And, there it is friends, once it divides between the movers and kickers and the moved and kicked it is all over and it will be all over very shortly.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

That Relapsed Catholic is hitting my buttons today. The Catholic has excerpted the following from That Fascist, Heinlein:

Indeed, capitalism is the opposite of fascism, which favors government control of the every economic decision. Calling us (liberals and conservatives) 'fascists' simply reveals the Left's nostaglia for truly evil enemies (like Nazis) and its current reluctance to engage in a battle of ideas. So Bush is a fascist and so is Heinlein...

(...)

"I was covering a anti-globalization street demonstration in Prague in 2000 for the Wall Street Journal and noticed that the crowd was chanting loudly in Spanish. I asked a demonstrator why this pan-European crowd was reciting Spanish slogans instead of Czech. 'Don't you know it?' he asked. 'This is one of the great anti-Fascist chants from the Spanish Civil War.'

"In other words, it was from the 1930s.

"Even the young communists think like old men, living in a glorious past that has long since passed. This is why they still want to talk about McCarthy, Nixon, Vietnam, 'the 1960s,' the minimum wage, the draft, the United Nations...

Their solution for the Iraq war and the Iran A-Bomb? Get France, Britain, Russia and China to agree. In other words, get our World War II allies to join us. Hasn't the world changed in 60 years? The French and British have given away their empires and forfeited a role in global affairs. They have one aircraft carrier each. Russia is failing state that could not rescue the crew on one of their own submarines. China could play only a bit part in the tsunami relief effort and is actively involved with two members of the axis of evil (Iran and North Korea). Surely India, Japan and Turkey are more important to us now?

"The Left's one relatively new concern is global warming. Yes, they have been threatening an environmental catastrophe since the late 1950s and climate change since the early 1970s, but it, nonetheless, is among their fresher concerns. Still, it is worth pointing out that worrying about the weather is principally a concern of the aged. The rest of us are too busy hurrying to work."

Cross Posted at Power and Control

I was noodling around at Relapsed Catholic and came across a note on Kwanzaa. Specifically Newsbusters says that Cox News is honoring the creator of Kwanzaa. Let us start with the headline of this little holiday confection.

Cox News Honors Kwanzaa Creator, A Rapist and Torturer

It amazes me that this Kwanzaa business has been washed of the real life criminal activity of its creator. The man was a race monger, a violent thug, a rapist, a torturer... just a horrible human being.

Yet never a word of this man's evil is ever uttered when his pseudo holiday is discussed in the MSM.

And the Cox News Service did it again on Christmas in theirs titled Kwanzaa glows even brighter after 40 years.

Kwanzaa turns 40 today. The colorful holiday, invented by California professor Maulana Ron Karenga in 1966, is like a jazz musician who fuses bits and pieces of music into a vibrant mosaic of sound. Kwanzaa, "first fruit" in Swahili, is a fluent, nonreligious holiday that borrows liberally from a patchwork of cultures and traditions.

Karenga originally created the seven-day observance to empower black communities and uplift black culture and identity.

Yes, kindly professor Ron Karenga. What a great guy.

Of course, his name wasn't really Ron Karenga originally. It was Ronald McKinley Everett.

In 1969 the organization called US (as is "us"--blacks--against "them" --whites), a black power militant group Everett founded, frequently clashed in violence with police and even other black power groups. Members of his group even killed two Black Panthers in 1969.

Nice and peaceful, eh?

In 1971 Everett served time in jail for assault. By then Everett had changed his name to Maulana Ron Karenga and began to affect a pseudo African costume and act a native African.

It wasn't mere assault he was convicted of, either. It was sexual assault and torture perpetrated against some of his female followers. The L.A. Times then reported that he placed a hot soldering iron in one woman's mouth and used a vise to crush another's toe.

Relapsed has more on Kwanzaa.

Ann Coulter is scathing with a funny bit of doggerel. H/T Commenter linearthinker

Update: 31 Dec'06 2340z

Ann Coulter blames Kwanzaa on the FBI . H/T Steve Sailer

Cross Posted at Power and Control

The Palestinians are still at it.

A mother of two was murdered Tuesday evening in front of her children in the city of Ramla, south of Tel Aviv. The woman, a 29-year-old divorcee, was killed by a barrage of gunshots while standing at the entrance to her home.

Large police forces were dispatched to the scene of the incident and began looking for suspects. According to estimates, the murder was carried out as a "honor killing."

The police investigation revealed that the woman was standing at the entrance to her home with her two 4-year-old and 8-year-old children, and was about to leave the house. The babysitter who arrived to look after the children was also present.

Fundamentalist Islamists in Gaza have begun a campaign of bombing and arson against Internet cafes, pharmacies and pool halls.

A group calling itself the Swords of Islamic Righteousness issued a statement claiming responsibility for some of the attacks, denouncing Western, immoral behavior, such as unveiled women and loud music, a Times of London correspondent reported.

The group said it would continue "shooting rocket-propelled grenades and planting bombs at Internet cafes in Gaza, which are trying to make a whole generation preoccupied with matters other than jihad and worship."

Pharmacies suspected of dispensing smuggled hallucinogens have also been targeted, as have pool halls, which the fundamentalists claim are immoral.

Check out Palestinian Civil War Watch - 5 for more on the war on CD shops and mobile phone stores.

Ramzy Baroud comments in Arab News about Palestinian discontents. He blames the Palestinian's problems on outside agitators.

What is taking place in the Occupied Territories, particularly in the Gaza Strip has much less to do with inter-factional rivalries and a lot more with regional and international power plays, in which some foolhardy Palestinians decided to involve themselves for the sake of maintaining personal and factional gains.

To avoid delving into self-pity, I wish to emphasize a point that I have made repeatedly in the past: If it were not for the dysfunctional nature and lack of unity within the myriad of political and societal structures that claims to represent the Palestinian people, no political designs, be it American or Israeli or any other, would've succeeded in duping the Palestinians into such caustic behavior and self-defeatism. (The gunning down of three kids on Dec. 11 and the killing of other innocent people, including children, in addition to the attack on Prime Minister Ismail Haniya on Dec. 14, have indeed crossed all red lines.)

Previous postings in the series:

Palestinian Civil War Watch - 0
Palestinian Civil War Watch - 1
Palestinian Civil War Watch - 2
Palestinian Civil War Watch - 3
Palestinian Civil War Watch - 4
Palestinian Civil War Watch - 5

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Barcelona is truly one of the most beautiful cities in Europe. I've only been here a day, but I'm having a wonderful time.

Here's how the streets looked on Christmas night:

And today on the waterfront, the old port authority building:

Oh, and earlier today, while strolling along Las Ramblas, I did a little "outreach":

I've hardly had time to keep up with the blogosphere, but I did read something in InstaPundit about the demise of Libertarianism, so I thought I should be covering my bases....

I'm glad to see that Eric has enlisted a guest blogger considering I haven't written about anything in a long time, and I really have no awareness of the outside world. for me it's been nothing but teaching, lesson plans, and the politics of the public school system.

And since M. Simon has been giving this site some legitimate content, I can tell you something else about the Nintendo Wii, which I blogged from the other day. I haven't seen this anywhere else, but the internet channel on the Wii works with both Youtube and Last.fm, which means (1) I can lie on the couch and watch Lazy Sunday on the big screen, and (2) I don't have to worry about the playlist at my next party.

Unlike blogging, listening to Last-fm on the Wii is something I definitely will do more of in the future.

Cale Hahn at Israpundit is going on about American relations with Israel. He thinks America is being a treacherous ally. Especially the ISG (Iraq Study Group - James Baker leading the charge.)

In regards to Israel, the ISG report states, "The US will not be able to achieve its goals in the Middle East unless the US deals directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict." Such a statement makes one wonder how many divisions Israel has operating in Iraq and Arab countries.

It is, in point of act, Washington 's tacit acknowledgement to the Islamic world it is prepared to use its influence to once again force Israel into further concessions and territorial withdrawals.

Only America, as Israel 's historic friend and ally, possesses the influence over Israel to force her into additional territorial withdrawals. That Washington has been the catalyst for the majority of "peace initiatives" in the Middle East is a matter of record. The pattern has been the same for Madrid, Oslo, Hebron, Wye, Sharm el-Sheikh, Camp David, Taba, the Road Map and the Lebanon and Gaza withdrawals:

Islamic leaders, aware of US influence over Israel , tell the US the key to securing its interests in the Mideast is "resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict". Washington, in turn, persuades, bribes or strong-arms Israel into accepting terms and withdrawing from territory under the guise of a "peace process". Muslims then violate the agreements and the territory becomes safe havens from which they launch attacks against Israeli population centers. This pattern is unchanged, and is a blueprint for the ISG's strategy of redeeming American influence in the Middle East.

Immediately following the publishing of the ISG report, several disturbing events occurred:

-James Baker proposed a US-organized conference dubbed Madrid-2, promoted as a forum to discuss Iraq but will actually focus on Islamic demands for a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Judea , Jerusalem , Samaria and the Golan. Iran and Syria will be invited to the conference. Israel will not.

-Newly appointed US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates characterized Iran's nuclear weapons program as motivated by deterrence against a nuclear armed Israel. Never mind that Ahmadinejad and Iran 's rulers have stated their intent to "wipe Israel off the map" in the very near future.

-Without consulting the Israeli government, Washington officially disclosed Israel 's possession of nuclear weapons.

- Newly empowered Congressional Democrats are secretly meeting with Hamas.

The sheer brazenness of the American treachery is staggering.

The treachery was on Israel's part for not taking the Bekaa Valley last summer despite numerous hints in public (many more and more direct in private I'm sure).

Syria said it would have to get involved if Israel took the Bekaa. Iran said it would come in too.

Sure it would have hurt Israel much more than the war did because of unpreparedness (a lot more dead soldiers). However, it would have rid Israel of two very big problems at little extra political cost to America or Israel (America would have handled Iran, being closer to the scene of action).

Now America is saying screw you.

I think a new government could fix this.

Tell me again why there aren't mass demonstrations against the government? Cell phones stopped working, the internet has been shut down, no one can find the time to organize, Israelis can't find the streets, or they think the current government is not bad enough to be worth political action?

Bush wants the double crosser Olmert out of power and Likud back in power. Here is what I think happened: The deal was - Bush gets Israel time, Israel moves on Bekaa in an effort to goad Syria and Iran into the war. Olmert does the preliminary moves on Bekaa - recon, special forces, small unit action (company size), helicopter insertions, etc. to make it look like something was going to happen. However, no movement in strength ever happened. Olmert was just using the war to punish Hizballah. So finally Bush shut the war down. Olmert is too political (what if the Israeli people really find out how totally unprepared the Army is?) and too tactial. Swatting flies instead of burying the manure.

If Israelis care about Israel, take to the streets in Israel. As an American all I can do is sit on the sidelines and cheer (or boo as the case requires and my understanding allows).

Olmert is Israel's Jonah. Time to throw him overboard.

Israpundit has another bit on American "treachery".

Cross Posted at Power and Control

There is a discussion going on at the Netscape Blog about the Pope's comments on science and technology. The Pope said worship God not technology.

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) -- Pope Benedict said in his Christmas message on Monday that mankind, which has reached other planets and worships technology, cannot live without God or turn its back on the hungry.

What has the Maker done for us lately? Well, given us the brains and culture to make all the technology stuff happen.

There is a very important place for the spiritual (the practice of science and especially technology is very spiritual - honesty and truth are required every step of the way - you can't lie to Mother Nature). However, the Pope ought to embrace (co-opt) science and technology. His fight against it is not only in vain. It is stupid.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Atmospheric CO2 is very low by geological standards. Lack of sufficient CO2 in the atmosphere stunts plant growth.

We need to get together with Russia, China, oil producers, coal producers, and in fact the rest of the world to see what we can do to get more CO2 in the atmosphere.

Anon posted a couple of good links about geologic CO2 in the comments at Power and Control.

CO2 Science
CO2 in Geologic Time

Anon has a few more links of interest:

CO2 in geologic time with error bands.
Debunking the hockey stick.
Hockey stick hysteria or why low pass filters can eliminate useful data.

Don't look now but Congress is getting in on the act with an act of Congress once the Democrats are in.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Commenter Gabriel in a response to my post Middle East Politics had this to say:

Thanks Simon. This is decent for Friedman....

Had heard this quote before:
"It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small country as Israel, with only about seven million inhabitants, can defeat the Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West's problem is that it does not understand this."

I dunno. I think we very well understand that Arabs suffer from incredible penis-envy, I just don't think the Arabs understand it at a conscious level. Until they understand it, we have to treat their sensitive egos with kid gloves. Or am I way off?

To which I replied:

Gabriel,

I put a up post on that point: Fighting For Self Esteem.

You make this point:

Until they understand it, we have to treat their sensitive egos with kid gloves. Or am I way off?

You are way off. Your statement previous to the above is closer to the mark:

I think we very well understand that Arabs suffer from incredible penis-envy, I just don't think the Arabs understand it at a conscious level.

I think we have to pound it into their sorry heads and asses.

To the effect: You are a sorry, small dicked, uncivilized people.

Once they have been totally and publically humiliated they will either change or disappear.

Carolyn Glick says that the job will have to be done by freelancers.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

With winter fast coming on it might be a good idea to look at Winter Survival in the Wilderness.

There really is too much important information to quote. So go read the whole thing.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

Here is a bit I posted at my place a few days ago. It fits in with the themes often seen here at Classical Values.

===

Commenter Karridine alerted me to this interesting piece by Orson Scott Card on the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.

Card's central thesis is that trade made the empire and its people richer and that the empire fell because trade was no longer safe.

Trade breaks down as merchants lose confidence and markets are disrupted by barbarian invaders. When this happens, specialization becomes impossible, local areas must become agriculturally and militarily self-sufficient again, and between disease, famine, war, and emigration, populations crash.

For a century, America has been the great cushion to absorb the shocks that might have brought down western civilization. In the Great War (WWI), Europe crashed its own population through war and then crashed further through the influenza epidemic. But the American economy provided the means for France and Britain -- but not Germany -- to recover. Arguably, it was the failure to include Germany in the recovery that led to repeated economic crises, and when America finally joined Europe with its own Depression in the 1930s, the stage was set for the next barbarian invasion.

He then goes on to discuss the American "imperial" system.

In the aftermath of WWII, once again America was the economic cushion -- only this time the portion of Germany under western occupation was included in the economic recovery, as was Japan.

The result, over the past sixty years, has been a pax Americana covering much of the world. And the world has prospered fantastically wherever the American military sustained it.

Let me say that again: As with Rome, the American military has been the wall behind which a system of safe trade has allowed an extraordinary degree of specialization and therefore mutually sustained prosperity.

America has not been imperial -- we have not been stripping other countries. On the contrary, those nations that were able to sustain the internal peace necessary for production, and that have joined the economy presided over by America, have all been able to join in the prosperity as equals.

We don't tax them -- quite the opposite. We have taxed ourselves to pay for the military protection that maintained the safety and perception of safety that allowed the European community and Japan to flourish. Their welfare economies are only possible because they did not have to pay for their own defense at anything like the levels we have paid.

People talk about America's enormous defense budget as if it were a menace to the world. But our enormous defense budget has allowed Japan and Europe -- and Taiwan and South Korea -- to thrive without having to invest much of their gross domestic product in defense.

Then he discusses how the American system could fall to the barbarians.

Here's how it happens: America stupidly and immorally withdraws from the War on Terror, withdrawing prematurely from Iraq and leaving it in chaos. Emboldened, either Muslims unite against the West (unlikely) or collapse in a huge war between Shiites and Sunnis (already beginning). It almost doesn't matter, because in the process the oil will stop flowing.

And when the oil stops flowing, Europe and Japan and Taiwan and Singapore and South Korea all crash economically; Europe then has to face the demands of its West-hating Muslim "minority" without money and without the ruthlessness or will to survive that would allow them to counter the threat. The result is accommodation or surrender to Islam. The numbers don't lie -- it is not just possible, it is likely.

America doesn't crash right away, mind you. But we still have a major depression, because we have nowhere to sell our goods. And depending on what our desperate enemies do, it's a matter of time before we crash as well.

Card looks at what America might become without world trade and imported oil.

...our own oil production cannot meet the demands of transportation and production at current levels. Rationing will cripple us. We will not be able to maintain our huge fleet of trucks. Air travel will becoming shockingly expensive and airlines will fail or consolidate. We won't even be allowed to drive our cars on long trips because gasoline will be rationed.

We will go back to the rails. Only we won't have the money to rebuild and refurbish the railroad system -- it will only be able to limp along.

It will look, even inside the United States, amazingly like the shrinkage that happened at the time of the fall of Rome.

Then, and only then, will America look -- and be -- vulnerable to any kind of intervention from the south. Economies that are still somewhat primitive will recover faster than economies that are absolutely dependent on specialization.

It takes two generations for the dark ages to reach America. But they will come, if we allow this nightmare to begin. Because once you reach the tipping point, there's no turning back, as the Emperor Justinian discovered.

Our global economic system is a brilliant creation, imperfect of course, but powerful and effective in creating more prosperity for more people than ever in the history of the world. It is a creation of America's military and America's benign government of the world -- so benign they pretend we don't govern it.

Our enemies and most of our "allies" and many of our own citizens are working as hard as possible to bring the whole thing crashing down, though that is not at all what they intend.

They just haven't learned the lessons -- the principles -- of how great economic empires are maintained. They only look at the political dogmas du jour and spout their platitudes. People like me are ridiculed for seeing the big picture and learning the lessons of history.

We many not be so lucky this time.

Fortunately we have an ace in the hole. However, we had better get cracking. This new source of energy will take 5 years to prototype and probably 10 years to roll out. There is no time to waste.

First I'm no man of wealth, but I do have a fair amount of taste. Especially for fine women, fine wine, and fine cigars.

Now that the Devil is out of the way. Merry Christmas to all.

My main interests are politics, American and Middle Eastern, science and engineering especially the energy sector, the drug war and the nature of addiction, plus a smattering of economics. And what ever else crosses my mind. I come at the world from a libertarian perspective, although I was a card carrying Libertarian for a number of years. 9/11 cured me. I now consider myself a member of the libertarian wing of the Republican Party. A way long back I was a Communist (Trot - workers of the world revolt) so I have their line down. A study of economics cured me of that.

If you have any questions, feel free.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

As I get ready to leave for a vacation, I was pleasantly surprised to see a post from Dennis (which I think is a good omen).

I'll be gone for eleven days, and depending on time and Internet connectivity, I might be able to check in, or I might not.

But regular readers, fret not!

I'm especially honored to announce that M. Simon of Power and Control has graciously consented to do guest blogging in my absence. Considering that Dennis wrote a post yesterday, and the distinct possibility that Justin usually has a post or two up his sleeves (and there may be another mystery blogger, although I'm never completely sure), there ought to be plenty of activity around here.

Have fun all, and Merry Christmas!

Coco says "Ho Ho Ho!"

Doesn't she look hot in the Santa hat?

This is really fun. I'm blogging to you now from the new browser channel for the Nintendo Wii (powered by Opera). The typing interface isn't as bad as you might think, but it definitely isn't something I'm likely to do again. You point and click with the wiimote on a visual keyboard, and the software suggests words as cell phones do.
>Just noticed that it also offers another visual interface that mimics the layout of a phone keypad. (I used that in this paragraph, the keyboard in the last.)
Merry Christmas to me! Oh ... And to all of you as well.

You want a friend in Washington? Get a dog!

-- Harry S. Truman

This interesting discussion of altruism (a topic which seems to interest mainly libertarians these days) triggered thoughts of Harry's maxim:

What are friends for and how can a friendship be tested? By behaving altruistically, would be the most common answer and by sacrificing one's interests in favour of one's friends. Friendship implies the converse of egoism, both psychologically and ethically. But then we say that the dog is "man's best friend". After all, it is characterized by unconditional love, by unselfish behaviour, by sacrifice, when necessary. Isn't this the epitome of friendship? Apparently not. On the one hand, the dog's friendship seems to be unaffected by long term calculations of personal benefit. But that is not to say that it is not affected by calculations of a short-term nature. The owner, after all, looks after the dog and is the source of its subsistence and security. People - and dogs - have been known to have sacrificed their lives for less. The dog is selfish - it clings and protects what it regards to be its territory and its property (including - and especially so - the owner). Thus, the first condition, seemingly not satisfied by canine attachment is that it be reasonably unselfish.

The author touches on this when he implicitly acknowledges that such "altruism" is an internalized response to fear of punishment (or shame, which is a form of punishment) at the hands of society:

The first order desire of the donator is to avoid anxiety feelings generated by a cognitive dissonance. In the process of socialization we are all exposed to altruistic messages. They are internalized by us (some even to the extent of forming part of the almighty superego, the conscience). In parallel, we assimilate the punishment inflicted upon members of society who are not "social" enough, unwilling to contribute beyond that which is required to satisfy their self interest, selfish or egoistic, non-conformist, "too" individualistic, "too" idiosyncratic or eccentric, etc. Completely not being altruistic is "bad" and as such calls for "punishment". This no longer is an outside judgement, on a case by case basis, with the penalty inflicted by an external moral authority. This comes from the inside: the opprobrium and reproach, the guilt, the punishment (read Kafka). Such impending punishment generates anxiety whenever the person judges himself not to have been altruistically "sufficient". It is to avoid this anxiety or to quell it that a person engages in altruistic acts, the result of his social conditioning. To use the Butler scheme: the first-degree desire is to avoid the agonies of cognitive dissonance and the resulting anxiety. This can be achieved by committing acts of altruism. The second-degree desire is the self-interest to commit altruistic acts in order to satisfy the first-degree desire. No one engages in contributing to the poor because he wants them to be less poor or in famine relief because he does not want others to starve. People do these apparently selfless activities because they do not want to experience that tormenting inner voice and to suffer the acute anxiety, which accompanies it. Altruism is the name that we give to successful indoctrination. The stronger the process of socialization, the stricter the education, the more severely brought up the individual, the grimmer and more constraining his superego - the more of an altruist he is likely to be. Independent people who really feel comfortable with their selves are less likely to exhibit these behaviours.

This is not to knock sincere friendship, which means more to me than almost anything, and to which I attach the highest possible value. But how on earth can anyone honestly claim to be a "friend," say, of "the poor"? (Or any other group; for that matter, even "the rich"!) It is simply not possible to be friends with people you do not know and have never met, and I don't trust people who claim to be acting on behalf of others, who claim to know what's best for them, etc.

The successfully indoctrinated, though, are easy to "convince." Somehow, I wouldn't find it emotionally rewarding to convince the already indoctrinated. But as I say that, I must freely admit that such behaviors put many people on the road to riches. I've known a lot of rich trial lawyers who made millions "helping the poor" -- and whose attentive minions agreed with them wholeheartedly as they shared in the contingent fee loot. You don't have to live like Mother Teresa to be a successful "altruist."

But it begs the question of what is truly altruism. I have no problem with altruism that is voluntarily chosen, like charity. But once it's forced on others (whether by indocrination or at gunpoint), it's just another form of dishonesty. A con game unworthy of respect. Not that I don't respect the power of the altruist police to throw me in jail if I don't pay up. But respecting power is not the type of respect I mean. No one can make me respect a theory. Asking me to acknowledge that altruism at gunpoint is a social good is like asking me to believe that the cop who pulls me over for going 65 miles per hour on a highway marked 55 but designed to be safe at 85 is "helping" to protect my "safety." No; he's gathering revenue. And it all goes into the greedy hands of people who act in the name of altruism.

Of course, if pulled over, I would freely acknowledge my sins, in the most penitent manner possible. I would act ashamed. Contrite. Respectful. And if it were demanded of me, I would freely "acknowledge" that the officer was protecting society -- and me. Yes, my behavior would be dishonest by any standard.

But not as dishonest as it would if I believed my lies. I often wonder how many of the "successfully indoctrinated" are truly indoctrinated, or whether they've just forced themselves to keep their natural selfishness in the closet.

Question: isn't the desire to avoid punishment (or shame) grounded in rational selfishness?

If so, what virtue is there in having people confuse punishment avoidance with sincere belief?

I've long suspected there's a huge closet of insincere altruists who'd love to come out, but the Democrats and the Republicans keep them fighting.

Speaking of fictional facts that might as well be true, I see that District Attorney Mike Nifong has dropped the rape charges against the Duke University La Crosse students:

Lacking any "scientific or other evidence independent of the victim's testimony" to corroborate that aspect of the case, the district attorney said in court papers, "the state is unable to meet its burden of proof with respect to this offense."

Nifong did not immediately return calls for comment, and a sign posted on his office door read, "No media, please!"

Excuse me? Kidnapping?

I guess that might as well have happened too, even if it didn't.

Duke President Richard Brodhead has called for the DA to resign.

"The district attorney should now put this case in the hands of an independent party, who can restore confidence in the fairness of the process," Brodhead said. "Further, Mr. Nifong has an obligation to explain to all of us his conduct in this matter."

Far more is involved in this case than the misdeeds of one District Attorney. There is a segment of the black community -- a small segment, we can hope -- that figures it is payback time for all the black men who have been railroaded to jail on trumped-up charges involving the rape of white women.

The local branch of the NAACP, an organization which fought against such injustices in times past, has thrown its weight behind those who are trying to railroad three white students, who were not even born when these other injustices occurred.

Winston Churchill once said, "If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Nowhere is that more true than when dealing with the explosive mixture of race and politics.

Nifong deserves to be removed from office and disbarred. If he gets away with all this, it will be a blank check for every prosecutor in the country to abuse the powers of the office.

The prosecution is a sordid affair, and the logic involved reminds me of blood libel, which is of course built on the principle that certain fictions might as well be true.

I hope it's over soon.

MORE: The Duke rape case touches on a larger, politically taboo issue: the high incidence of false rape charges.

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Listening to the G. Gordon Liddy Show, I just heard Pajamas Media's Richard Miniter make a major news announcement revealing what he thinks Sandy Berger was doing (in the sock stuffing caper) and for which Miniter thinks "he ought to go to jail for a long time." (10 to 20 years!) Among other national security documents, says Miniter, Berger removed and destroyed a 1995 letter from the President of Somalia to President Clinton, in which the former apparently offered to hand over Osama bin Laden.

That's all I have right now, but keep an eye on Pajamas Media, as Miniter's documentary evidence is supposed to be posted the next half hour.

Excellent work! My hat's off to Richard Miniter and Pajamas Media for fantastic original reporting.

(This comes right on the heels of Richard Miniter's groundbreaking reports on the flying imams. )

I'm beginning to understand why blogs make the old media puke....

UPDATE (12:00 p.m.): The report has been posted at Pajamas Media, and here's the link:

PJM is making public on this website for the first time the report by the Inspector General's office regarding Sandy Berger and his theft and destruction of classified national security documents -- named in the report as, "The 'W' Intelligence Files." This document was obtained for review by Pajamas Media's.

Berger, as the former National Security Adviser for the Clinton Administration, was granted sole access to these documents in order to vet them prior to their being turned over to the 9/11 Commission and congress. As this file shows, he used this position of trust to take a number of documents and destroy several.

Is the best defense always a good offense?

Eric Boehlert (a Salon editor who now writes for Media Matters) is getting a lot of attention in the blogosphere right now because of the ferocity of his defense of the MSM's phony "Jamil Hussein" story. Rick Moran in particular delves into Boehlert's thinking with a great post in which he concludes that "Boehlert is so busy trashing conservative bloggers and trying to demonize their motives that he's missing a great story...."

I think the making up of "Jamil Hussein" is the story, because the controversy surrounding it goes to the heart of a greater human problem -- how ideology corrupts thinking to the point where facts are seen as subordinate, incidental, even irrelevant.

The last time I discussed "Jamil," the details were still hotly debated, and I was reminded of my relatively meaningless battle over "George Harleigh" (a fictitious professor science professor who had worked for both Nixon and Reagan, and who could always be depended on to sound off about the horrors of Bush).

I soon noticed that there's a downside to debunking fraudulent people or claims. The people who make them up -- and most of those who agree with them -- simply don't care. Because the characters and claims are invented to support what they already believe fervently, debunking them does not "count."

Lies presented in furtherance of a greater "truth" are not really considered to be lies, at least not in the moral sense. The idea is to persuade people, and if fictional people or incidents have to be used, that's OK, as long as it's in the interest of the greater truth.

The problem I have with this approach is that I don't like being lied to. Even when I agree with the cause the lie is intended to support. I don't find lies emotionally fulfilling because they pollute the process of thought. When lies are presented as "news reports," it's even worse, because it makes me distrustful every time I pick up the paper or turn on the television.

I'm sorry, but I think Eric Boehlert's "might as well be true" defense is not helpful to the cause of honest journalism, and I agree with Allahpundit:

He's written two columns about Jamilgate now; there are enough links embedded in both to show he's done his homework. Which means he knows very well this wasn't the only story the AP's used Jamil Hussein for. The actual number, as Michelle notes, exceeds 60. He also knows that the AP originally claimed four mosques were burned and that that claim has since disappeared into the ether without so much as a clarification. Just like he also knows, courtesy of Robert Bateman, that it's unlikely in the extreme based on Hussein's location that he'd be a credible witness for the wide variety of attacks sourced to him by the AP. All of which make this story highly dubious, yet none of which Boehlert sees fit to mention anywhere in his piece. Why?

Because he doesn't care if the story's bogus or not. He'll say en passant that he does because he knows, as a journalist and media critic, that he has to. But it's strictly pro forma. His position seems to be that the story's true in the Larger Sense, as a microcosm of the brutality in Iraq, even if it's not, you know, technically true ("as if an AP retraction would change a thing on the ground in Baghdad, where electricity remains scarce, but sectarian death squads roam freely"). In other words, "fake but accurate." That's his bottom line here and that's why it's dishonest of him and his pals to even pretend to care whether the report's accurate. As far as they're concerned, if Jamil Hussein turns out to be real, the story's true; if he turns out not to be real, the story's True. They can't go wrong. Meanwhile the AP, if it's guilty of bad facts to whatever greater or lesser degree, gets an almost completely free pass.

Boehlert's approach is to minimize the seriousness of the fictional character and reports, and mount ad hominem style ideological attacks against those who debunked them. While the debunkers' primary crime is simply that they are "warbloggers" whose pro-war ideology is wrong, he also misleadingly splices selected fragments from quotes (whether this is "Dowdifying" or Issikoffing I'm not sure) to make JunkYardBlog's SeeDubya and the Anchoress look like heinous opponents of free speech. What they actually said -- along with the context -- are as unimportant to Boehlert as whether or not Jamil Hussein exists. As Boehlert concludes, it is only the larger truth matters:

despite the hundreds of stories AP files from Iraq each week, and the thousands posted annually since the invasion, warbloggers can only find fault with a single story, yet insist that one is enough to tarnish the AP's Iraq reporting and all mainstream news reporting from Baghdad.

It's not going to work. If warbloggers want to prove that cowardly American journalists are being duped by local Iraqi stringers pushing a terrorist agenda, or that the AP is guilty of chronically manufacturing bad news, they are going to have to do more than flush out Jamil Hussein.

By this logic, I was wasting my time debunking the fictitious George Harleigh. Because, even if there was no such professor, there are many more who would have said -- and did say -- the same thing. That Bush was bad.

What difference does one little fiction make? And what difference does it make if some impudent warbloggers are quoted out of context? Serves their little chickenhawk candyasses right, doesn't it?

That last sentence was sarcastic, OK? Would it then be fair to quote me as calling SeeDubya and the Anchoress "chickenhawk candyasses"? About as fair as it would be for me to quote Boehlert as saying this:

Biased American journalists, too