Now Annan Wakes Up

Kofi Annan wants Israel to stop its Gaza incursion and turn the power back on for their enemies to regroup:

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has demanded that Israel take urgent action to prevent a humanitarian disaster in the Gaza Strip. ...

Mr Annan called on Israel to restore supplies of food and fuel and to repair a power plant hit in an air strike. ...

Mr Annan urged Israel to lift restrictions on the movement of basic goods such as foodstuffs into Gaza.

So Kofi now wants the Israelis to stop everything because the Palestinians attacked them? How about Kofi asking the Palestinians to quit shooting rockets into Sderot and hand back Gilad Shalit?

Oh, I forgot -- this is the UN.

Will Stone Screw Up 9/11?

When Oliver Stone first announced that he would make a film about the events of 9/11, many expressed concern and even outrage over the prospect. Stone has made a habit of both politicizing his movies and increasingly relying on strange cinematographic effects to distract from the subject matter. Any Given Sunday probably provides the best example in his later work of the latter criticism; my IMDB review can be read here. The Observer reports that Stone finds himself the center of criticism once again -- but for reasons that have nothing to do with politics or competence:

Despite Stone's insistence that his days of deliberate provocation are behind him, World Trade Center, which opens in US cinemas next month and in the UK on 29 September, has divided the public, critics and academics ahead of its release.

The film, which stars Nicolas Cage as John McLoughlin, one of two New York Port Authority police officers caught up in 9/11, has been attacked in a way that Stone's fellow director Paul Greengrass managed to avoid in his portrayal of circumstances on the doomed Flight 93, one of the planes hijacked on 11 September that crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Greengrass's film, United 93, stunned British audiences this year with its documentary style, as if much of it had been filmed in real time. ...

The widows of two Port Authority Police officers who were killed on 11 September have decried Jimeno and McLoughlin, who acted as close advisers to Stone's film, and earned at least $200,000 each for their services. Jeanette Pezzulo, who lives in the Bronx, told the Seattle Times that Jimeno's decision to make the film was hurtful because her husband, Port Authority police officer Dominick Pezzulo, died while trying to free Jimeno and McLoughlin. She said: 'My thing is: this man died for you. How do you do this to this family?'

Her sentiments were echoed by Jamie Amoroso from Staten Island, whose husband also died in the rescue operation. She said: 'I do not need a movie to tell me what a hero my husband was.'

Baltimore detective Ken Nacke, whose brother Louis died on Flight 93, said he would not be going to see the film. He criticised its producers for not involving enough of the survivors' families in its production, something he said did not happen with Greengrass. He added: 'I met a couple of people who lost relatives and had approached the producers and weren't allowed to be involved, and I think it would be disrespectful to them if I went to see it.'

To be honest, I was not looking forward to this movie, given Stone's history of distorting truth to score cheap political points. He did that in Nixon and JFK, and I have no stomach to see another Stone exploitation job. I'm not sure that's what's happening here, though. While it seems a bit strange to focus on a story on the fringes of the historical events of the day when so few efforts have been made to tell the main story, it doesn't mean that the tale of Jimeno and McLoughlin won't have emotional impact and make a good film. In a way, I'd prefer that Stone focus on that than attempt to tell the macro story -- because that carries less risk of mischief in Stone's normal manner of filmmaking. Not every film on 9/11 has to be comprehensive in scope, and even United 93 focused on one part of the day.

One aspect of the film I found disturbing from the Observer story was the lack of the footage of the aftermath of the attack. To me, that smacks of a passive attempt to water down the human cost of the attack. Networks still embargo the shots of people jumping or falling from the Twin Towers, ostensibly out of respect for the victims but more likely to allow Americans to emotionally disengage from the horror of the consequences of the most successful attack on our soil. United 93 chose a different path; it did not shy away from showing the humanity of the people caught on the plane, and the final scene showed the spiraling approach of the Pennsylvania countryside in a manner that brought back all of the horror we felt when we heard what happened on that flight.

Still, it seems to me that the criticisms of Stone in the Observer piece seem a little overblown. Two of the 9/11 widows have an understandable frustration about the focus of the two survivors while their dead husbands -- who died trying to save Jimeno and McLoughlin -- apparently get short shrift from the script. Stone should have done more to include their stories, if the final film does not show it. However, paying Jimeno and McLoughlin $200K as technical consultants hardly qualifies as "cashing in". These films take at least a couple of years to produce, and as the producer notes, that's not much in terms of a wage for the demands on their time. Studios routinely pay much more than that just to get the rights for a story.

If these are the worst criticisms that Stone gets for his new film, it would be a huge improvement on his more political projects. We can wait to see what Stone has created before we start attacking it. Perhaps, though, Hollywood will finally see fit to tell the macro story of 9/11 honestly and in full, even if Stone preferred to avoid it.

Bush Tries Economic Leverage With Putin

George Bush has decided to create the necessary economic leverage to generate international consensus on Iran. The White House has concluded a deal on nuclear power for Russia predicated on Russian commitments to remain firm on Iran's nuclear ambitions:

President Bush will pursue a nuclear cooperation agreement when he meets Russian leader Vladimir Putin next week during a summit of industrialized nations in St. Petersburg, the White House said Saturday.

But any agreement would be conditioned on Russia helping to pressure Iran to give up its alleged desire to develop nuclear weapons, said Frederick Jones, spokesman for Bush's National Security Council.

"We have made clear to the Russians that for an agreement on peaceful nuclear cooperation to go forward, we will need Russia's active cooperation in blocking Iran's attempt to obtain nuclear weapons," Jones said.

This issue has percolated between Washington and Moscow since the 1990s, when the Clinton administration refused to negotiate -- rightly -- while Moscow built Iran's nuclear capability. Back then, experts considered an Iranian nuke to be more than a decade away, and the US decided that a unilateral approach to Iranian nuclear ambitions suited our purposes. Now that the Iranians have apparently mastered the enrichment cycle, they appear much closer to a nuke.

With time running out, we need to get Iran's nuclear sponsors to stop their assistance to the mullahs. That means we have to exercise some leverage on Moscow. We could make it difficult for them at the G-8 as a "stick" approach, but that really only amounts to a one-time disincentive. The US has to provide some rational incentives for Russian cooperation. Providing them a more stable source of energy to replace the oil that Iran could provide makes sense, especially since Russia already can build its own nuclear-power plants.

The US wants to ensure a safer record for nuclear power in order to convince people of its value in reducing the reliance on Persian Gulf oil resources. Russia, which has continued to build plants even after the Chernobyl disaster, needs the US imprimatur to make deals with developing countries to sell their designs. The real value isn't in US technology, but in US approval of Russian exports. The US will likely insist on safer designs, and the Russians can then sell the best designs for reactors which will not produce weapons-grade fissile material. The US will indirectly then reduce the reliance on Middle East oil, dropping prices as well as Arab influence on world events.

Can we trust Putin? I doubt Putin really wants to see a nuclearized Southwest Asia, but Russia needs hard cash and has little else to offer these days. If we take the chains off and allow Russia to sell safe nuclear power to Third World countries for their economic development, we may kill a number of birds with one stone -- and have additional leverage with which to shut down the mullahcracy's attempt to develop the bomb.

Kudlow Overplays A Winning Hand

Larry Kudlow takes issue with the media for underreporting and distorting the Bush administration's record on the economy in his Townhall column today. Kudlow has an excellent point, as media outleys have all but ignored the Bush economic engine and the tax cuts that fuelled it. Unfortunately, Kudlow distorts it himself in an attempt to gild the lily:

Did you know that just over the past 11 quarters, dating back to the June 2003 Bush tax cuts, America has increased the size of its entire economy by 20 percent? In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy, and much larger than the total economic size of nations like India, Mexico, Ireland and Belgium.

This is an extraordinary fact, although you may be reading it here first. Most in the mainstream media would rather tout the faults of American capitalism than sing its praises. And of course, the media will almost always discuss supply-side tax cuts in negative terms, such as big budget deficits and static revenue losses. But here's another suppressed fact: Since the 2003 tax cuts, tax-revenue collections from the expanding economy have been surging at double-digit rates, while the deficit is constantly being revised downward.

For those who bother to look, the economic power of lower-tax-rate incentives is once again working its magic. While most reporters obsess about a mild slowdown in housing, the big-bang story is a high-sizzle pick-up in private business investment, which is directly traceable to Bush's tax reform. It was private investment that was hardest hit in the early decade stock market plunge and the aftermath of the 9-11 terrorist bombings. So team Bush's wise men correctly targeted investment in order to slash the after-tax cost of capital and rejuvenate investment incentives.

The move paid off. Investors now keep nearly 50 percent more of their after-tax capital returns -- an enormous increase that has resulted in a remarkably profitable and highly productive business sector. While the overall economy has grown by one-fifth since mid-2003, private business investment has expanded by 37 percent.

Much of what Kudlow says here is true, but the specific numbers he uses are suspect. As Instapundit and his readers point out in a post this morning, Kudlow uses actual dollars rather than figures adjusted for inflation. The uncorrected projected GDP for 2006 based on Q1 numbers is $13.042 trillion, while the projected GDP for 2003Q2 was $10.844 trillion. The difference comes to slightly less than $2.2 trillion, which indeed gives a 20% growth rate -- with inflation.

However, most economists use figures adjusted for inflation based on a specific value year; the BEA, where Kudlow got his numbers, uses 2000 as a basis year for adjustment. Those numbers still tell a compelling story, but not as dramatic as Kudlow's figures represent. In adjusted dollars, 2006Q1 projected GDP came in at $11.403T against 2003Q2 projected GDP of $10.230T, leading to a growth rate of 11.4%.

The reliance on nonstandard calculation detracts from an already strong argument -- Kudlow does not do any great service to Bush with this decision. The numbers, adjusted for inflation, are already compelling. The eleven-quarter period that Kudlow highlights ranks well in the last quarter-century. The Clinton administration had a run of such periods, starting in 1998Q1 through 2000Q3 (with each quarter showing this type of growth). Reagan had a similar run, between 1984Q3 and 1986Q3.

As King Banaian pointed out during our radio show, however, the Bush administration's run has some remarkable differences. First, neither Clinton nor Reagan had a shooting war going on during these periods, allowing for more stable economic environments. Second, oil prices dropped during these periods for Clinton and Reagan, while they have increased considerably during the Bush expansion. Yet the Bush expansion, fuelled by the tax cuts, has shown remarkable stability and consistency. In the past eleven quarters, the only one below an annual rate of growth of 3% was 2005Q4, which reflected the economic impact of Hurricane Katrina. Also, we should recall that the Clinton era coincides with the dot-com bubble and the bulk of the investor frauds of Enron, Global Crossings, and Worldcom.

In fact, in Bush's entire tenure in office, he has only had one quarter of economic loss where he was president for the entire quarter -- and that was 2001Q3, when he ordered the entire airline industry grounded as a result of 9/11, as well as the devastating losses in Manhattan in both lives and property. Even then, the loss was kept to an annual projected rate of -1.4%. (Clinton only had one as well, in 2000Q3, and the two share another, 2001Q1.)

As to the claim that the American economy grew more than the entire Chinese economy, that also requires a bit of sleight-of-hand to believe. First, again we have to accept the unadjusted numbers from Kudlow rather than the adjusted numbers economists normally use. Second, we have to accept the Chinese GDP at their exchange rate -- which the US continually protests as set artificially low as a barrier to American products. The CIA factbook on China shows the GDP at their exchange rate as $2.25T, slighly more than the gap for the unadjusted American GDP increase. However, the purchasing power parity GDP comes in at $8.86T, more than three times the official GDP and much larger than our GDP increase, unadjusted or adjusted. (We grew in real terms amost as much than the Russian economy in its entirety, though.)

The Bush economy has never been reported well by a media culture clearly biased against the White House. Kudlow is correct on that point. He should have stuck with the commonly-accepted figures rather than undermine the argument he made about mainstream media distortion.

Northern Alliance Radio Today

I will join the Northern Alliance Radio Network today via telephone, rather than in studio as normal. I still cannot sit up in a normal chair long enough to do the radio show, and Mitch and King have been gracious enough to allow me to do my part from the recliner. You can listen to the show on AM 1280 The Patriot, either on the radio if you're in the Twin Cities, or on the Internet stream if not. You can also catch the Internet stream at the new Townhall site.

We'll be discussing the terror attacks, the DocEx documents that I've reviewed the last couple of days, the Jeff Goldstein/Deb Frisch kerfuffle, and much more. Be sure to call in at 651-289-4488 to join the conversation!

UPDATE: Forgot to post the time! We're on now (1:15 PM CT) and will be on until 3 PM CT.

Attacking Bloggers' Children? Despicable (Updated)

Jeff Goldstein, who has always been a friend to CQ from its earliest days, has found himself and his family the target of some despicable threats, apparently from an academic at the University of Arizona. This series of e-mails allegedly came from Deb Frisch, a professor of psychology at Arizona with some history of on-line histrionics:

"I’d like to hear more about your “tyke” by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke?

Tell all, bro!"

***

"[...] as I said elsewhere, if I woke up tomorrow and learned that someone else had shot you and your “tyke” it wouldn’t slow me down one iota. You aren’t “human” to me."

***

" Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby.

Are you still married to the woman you humped to produce the toddler? "

***

Give your pathetic progeny (I sure hope that mofo got good genes from his mama!) a big fat tongue-filled kiss from me! LOTS AND LOTS OF SALIVA from Auntie MOONBAT, if you don’t mind!

Somehow, Jeffy boy, I think you get off on the possibility of Frenching your pathetic progeny, even if it is a boy. You seem like a VERY, VERY sick mofo to me, bro.

If this came from Frisch, then perhaps she would be better off the subject of psychotherapy than teaching it. In any case, regardless of whether you agree with Jeff's politics or not, we should all join in condemning this kind of attack on anyone. I'd condemn this kind of sick, perverted threat if it was aimed at anyone in the blogosphere. Nor do I think this is indicative of anyone's politics; I've had plenty of debate even with hard-Left bloggers and commenters without ever encountering anything like this. Namecalling is petty and childish, but it goes with the territory and immature people across the political spectrum engage in it. These threats have nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with intimidation, a kind of terrorism, in its way.

The Univeristy of Arizona is a fine institution -- in fact, the Admiral Emeritus is an alumnus of the school. We root for them every year when they play ASU and USC. One hopes that the adults in charge will investigate this immediately to determine whether Frisch sent these e-mails herself (they came from her university e-mail account, apparently), and if so, that they kick her out ASAP. The FBI should also investigate what Frisch intended by her reference to Jon Benet Ramsey, if she was the one who wrote it.

In the meantime, bloggers across the spectrum should denounce these threats as the sick, perverted, and unacceptable rantings they are, regardless of their author and their intended target. (via Michelle Malkin, who has other links as well.)

UPDATE: Well, this was quick -- apparently the University of Arizona doesn't mess around. The administrators started getting e-mails from Jeff's readers, and now Frisch admits to the threats and has resigned, according to her blog. In her post, titled "white flag", she blames Jeff for her woes:

Some blogs have posted comments that I perceive to be physically threatening. I have contacted the FBI and the Pajamas Media staff to determine how to proceed with this aspect of this unbelievable experience.

My intention in this post is to de-escalate the situation. The comments that started this all were nasty, not threatening. But I feel very threatened by the response.

Riiiiiiight.. She sent these disgusting messages, including a reference to a notorious child murder, and she doesn't see them as threats -- but demands for accountability for those threats have her scared. The funniest part is that she contacted the FBI, which if true, means that they will have to investigate her original messages that started the whole thing ... along with her admission. Her readers aren't fooled:

You really succeeded in making liberals look like psychopaths. Can you do the rest of us a favor, and either stop posting entirely, [or] join the Republican Party? ...

"In hindsight, the things I wrote were over the line of nastiness." Actually, in hindsight, you wrote a bunch of things that could reasonably be interpreted as physically threatening his child. That's not just "nasty"; that's against the law. The fact you can't figure this out, even with the benefit of hindsight, says a great deal about you. The fact you now wrap yourself in a cocoon of pretended victimhood says a great deal more.

I think the Wildcats just learned about addition through subtraction. Go 'Cats!

UPDATE II: The Instapundit cautions us not to assume it's Frisch, even with the blog post on her site, noting that people can still spoof identities easily enough on line. In this case, it seems like a long shot; Frisch has archives going back as long as mine. It is possible that someone hacked her site and posted this under her name, but that seems pretty farfetched. It's not impossible, however.

UPDATE III: Jeff's site is back on the air, so to speak, so we can all enjoy Protein Wisdom yet again. In reading through the comments, I notice that we are quick to blame liberals (and for some strange reason, lesbians) for this kind of behavior. Let me state once more that this has nothing to do with political points of view and everything to do with a seriously damaged sense of judgment and perhaps some emotional problems. Most liberals (and lesbians) I know are decent, well-mannered people who do not deserve to get lumped in with the Deb Frisches of the world. I give you Jeralynn Merritt for a case in point (via Allahpundit at Hot Air).

Let's remember that before we start painting with wide brushes here -- and let's refrain from attempting to guess someone's sexual preferences, especially when it has no relation to the topic.

UPDATE IV: Let's not get wild on this idea of requiring a response from everyone in the blogosphere on this story. Deb Frisch is responsible for her actions -- not Mahablog, nor any other left-wing blogger who never linked or blogrolled Frisch in the first place. The "crickets chirping" on the Left just means that they probably don't read Jeff or Deb Frisch. If we make it a requirement to comment on every blogger who crosses the line on either side of the political divide, none of us will have time for anything else.

Now, if someone uses their blog to defend her comments, then that's a basis for criticism. Otherwise, further commentary is not a requirement.

Rudy Running?

Robert Novak hears the talk around the campfire, and the chatter says that Rudy Giuliani, America's Mayor, will run for the presidency in 2008. Novak says that the road will be difficult for one of the nation's most admired men:

Well-connected public figures report that they have been told recently by Rudolph Giuliani that, as of now, he intends to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.

The former mayor of New York was on top of last month's national Gallup poll measuring presidential preferences by registered Republicans, with 29 percent. Sen. John McCain's 24 percent was second, with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich third at 8 percent. National polls all year have shown Giuliani running either first or second to McCain, with the rest of the presidential possibilities far behind.

Republican insiders respond to these numbers by saying rank-and-file GOP voters will abandon Giuliani once they realize his position on abortion, gay rights and gun control. Party strategists calculate that if he actually runs, he must change on at least one of these issues.

Rudy supports a right to abortion, gay marriage, and gun control, just in case no one could figure that out from Novak's thinly-veiled verbiage. It will make it quite difficult for Rudy to win in the primaries outside of New England, and it's doubtful that he will gain much by making a complete change on any of those positions. What's more likely to work is a philosophical explanation of his stances, followed by a pledge to work with the party to meet its goals in some type of big-tent fashion.

For instance, Giuliani could affirm that he believes a woman should have the option of an abortion if she chooses. However, he could take the position that this should not come through judicial fiat but through legislative action in the states, allowing the voters to determine the legality of abortion and its circumstances. In doing so, he can then pledge to appoint strict constructionist justices to the appellate and Supreme courts. He could also take a similar position on gay marriage.

Gun control would be a tougher nut to crack. Of the three issues Novak mentions, this is the only one with an explicit guarantee in the Constitution, and yet it's the one right that liberals attack. It will be hard to square that impulse with the conservative base no matter what philosophical or utilitarian arguments Rudy might offer, and a pro-gun Democrat could steal the South in the general election, even if Rudy won the nomination. Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee in 2000, and the election as a result, largely on this one issue.

I like Rudy Giuliani; in fact, I admire him tremendously. Many Republicans feel the same way, and that admiration undoubtedly gives him a tremendous boost. However, admiration does not equate to guaranteed political support. It does cover some gray area, and the comparison to John McCain shows that to some extent. McCain's professed political beliefs align much more closely to the conservative base, but the truth is that few of us trust him any more. We trust Giuliani more because Rudy sticks to his word and his allies.

In the end, though, if the race came down to these two men, McCain would likely beat Giuliani in the primaries, because the base will not turn a blind eye to someone who opposes so many of their key positions -- even if he has earned the admiration and respect of all involved. Fortunately for the GOP, we expect to see many more candidates throw their hat into the ring, such as George Allen and others who give conservatives a real choice in the primaries.

No Hudna For Haniyeh

The Israeli government has rejected a call for a cease-fire from Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas PM that has yet to produce the israeli soldier his organization abducted in a border raid that killed two other IDF troops. Israel insists that no negotiations for cessation of its Gaza incursion can begin until Hamas returns Gilad Shalit:

The Hamas-led Palestinian government called for a cease-fire in its violent two-week standoff with Israel but stopped short Saturday of offering to release an Israeli soldier held by Hamas militants. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected the proposal by Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. Olmert will not agree to a truce until Hamas releases the soldier, officials in Olmert's office said. ...

Israel's two-week military campaign, prompted by the abduction of Cpl. Gilad Shalit has put the Hamas government under growing pressure. Israel has arrested several Palestinian Cabinet ministers and Hamas lawmakers.

On Saturday, Haniyeh issued a five-point cease-fire proposal, calling on Israel to halt its offensive and release prisoners but saying little about what Hamas is prepared to do in return.

"If we want to get out of the current crisis, it is necessary to return to calm, on the basis of a mutual halt to all military operations," said a statement issued by Cabinet spokesman Ghazi Hamad in Haniyeh's name.

If Haniyeh and the Palestinians thought that Israel would bite on an offer that thin, they must be daft. Israel has no intention of pulling out of Gaza without Shalit, or failing that, with the heads of as many terrorists as they can kill. For years, the Palestinians have made these abductions and prisoner swaps very expensive for Israel; now Israel has finally shaken off Western leaders, especially in Europe, and are determined to make them very expensive for the Palestinians from this point forward.

The Palestinians committed an act of war by raiding the border and capturing Shalit. Now they want to call off the war and get prisoners back, all without giving up anything in return. Capitulating to that demand with a truce only guarantees that Hamas will return to the same strategy again and again. In fact, the Palestinians have done just that for decades, aided and abetted by a benighted West that only appeared interested in a perverted status quo, where one side commits terrorism and the other side is barred from responding.

Finally, five years after 9/11, two years after Madrid, and almost on the anniversary of the London attack, the West has finally figured out that appeasing terrorists only gains more terrorism. Europe and the US has refrained from their normal demands that Israel stop shooting at the people who have sworn to kill them and who have conducted unceasing missile attacks ever since the withdrawal from Gaza. Everyone now understands the stakes involved in facing down Hamas, as well as all of the other affiliated Islamofascist terrorist groups in the region.

Hudnas will no longer suffice. If Hamas wants to see an end to the fighting, then they had better start living up to the agreements made previously with the Palestinian Authority and end all attacks on Israel and its citizens. Otherwise, they will have the war they wanted, and when they get their ass kicked, no one will lift a finger to stop it.

That's the lesson we need to teach Hamas and the Palestinians. If they want peace, then stop provoking war. The world has tired of sympathizing with bloodthirsty terrorists.

Iraqi Documents: UNMOVIC Knew Of Renewed WMD Efforts (Updated And Bumped)

Continuing my review of the many documents released from the DocEx files over the last two days, I found yet another interesting piece of information regarding Saddam Hussein's pursuit of WMD. In a summary of a larger document, the translators found that Iraq had restarted its processing of castor-bean extraction, from which ricin can be developed -- and that UNMOVIC discovered it in December 2002.

From CMPC-2003-003766-HT.pdf, with line breaks and emphases mine:

Ricin toxin is found in the bean of the castor plant. UNMOVIC inspections since December 2002 have verified that the bombed caster oil extraction plant at Fallujah III has been reconstructed on a larger scale.

Undeclared BW agents, there are a number of microorganisms and toxins that have been developed as BW agents by several countries, including Bacillus anthracis (anthrax), Clostridium bottalinum toxin, Yersinia pestis (plague), Francisella tularensis (tularemia), Brucella species (Brucellosis) Coxiella burnetti (Q fever) and Variola major (smallpox). Drying of BW Agents, BW agents are produced by a process that usually results in a liquid product, for example bacteria in an aqueous suspension, or toxins in an aquesous or organic solution.

Bacterial BW agent production, this requires certain equipment, typically a fomenter and down stream processing equipment such as separators and settling tanks. Also required for the production of bacterial BW agents are nutrients that are dissolved in water and added to the fermenter. The lack of supporting documentation makes it difficult for UNMOVIC to confirm Iraq's figures on the quantities of bacterial BW agent produced.

Genetic Engineering and Viral Research. Genetic Engineering, a process whereby an organism's genetic material is modified, has many medical and industrial applications. BW Agent Stimulants are chemicals or microorganisms that have very similar characteristics and properties to a biological warfare agent.

UNMOVIC inspections and Iraqi declarations confirm that Iraq continues working with organisms that could be used as BW agent stimulates. The documents display after each section the actions that Iraq could take to help in resolving the issue and convincing the UN inspection teams that the activity have stopped or were fruitless and so on.

So here we have confirmation that Iraq continued to work on WMD, and that the new UNMOVIC inspections verified that. We had previously heard from the mainstream media that UNMOVIC only found that the Iraqis still refused to cooperate fully with the inspections, but this puts a little different light on the situation as the UN found it as they debated how to deal with Iraq. Even with Saddam actively pursuing WMD, as it turns out, they refused to take any action except to propose extended inspections.

Another point seems rather interesting here. The third paragraph seems to match up pretty well with the CIA/DIA description of the mobile laboratories discovered shortly after the invasion of Iraq:

Common elements between the source’s description and the trailers include a control panel, fermentor, water tank, holding tank, and two sets of gas cylinders. One set of gas cylinders was reported to provide clean gases—oxygen and nitrogen—for production, and the other set captured exhaust gases, concealing signatures of BW agent production.

The discovered trailers also incorporate air-stirred fermentors, which the source reported were part of the second-generation plant design.

Once again, it looks like Saddam's own documentation makes it clear that he had never stopped working on WMD programs. This time, it also shows that UNMOVIC and the UNSC knew it.

UPDATE and BUMP: Hans Blix never mentioned ricin or castor beans in his UN presentation on March 7, 2003. In fact, it never even mentions the word "violation" once.

Hamdi Mahmoud Made Some People Nervous

The month prior to the American invasion of Iraq, the Times of London broke the news that one of Saddam's bodyguards had defected to the West and had given the Mossad a file that showed where Saddam Hussein kept his WMD (Times link not available). Abu Hamdi Mahmoud provided what looked like a smoking gun to the UNMOVIC team:

The bodyguard, Abu Hamdi Mahmoud, had provided Israeli intelligence with a list of sites, the newspaper said, as he was debriefed at a high-security Israeli base.

It quoted William Tierney, a former UN weapons inspector who has continued to gather information on Saddam’s arsenal, as saying Mahmoud’s information was "the smoking gun" that has so far proved so elusive for both the UN weapons inspectors and US intelligence.

"Once the inspectors go to where Mahmoud has pointed them, then it’s all over for Saddam," Mr Tierney said.

The newspaper said Mahmoud was a member of the elite unit that protects Saddam, called the Murasiq Qun - the "Inner Circle". Known as "the Gatekeeper", Mahmoud was a muscular Saddam lookalike often photographed standing behind Saddam .

Not much has been heard from Hamdi Mahmoud since the fall of Saddam. Google searches turn up little except the initial reporting on the topic. The UNMOVIC inspections ended shortly before the invasion. One other reason that the inspections may not have turned up anything of value may be because of the alert that Iraqi Intelligence Service directors sent out immediately after Mahmoud's defection. In document IISP-2003-00027591-HT-DHX.pdf, the General Director of Directorate 17 (responsible for training of IIS officers) sent a Top Secret and Personal communique to the chief of Directorate 40 regarding the defection and publication of the material:

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Benevolent Top Secret and Personal Number Directorate 17/6/1 Date: 2/3/2003 Subject: News

To: The Director of Directorate 40

Kadimi Kurdistan broadcasting station claimed the following:

British sources revealed that one of the personal bodyguards of the president of the Iraqi regime handed the Israeli secret service, the Mossad, a file containing the locations of secret arsenals where Saddam is concealing WMD. The British Sunday Times reported that Hamdi Mahmoud, Saddam’s personal bodyguard, fled Iraq recently to Israel and gave that file to the Mossad. The newspaper pointed that the information revealed by Mahmoud comes a day before the International inspectors presented their report to the United Nations regarding the inspection operations inside Iraq. It went on to add that Mahmoud, now living in Israel at an undisclosed location, has given the Mossad a secret file containing all the locations where Baghdad is hiding weapons and equipment of mass destruction. The newspaper explained that the locations include a chemical weapon plant built underground in Baghdad, a plant to assemble SCUD missile near al-Ramadi, an underground reinforced arsenal for biological bombs, in addition to five arsenals for missiles buried in the sands of the Western desert.

Note that none of the above talks about any kind of false information getting propagated by Mahmoud. The memo treats the information published as fact rather than speculation or disinformation. Moreoever, the very urgency implied in the classification and in the language gives the impression that the IIS considered this a big problem.

Iraqi Documents: Kuwaiti POWs Used As Human Shields

This story has been reported before, but the captured IIS documents contains the actual orders from Qusai Hussein directing the Republican Guard to take Kuwaiti prisoners illegally held for twelve years and use them as human shields at strategic locations. Document CMPC-2003-012666.pdf shows the brutal callousness that became the hallmark of the Hussein family:

Presidential Office/ Special Office The Secretary: Re / Kuwaiti POW’s

Regarding the execution of Mr. President, Commander Saddam Hussein’s (God protect him) orders, according to the decision of the Revolutionary Command Council on Friday, March 4, 2003.

Transfer all Kuwaiti POW’s / a total of 448 captured Kuwaitis who are located at the Al-Nida Al-Agher Prison and the Intelligence / General Center and Kazema Prison in Al-Kazema, to make them human shields at all locations that are expected to be attacked by the American aggressors. Put them in communication locations and essential ministries, radio and television, Military Industrial Commissions, and all other locations expected to be attacked by the criminal Anglo-American aggressors.

Transporting them should be in coordination with:
Intelligence Services Directorate
Republican Guard Chief of Staff

Under direct supervision of the Special Security Organization / Organization Security

[Signature]
Qusai Saddam Hussein
Supervisor of the Republican Guard Secretariat
March 14, 2003

Recall that the cease-fire agreement that kept Coalition forces from marching to Baghdad in 1991 required Saddam Hussein to release all Kuwaitis held prisoner immediately. Saddam and his family never complied with this major requirement, an act of war in itself. Qusai compounded it by violating every standard of war by using his illegal prisoners to act as unwilling human shields to deter the Americans from attacking their command and control facilities.

As I said above, this is not a new story, but it is one worth repeating.

Saddam's Idea Of Diplomatic Pouches

Another DocEx document has a strange take on diplomacy under Saddam Hussein's brutal regime. A top-secret roster of Iraqi Intelligence Service projects for 2003 shows some interesting, inventive, and disturbing initiatives that only the American invasion stopped. From CMPC-2003-005745.pdf:

Use of diplomatic briefcases as an explosive device that can not be detected using an X Ray device

Sabotaging airplane fuel

Development of a research project for self igniting chemical mixtures to be used in acts of sabotage

Project for camouflaging a long range explosive device using a stick [or crutch]

If Saddam had remained in power, the IIS would have developed these murder systems for the state of Iraq. What purpose would an exploding diplomatic briefcase serve other than assassination or terrorism? Self-igniting chemical explosives are only useful for the same purposes, and probably violated the UN resolutions regarding chemical weapons. And can anyone imagine a rational state disguising its assassins as disabled people and their weapons as crutches?

This shows the Saddam regime as particularly virulent, as well as close to certifiable. It may or may not have much to do with WMD, but it certainly shows that the world is better off with Saddam locked away.

ABC: AQ Planned 5th Anniversary Celebration

According to a new ABC News report, the conspiracy revealed earlier today to target the PATH trains intended on carrying out their attack on September 11th, 2006. The al-Qaeda-connected terrorists planned on giving New Yorkers a reminder on the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks -- and it may still be in motion:

Federal law enforcement officials tell ABC News a plot designed to use 15 to 20 suicide bombers on one commuter train as close to Sept. 11 as possible was well underway. ...

"This is a plot that would have involved martyrdom, explosives and certain of the tubes that connect New Jersey with lower Manhattan," said Mark Mershon, Assistant Director-in-Charge of the FBI New York Field Office. "We're not discussing the modality behind that."

But law enforcement officials say the plotters had already accessed detailed blueprints and drawings of the PATH tunnels, available on the internet.

And like the London bombers, the plan was to load backpacks with explosives.

Assem Hammoud, earlier identified by his nom de guerre Amir Andalousli, has admitted to taking the bayat pledge that made him part of al-Qaeda. He had planned to go to an AQ training camp in Pakistan this summer, ahead of the plot. The description of the plot now has at least two suspects detained, five more on the run, with Hammoud the only one under formal arrest at the moment. One could surmise that one of the reasons Hammoud planned to go to Pakistan would be to get the necessary number of martyrs to execute the massive explosions.

ABC also has more details about the investigation. They have watched this cell coalesce for over a year, starting with chat room meetings that the terrorists apparently thought were secure. None of the conspirators were ever in the US, apparently, although at least one of the was in Canada at some point. Unsurprisingly, some of the plotters planned on traveling to New York to carry out this attack from ... Saudi Arabia.

Talk about irony. And deja vu. (via Hot Air)

Iraqi Documents: Our Friends, The Russians (Updated And Bunped)

One of the reasons that the DoD may have sat on the captured IIS files without translating or releasing them, some speculate, was that the contents may embarrass some of our allies in the overall war on terror. One document released yesterday seems to support that analysis. According to document CMPC-2003-000878, the Russians gave more active support to Saddam prior to the March 2003 invasion than previously known -- and they used Syria as a conduit for their materiel:

Bulletproof Vests from Russia

Thirteen thousand vests were imported from Russia by request from the Presidential Command Office; they were all turned over to Qusai Saddam Hussein eight days before the war. Three Russian experts came with the vests, and the deal had been financed through a wealthy man in al-Kut (180 km south of Baghdad). [The suits] were bought for 250 dollars and then sold to Qusai Saddam Hussein for 600 dollars; they had sneaked into [Iraq] by way of [Syria] after [being] wrapped by Swedish jackets (so as not to embarrass Syria) as well as to deceive the American Intelligence, [however] [the American Intelligence] was able to discover this operation.

This suit is characterized by its ability to withstand a round from an American made M16-A2 (which has a very high speed and a piercing head) from a distance of only 5 meters, and the MG 7.62 [mm] machine gun at the same distance.

Advanced Russian T-72 Heavy Tank Engines

This tank is considered the gem of the Russian (Armored divisions); it has a 125 mm smoothbore barrel, and is capable of firing an APFSD (armor-piercing) round. These tanks suffer from engine [problems] from their use in the Iran-Iraq and Gulf wars. Iraq at most used 25 liters of engine oil per month on these tanks [and] Republican Guard officers always complained about their [the tanks] movement (During Operation Desert Fox in 1998, they were only able to move 6 tanks a distance of 1200 meters from the other 21 tanks.) One characteristic of a Russian armored tank is that the greatest emphasis is put on fire, then force, movement, and armor, in that order. Suddenly, there were new engines imported from Russia, and Republican Guard units were provided with 70 engines for each unit; these engines passed though Syria one month before the war.

This doesn't have much to do with WMD, of course, but the revelation of the movement of tank engines -- seventy of them for every armored unit -- has to raise some eyebrows about the relationship between Washington and Moscow. It also should remind people about the materiel conduit that Syria supplied to Saddam Hussein and Vladimir Putin, and whether or not that conduit operated bidirectionally. Perhaps the WMD that the US seeks did not stay in Syria at all, but made its way to Russia instead.

UPDATE and BUMP: Another look at our friends in Moscow comes in document CMPC-2003-001950, which details a meeting with the Russian ambassador in March 2003. The diplomats discussed the evacuation of Russian citizens from Iraq, but also discussed current American military assets deployed in the Gulf theater:

3- The ambassador, during the meeting, had given the following information about the American military presence in the Gulf and in the area since March 2. as follows: - 206500 troops, including: 98000 air force troops, 36500 infantry. 90% of these forces are in Kuwait, positioned on board of American warships. - American forces had reached Bobian Island. - 480 tanks. - 1132 armored vehicles. - 296 artillery - 735 Apache Helicopters - 871 combat planes - 106 US navy units, of which 68 are in the Gulf. The rest of them are in Oman, Adan, The Red Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. - 5 aircraft carriers, one of which is nuclear. Three are in the Gulf, one is in the Mediterranean Sea, and another one is on the way. - 583 cruise missiles are positioned on the US navy units. They are distributed over 22 navy units. - 64 cruise missiles are carried by planes. - Ten B-52H heavy bombers are positioned in the Indian Ocean. - Eight B-18 aircrafts are located at the American base in Oman (Tamarid Center).

4- The ambassador had indicated that they were concerned about the increasing number of aircrafts in Jordan . Also, he described the number of those aircrafts, positioned at Al-Sult base, as follows:
- 24 F-16 aircrafts.
- 10 Tornado aircrafts.
- 11 aircraft carrier.

Also, he indicated that there are five A-10 tank destroyer aircrafts located at King Faisal base in Jordan.

5- The ambassador also indicated that a number of the 82nd Division military personnel, which was stationed in Afghanistan, have begun arriving in Kuwait, and that the number has reached 750 to date.

I'm sure the White House would prefer not to have this get around.

One Year Ago: The London Bombings

Today marks the first anniversary of the Islamist attack on London's transportation systems, killing dozens and injuring many more. At the time our family were in Washington DC on vacation, wondering whether terrorists would try coordinated attacks in DC or New York City at the same time. We spent extra time around the television, watching the terrible aftermath of the attacks. At the time, I wrote:

If AQ thinks that they can frighten Blair and the British out of the war on terror by bombing London, I believe they are quite mistaken. Another lunatic used terror on Londoners on a much more massive scale for years at a stretch, thinking that the same kind of attacks would panic the British into surrendering, or at least into withdrawing from the conflict. The Blitz did neither. It hardened British resolve to stamp out the cancerous philosophy of fascism and to destroy the governments that used it to oppress their own people, commit genocide on ghastly scales, and attack peaceful civilian populations to further their political goals.

Hitler didn't succeed at his campaign of intimidation. Osama bin Laden won't either. Put simply, the British are not Spaniards. They will arise in fury and a renewed sense of mission to stamp out the bloodthirsty terrorists who have committed this heinous act -- and we will stand with them to do so, just as they have stood with us these long years since 9/11.

The British have remained steadfast in our alliance against the Islamofascists, and indeed have demonstrated the phlegm and stoic resolve for which they are so rightly reknowned. They have undertaken a hard look at the effects of multiculturalism, more bravely than some in the US, and resolved that those who wish to live in Britain should expect to assimilate into British society.

The Yoests have other thoughts; Charmaine was in London at the time of the attacks, and her husband Jack reposts their conversation that morning. Be sure to read the entire post, and drop a nice comment to Jack and Charmaine, two of the most gracious people you will ever find on the Internet.

Dr. Germ Analyzes Aircraft BW Attack Requirements In 2002

For those who continue to reject evidence of Saddam Hussein's pursuit of WMD programs, the document released yesterday by the FMSO DocEx project makes it a much more difficult proposition. Document CMPC-2003-004346 reveals that Dr. Rehab Rasheed Taha, otherwise known as Dr. Germ, prepared an analysis in 2002 of how to spread biological weapons material using an aircraft as the medium, and how far they had advanced on the application:

In the name of God, most Merciful, most Compassionate

THE BIOLOGICAL COMMITTEE DECISION

An appendage to the Biological Committee Decision, on 10 March 2002, subsequent to the biological activity combined list review, that was received after the delegate’s return from Moscow, and in reference to the concluded meeting convened on 10 April 2002, [when] the (GRL) draft list study was completed. – The Biological Section is evaluating what is shown in the third revised attachment for the continuous observation and examination plan. - The grades are subject to change according to the automation of export and import controls, according to resolution 1051 (1996) issued in document No. (S / 2001 / 560) which shows us the following:

1 – What is included in the draft list (GRL) is similar to what is included in the revised comments; submissive grades according to the system of export and import controls except the following:

a. Paragraph 7-1 from the revised statement and the (GRL) draft about the aircraft sprayers that are able to scatter dust. The dispensing percentage exceeds the one liter suspended liquid per minute or 10 grams of the dry substance per minute, therefore the size of the aerosol or dust portions were increased to the size of (15) microns or less.

b. A new paragraph under No. (11) was added to the draft list (GRL). According to that, it combined microscopic conservation equipment and Micro Encapsulation that was taken from the reviewed merchandise list (the additional list) stated in resolution (1382) 2001.

c. The (GRL) draft list indicated changes to the biological part, which was placed in the last page of the draft. Agents were added for the use of tissues and cell cultures (Cell Culture Mediators), and added cell growth cultures to cow fetus serums of (1) liter or more. These changes are not included in the mentioned list in paragraph (5) relating to culture media.

2. According to the changes shown in Paragraph (1-7), it increases the size of aerosol portions or the dust, and limits it to within (15) microns or less that and does not create a problem. The available information that we’ve been referring to is that agricultural usage doesn’t need these small sizes (quantities), but larger sizes (quantities). What is related to the change in the previously added paragraph (11), combining microscopic conservation equipment and micro encapsulation also does not create a problem because the use of this equipment is very limited, and it does not effect the production or research process.

Changes mentioned (suggested) in paragraph (5), that subjoin culture agents used in tissue culturing or cells and cell growth culturing to cow fetus serum is not considered a problem. These agents [were] originally entered including the complicated culture agent paragraph mentioned in paragraph (5) from the revised comments of the grades that are subject to notification in accordance to the system of imports and exports, that were imposed by resolution 1051 (1996).

Review please with respects.

Dr. Rehab Rasheed Taha
Committee Chief
Captain
Senan Abdel Hassan
Member
04-13-2002
Thamer Abdel Rahman
Member
04-13-2002

This shows that Taha continued to pursue application of biological weapons, in this case taking care to exploit UNSCOM parameters to hide the existence of the source material, its weaponization into the proper size (15 microns or less) for dissemination, and the process by which she produced it. This memo is dated in American format and comes from April 2002, prior to the Congressional authorization of force, but well after 9/11 and our renewed focus on the region.

Saddam and his henchmen not only had every intention of reconstituting their WMD programs, they obviously continued them unabated during the entire twelve-year quagmire while the UNSC slept.

ADDENDUM: We also have this IRIS news release from January 2002. The official Iraqi news agency (incorrect -- see next update) felt it necessary to warn their subjects about a new militarily-restricted area around al-Rashad:

Transporting Chemical Weapons to the Al-Rashad Area

At the beginning of this month, the ruling regime moved chemical and biological weapons to the Al-Rashad area and declared it a prohibited military area. This area is covered with trees and bushes. . .

This appears to be a more formal translation of the same document we covered in April.

UPDATE: IRIS is the official Iranian news agency. My error, and thanks to Jveritas for the correction.

Japan Insists On Sanctions

Despite earlier reports that Japan would back away from demanding sanctions against North Korea for its missile launches this week, the new draft circulated by Japan retains its demands for economic sanctions in defiance of Russian and Chinese opposition:

Japan circulated a new draft Security Council resolution Friday that retains the threat of sanctions against North Korea, ignoring Chinese and Russian concerns of inflaming tensions with the isolated communist nation.

No other details have yet come out about this development, but apparently Japan has not backed down from its demand for tangible consequences for Kim's fireworks display.

UPDATE: The AP has updated the story with more details. The draft declares that the UNSC will "take those steps necessary" to keep Pyongyang from acquiring material that could be used in their missile program. Given that the North Koreans just launched seven of them and plan to launch a few more, the issue of material for replacements might cause them a little concern. The same could be applied to the source material for rocket fuel, and an energy embargo would hurt Kim's regime badly.

Russia and China will have to face this resolution soon, possibly as early as Sunday. If they veto the resolution, likely Japan will start to consider its own options. They include termination of trade and assistance to Kim's regime, and perhaps even nuclearization as a MAD deterrent to Kim's provocations. The Chinese will not like that option one bit, and even the consideration of such an option (which might be a tough sell to the Japanese anyway) will prompt China to finally get serious about reeling their client state back into a rational frame of mind.

Sadr City In The Crosshairs

It looks like the Iraqis and Americans have decided to focus on one of the toughest tasks in cleaning up Baghdad: Sadr City. The Shi'ite enclave has spawned militias loosely organized around the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr, long a provocation for the majority Sunni population of greater Baghdad and a threat to the authority of the new federal government. Today Iraqi forces, backed by American support, captured two major leaders of militia efforts, including one who ran weapons from Syria:

Iraqi forces backed by U.S. aircraft battled militants in a Shiite stronghold of eastern Baghdad early Friday, killing or wounding more than 30 fighters and capturing an extremist leader who was the target of the raid, Iraqi and U.S. officials said.

In another operation, Iraqi troops backed by U.S. soldiers arrested a top regional commander of a Shiite militia near Hillah, a U.S. statement said. The moves appeared part of a crackdown on sectarian militias blamed for the escalation in Shiite-Sunni violence that has led to fears of civil war in recent months. ...

U.S. officials did not identify the insurgent leader but residents of the Shiite neighborhood said he was Abu Diraa, a commander in the Mahdi militia of radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

The U.S. statement said the militant leader was involved "in the transfer of weapons from Syria into Iraq" in an effort to break away "from his current insurgent organization." The statement did not mention any U.S. role in the raid, but residents said they could hear American aircraft providing cover.

In a statement Thursday, the U.S. said Iraqi and U.S. forces also arrested Adnan al-Unaybi, commander of a Mahdi militia force south of Baghdad. The statement said he was arrested north of Hillah, about 60 miles south of Baghdad.

Iraq has to continue its efforts to disarm and disband Shi'ite militias such as the Mahdi Army and its spinoffs. They present an acute problem as today has proven; bombs hit three Sunni mosques and one Sunni cleric has been abducted, and Shi'ite militias are the logical suspects. As long as these kinds of activities continue to occur, it will present a rationalization for the Sunnis to reject political engagement in a federal system and to rely on the native insurgencies for tit-for-tat protection that could produce a civil war.

Chronically, these militias will undermine the authority of the federal government. No government that hopes to survive can allow armed gangs to impose their own will on citizens without the citizens losing faith in the government and the system that put it in place. While Nouri al-Maliki presses for an end to the Sunni-based insurgencies, he has to also work towards an end to the Shi'ite militias, else the Sunnis will see this as a biased approach to governance and reject it. Maliki has to establish a monopoly on organized force in Iraq in order to bring security and stability to the nation.

The Iraqis made a good start of it today. If they can continue this effort, they will go a long way towards establishing credibility as a government dedicated to protecting all of their citizens, regardless of religion or ethnicity.

Holland Tunnel Target Of Zarqawi Network (Updated)

The New York Daily News reports that terrorists planned to detonate a large explosive device in the Holland Tunnel, flooding Manhattan's financial district and causing a disaster on the scale of New Orleans. The FBI discovered the plot while monitoring Internet communications, leading to the arrest of at least one terrorist in Beirut and got leads pointing towards the involvement of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi before he assumed room temperature:

The FBI has uncovered what officials consider a serious plot by jihadists to bomb the Holland Tunnel in hopes of causing a torrent of water to deluge lower Manhattan, the Daily News has learned.

The terrorists sought to drown the Financial District as New Orleans was by Hurricane Katrina, sources said. They also wanted to attack subways and other tunnels.

Counterterrorism officials are alarmed by the "lone wolf" terror plot because they allegedly got a pledge of financial and tactical support from Jordanian associates of top terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi before he was killed in Iraq, a counterterrorism source told The News.

It's not clear, however, if any cash or assistance was delivered.

The News has learned that at the request of U.S. officials, authorities in Beirut arrested one of the alleged conspirators, identified as Amir Andalousli, in recent months. Agents were scrambling yesterday to try to nab other suspects, sources said.

The Holland Tunnel has long been considered a potential terrorist attack, even before 9/11. Writers have used the same kind of plot in thrillers for at least the last twenty years, and after 9/11 the FBI has recognized this vulnerability in Manhattan, along with the subway systems. The discovery of this specific plot has an impact on several national-security debates.

First, if the ties to Zarqawi can be verified, it underscores the necessity of continuing pressure on the only al-Qaeda network with obvious operational capacity. Zarqawi wanted to exploit Iraq in order to keep the Iraqis from forming the first representative democracy in the Middle East, but also to get financing for his network to sponsor other attacks abroad. Osama bin Laden publicly called on him to broaden his operations to the United States, and it appears that he tried to do so. His death not only made it a little easier for us in Iraq -- rolling up hundreds of his agents -- but also made America safer.

Second, this shows the value in having national-security agencies involved in tracking international communications. While many bemoan the idea of "Big Brother", and for some good reason, our safety demands that we catch these terrorists before they strike. Just as in any war, that means we have to penetrate their communications. The terrorists, not having the centralized government of an actual state, use decentralized communications and exploit Western openness on our own systems instead. In this case, we found out about the plot by eavesdropping on Internet chat rooms, but we can certainly bet that once we found this, we started tracing and tracking all kinds of communications to identify the perpetrator and any contacts he made.

Lastly, as It Shines For All points out, the arrest of Amir Andalousli demonstrates the wisdom of our forward strategy on Islamofascist terrorists. Without our removal of the Saddam Hussein regime, we never would have been able to pressure Syria into withdrawing from Lebanon (along with France, who made the right decision in this case). Our insistence on the end of Assad's 29-year occupation of Lebanon, and especially Beirut where Andalousli was arrested, would have resulted in peals of laughter had we not staged 135,000 battle-hardened troops within shouting distance of Damascus -- and demonstrated our willingness to take action against tyrants in the area. American credibility made the difference, and had we not established that, Syria would be toasting Andalousli this afternoon rather that the Lebanese burning him this morning.

We have succeeded in keeping America safe by a comprehensive strategy against Islamofascist terrorism. In this case, we see how all of our efforts combine to present a tough national defense. We need to maintain that strategy and continue to thwart the efforts of our enemies, until they give up or are no more.

UPDATE: Suddenly, Chuck Schumer is a fan of communication intercepts:

Mr. Schumer said the arrest in Lebanon was the result of intercepted Internet conversations. "They were caught by people talking" he said. "In this case, intelligence did its job."

Amazing how having a politician's political base made safe by such work tends to make that politician less hysterical about privacy implications.

UPDATE: Fox News now reports that the target was not the Holland Tunnel, which wouldn't have done much but snarl car traffic, but the NY-NJ PATH train. Allahpundit at Hot Air first pointed this out.

UPDATE II: The press conference confirmed AJ Strata's suspicions that the investigation got prematurely closed, thanks to a leaker in the US government. The spokesmen took pains to excoriate the ignorant idiot that blew the probe and damaged relations with other governments trying to coordinate with American agencies that have turned into sieves.

Isn't it long past time to conduct a no-holds-barred effort to find and punish leakers? Do we have to wait until Americans die before we get serious about this?

Saddam And Anthrax Operations

In yet another document captured by the Coalition from the files of the IIS, we have yet another piece of evidence that Saddam Hussein continued his pursuit of WMD. In document BIAP-2003-004552.pdf, we have a short memorandum announcing a transfer to a biological weapons program:

CENTER OF MANAGEMENT AND LAW / PRESIDENT

For that, we order Dr. Hazem Anwar Alnasery, assigned to the Health Department Center, and Dr Mothny Abas, president of the Central Health Testing Department, to be members of the Anthrax Operation Room. This order will not cancel the previous order assigned to Dr. Mostafa Fathee, president of the Central Health Testing Department and president of the Health Research Institute. Thanks.

Signed
Zohir Saeed Abd Elsalam
10/13/2002

The "Anthrax Operation Room" sounds pretty ominous. El-Salem wrote this memo in October 2002, so this is not a case of pre-Gulf War mischief. Abas got assigned to anthrax operations while Congress debated whether to authorize military force.

This poses an interesting question about the anthrax attacks in the US in 2001. Did the US find Abas and the Anthrax Operations Center's products during the invasion? Or did Abas manage to escape the collapse of the Saddam regime, and still manage to stage anthrax attacks from wherever he established himself?

UPDATE: The anthrax attacks were in 2001, not 2003. Abas would not have worked at the Anthrax Operation Room at that time -- but it was obviously in operation during that period. Did Saddam orchestrate those attacks?

Project Harmony Documents Show Chemical 'Projects' In 2003

The translated documents from the captured IIS files have even more information on Saddam Hussein's activity in WMD research and development. BIAP-2003-003057.pdf has the agenda from a January 21, 2003 meeting that involves chemical projects scheduled for implementation in the coming year:

Members of the Chemical Projects Implementation Authority Below is the 10th session agenda for the Chemical Projects Implementation Authority held on January 21, 2003 at 0900.

1. To review work progress for the month of December for each project as of
December 31, 2002 according to the approved schedules and it’s indexes.
2. Discuss the implementation plan for the year 2003’s projects, to suggest the
[amount of money to] allocate, and to set out detailed plans to accomplish this.
3. The status of the importation orders.
4. The status of manufactured equipment.

Signed
Dr. ‘Alla Abbas Hussein
Chief, Chemical Projects Implementation Authority

Below is a table listing bids for several phases of the "sodium carbonate" project, one which the table shows will cost Iraq over $18 million dollars as well as $2.2 billion Iraqi dinars (see update below). One has to wonder what about sodium carbonate would require such an investment while the US argued for a military invasion of Iraq at the Security Council. This document shows that the Saddam regime not only kept their WMD programs active but were prepared to spend large amounts of money to fund them.

UPDATE: Originally I had this in billions of dollars and trillions of Iraqi dinars. However, one commenter points out that the numbers were probably a literal translation from the document, and that commas in the rest of the world are used as decimal indicators, where we use periods for that purpose. That takes each total down a level of magnitude here into more realistic numbers. Still, $18 million for a sodium carbonate project seems very high.

Iraqi Rosters In 2002 Show Interesting Department Names

The latest document release from the captured IIS files, this time with full translations, show some interesting behind-the-scenes nomenclature in the Iraqi government. For instance, Project Harmony document BIAP-2003-002728.pdf is a roster of night workers that got transmitted to the IIS Finance Department -- and some of the assignments appear to indicate ongoing WMD programs in Iraq:

Names of branch night workers on 28/12/2002 to the Finance Department: Missiles branch 1. Brigadeer General Sidaad Jasem 2. Amer Jaseb Operation branch 1. Liieutenant Colonel Riad Fawzy Biology dept. 1. ahmed Abid Al Hasan 2. Safaa Katai Nuclear dept. 1. Natek Ibrahim 2. Mohammad Fawzy Import dept. 1. Riad Abid Sadaa Chemical dept. 1.Ahmed Mohammad Fakhry Notary dept. 1. Moustafa Abid Alkader 2. Naser Abdulla 3. Safaa Abid Alatif Machine dept. 1.Khaleel Kazem 2. Abas Majid 3. Ibrahim Ali 4. Asil Salem 5. Mohanad Moufak 6. Dyah 7. Ali Jasem 8. Amjed Hamid 9. Thaer Edan 10. Ali Abid Alhussein operator dept. 1. Mahady Saleh 2. Kareem Majid 3. Abas Mahady Labatory dept. 1. Kamal Mohammad Photography dept. 1. Hasan Khamis 2. Ibrahim Ahmad 3. Jawad Kazem 4. Salah Mahady 5. Sanaa 6. Tomas Aziz Chemical dept. 1. Marwan Abid Al Kader

Among the rather banal departments, such as Notary, Computer, and Communication, we also see Nuclear, Biology, and Chemical. Power Line notes the same issue in another memo detailing end-of-year bonuses. In these three categories, 30 people received bonuses. One has to wonder why they worked three shifts and paid bonuses for programs that people still insist did not exist.

AP: North Korea Targeted Hawaiian Waters

According to an AP report, North Korea wanted to use its Taepodong-2 missile to hit the waters around Hawaii, apparently to send a message to the US. The Japanese newspaper Sankei reported that Kim Jong-Il wanted to protest economic sanctions:

North Korea targeted waters near Hawaii when it fired a long-range missile this week, a Japanese newspaper reported Friday.

The long-range Taepodong-2 was part of a barrage of seven missiles test-fired by North Korea on Wednesday. They all fell harmlessly into the Sea of Japan, but South Korean officials said the long-range missile had malfunctioned, suggesting it was intended for a more remote target.

Japan's conservative mainstream daily Sankei said that Japanese and US defense officials have concluded that the Taepodong-2 had targeted US state of Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean, after analyzing data collected from their intelligence equipment.

The newspaper quoted unidentified Japanese and US government officials.

The officials decided that the missile was pointed at Hawaii from the angle of its nose cone immediately after its launch and the altitude it has reached, after analyzing data collected by Aegis-equipped destroyers and RC-135S electronic reconnaissance aircraft, the newspaper said.

We have waited to see what analysis could be made by defense experts from the limited telemetry available about the intended target. If this proves correct, it will increase pressure on the White House to pursue a tougher line on Pyongyang and its missile tests -- perhaps even pushing us towards the risky policy of hitting the launch sites before any more ICBMs fly.

It also makes it a little tougher for us to settle for a "presidential statement" from the UN Security Council as well. That shows that the North Koreans represent a direct threat to our territory. We need to present a tough and united front to face down Kim. If the UNSC can't find it in themselves to do that while Kim fires missiles at Hawaii, then perhaps we can find some other use for Turtle Bay.

Larry King-George Bush Liveblog

8:00 CT - Liveblogging the interview. King starts off by getting Bush to admit that turning 60 is "traumatic".

8:01 - North Korea. Bush knew the missiles were "teed up", but says that seven launches took him by surprise. Says he's talked to the other parties in the multilateral talks and they all agree that a strong response is needed.

8:03 - Bush says no to bilateral talks: "We tried that before and it didn't work." He insists on the multilateral approach. Bush tells King that the US has taken the lead, and this is why the multilateral talks have existed at all.

8:05 - Laura Bush scores a couple of points by telling King that they spent the time watching the shuttle launch instead of Kim's fireworks.

8:06 - King asked Bush if Iraq was a diplomatic failure. Classic Bush response: "Well, yeah, after seventeen failed UN resolutions." He insists that removing Saddam was the right decision, and that establishing democracy in the Middle East is an important key to improving the conditions that breeds terrorism.

8:07 - King asks Laura about Iraq, and she reminds him of the twelve-year quagmire. She's obviously ready for this interview. Bush says, "It's easy to lose resolve if you govern based on polls." He reminds people that Japan also had democracy imposed on it by an occupying American force, and 60 years later we now have one of ourrongest relationships with Tokyo. Could we count on Japan as a countervailing force against Kim if we hadn't done the tough work in the postwar period?

8:12 - Bush seems more at ease with Larry King than with other one-on-one interviews. The last such event featured Tim Russert, and Bush seemed strained and defensive. He appears more natural and at ease with King.

8:16 - He answers the "Why me?" question by saying that he considers himself fortunate. Again, he's coming across much more personably than almost any other time I've seen him interviewed. Bush insists that the polling doesn't bother him, and that he expects criticism. Laura makes a great point by reminding people that they saw what the job was like under Bush Senior's term.

8:18 - Bush: You cannot achieve great things if you're worried about opinion polls. He tells King that he'd rather be right than popular, inadvertently paraphrasing Harry Truman.

8:19 - Funny moment when King continued to press Bush on whether he'd rather be popular. Bush laughed and said, "Well, you rely on ratings. No wonder you keep asking questions about popularity!" He insists that he's been popular and unpopular, and neither has changed his core principles or the focus on his goals. He sounds confident without being cocky,.

8:25 - You could see Bush's anger at the leakers who turned over the NSA and Swift stories. He agreed with King about the need for a free press, but he also emphasized the fact that we're at war.

8:27 - Bush on Guantanamo: Supreme Court okayed Gitmo but told him he had to work with Congress on military tribunals, which he said he would do. He disagreed with the Court's application of the Geneva Convention to non-state actors out of uniform and targeting civilians for political purposes. Good answer on that point.

8:28 - King has done a good job on this interview as well, at least so far. He has been respectful but still asking probing questions.

8:30 - Oooh. He backed off of phased implementation a bit here, still insisting he wants comprehensive immigration reform. He says amnesty equates to making people citizens automatically, a strange definition; amnesty has always referred to forgiving their illegal status, not the granting of citizenship. He did say that legal immigration applicants should be at the head of the line.

8:34 - Bush wraps up his immigration discussion well, appearing quite at ease discussing the details of the arguments. I didn't agree with him on some of it, but he has remained consistent.

8:35 - Why different approaches between Iran and North Korea? "They're two different situations ... North Korea got concessions, and then failed to honor their commitment."

8:36 - Still insists that he has a good relationship with Putin, as does Laura. Bush thinks he has the kind of relationship with the Russian president where he can speak frankly about disagreements. Well, okay, but Bush doesn't seem to have much influence on Putin's actions.

8:39 - The First Mate: "I just flat-out like George Bush ... he's real."

8:41 - King asks Bush about Lieberman and his independent run; would Bush support Lieberman? Bush says that King wants to "get me to give him a political kiss which might be his death!" He declined to comment on "hypotheticals".

8:43 - About Katrina: "There were a lot of heroics, and a lot that could have been done better." Laura tells King about grant programs to completely restock school libraries. Not too much on this topic that would surprise anyone. Earlier, Bush told King that he knew Ken Lay "pretty well," and that he was surprised by his death.

8:48 - Bush pledges to handle any war-crimes charges against American troops in a transparent manner, and describes the allegations as "despicable, if true". He wants to stress that these are the actions of a few, and not indicative of the totality of the American military. He understands that the Iraqis are concerned, and they should be.

8:50 - On Al Gore's charges about Bush and Cheney, he reminds people that he started the hydrogen initiative and is now funding clean coal.

8:51 - He tells King that he will be very involved in midterm campaigning. He seemed very enthusiastic about it -- maybe not TomKat enthusiastic, but still charged up.

8:52 - He says we will use persistence to get Osama bin Laden, but also reminded people that al-Qaeda no longer runs training camps and that most of their leadership has been captured or killed. He assures people that we will bring him to justice.

8:57 - Final segment. Laura says that the Presidency hasn't changed George much, just a little gray in the hair. Bush recommends daily exercise to keep the stress down. King reminds Bush that Nancy Reagan also has her birthday today, and they both talk about their admiration for her. Bush plans on being in full sprint throughout his entire second term -- a lot of initiatives to tackle, and he remains very optimistic about the American capacity for solving problems.

Analysis: I think Bush did himself a lot of good in this interview. He came across as very natural, very relaxed, and confident. He answered clearly and avoided the strangled syntax that often dogs his appearances. Hillary Clinton recently described him as "charming", and I think viewers got an opportunity to see that side of him.

King did well, but one criticism may be that he tried to tackle too many topics for a one-hour interview. It came across like some of his stream-of-consciousness columns at times. It may have benefitted from a clearer focus on two or three topics and more in-depth questioning. However, King remained relaxed and respectful.

Governator Will Be Back?

Supposedly written off after a disastrous special election torpedoed his referendums, Arnold Schwarzenegger appears ready to utter his famous movie line to Californians this November. New polling shows that the Governator has moved out of a virtual tie with Democratic challenger Phil Angelides to a seven-point lead, all of which came from undecided voters:

The former movie star moved further ahead of State Treasurer Phil Angelides -- who won the Democratic nomination for governor in March -- with a 44 percent to 37 percent lead in the Survey and Policy Research Institute's June 26-30 poll.

That was up from a 40 percent to 37 percent margin in March. The survey attributed Schwarzenegger's surge to his decision to send California national guard troops to the Mexican border in the fight against illegal immigrants, as well as the adoption of a compromise state budget.

Initially, Schwarzenegger had captured the imagination of Californians during the rare recall election, easily beating Cruz Bustamante for the top job. He extended his approval ratings to the mid-60s before he stumbled badly in 2005. He insisted on holding an expensive special election to push complicated budget reforms in direct elections, bypassing a chronically dysfunctional legislature. He ignored advice to avoid the contradiction of staging a special election that cost tens of millions of dollars in order to solve a budget problem, and it cost him dearly. His approval ratings sank like a rock, and his political opponents smelled blood in the water.

However, Arnold has quietly rebuilt his political capital, at least enough to put himself into a position of strength for November. He had to conduct a complete political campaign for the first time, and he has performed better than most people would have thought; his prior win was widely credited to the highly compressed time frame of the recall election. It helped that the Democrats nominated Phil Angelides, a colorless machine politician who cannot hope to challenge the Governator for personal attraction and charisma.

The Democrats must wonder what hit them. Given Arnold's political difficulties, Angelides could not have calculated on falling behind this early in the race. It looks like the Governator has built some momentum while Angelides stands still. He's sending an early message: He'll be bock.

Two Must Read Posts

I'm taking a couple of hours off -- my back's hurting again, and I'm a little tapped out, but I'd like to point readers to a couple of must-read posts. First, be sure to read all of The Anchoress' birthday greeting to George Bush. It's a repost, but it's brilliant. Don't miss it.

Second, Meryl Yourish takes sides in the conflict between Western values of life, liberty, and the rule of law, and the forces of Islamofascism that threatens all of it. She's a Zionist, and she explains her declaration in a brilliant post. Michael van der Galien points it out from The Moderate Voice.

Back later, with batteries recharged.

The Pork Poll, Or Have You Seen Elvis Lately?

The Sunlight Foundation has a new poll for blog readers across the political spectrum. Several of us, including Instapundit and Truth Laid Bear, will post this poll ourselves and collect data from our readers. It's not meant to be scientific but rather a bit of temperature-taking, as well as a little fun for everyone.

Take a moment and fill it out so we can see where CQ readers stand on the issue:

Six months ago, lobbyist Jack Abramoff admitted to corrupting government officials and pleaded guilty to three counts of conspiracy, fraud and tax evasion. Two Members of Congress have resigned their seats under a cloud of ethics charges, one of whom—Randy Cunningham--is in jail, and one—Tom DeLay—is under indictment in Texas.

Seven other Members—Senators Conrad Burns and Bill Frist, and Congressmen Dennis Hastert, William Jefferson, Jerry Lewis, Alan Mollahan and Bob Ney are currently under investigation by either the congressional ethics committees or law enforcement authorities (see this Congresspedia page for details). David Safavian, a top official at the General Services Administration, was found guilty by a jury on four counts of lying and obstruction of justice. And at least 11 government officials and former and current congressional staffers have either pled guilty or are under investigation for bribery, conspiracy, accepting bribes, corrupting elected officials, violations of lobbying rules, and numerous as yet unnamed reasons.

Six months ago, after Abramoff pled guilty, everyone in Congress was for reform ... Now, six months later, the Washington Post reports that these calls for change are “a fading concern.” The Post recounts, “Lawmakers considered a range of provisions, including a ban on privately funded junkets, a prohibition against taking gifts and an end to steeply discounted travel by private jet. Instead, they decided to strengthen and double the number of lobbyists' public disclosure reports, and they discarded -- or will probably discard -- almost everything else.” Powerful members of both chambers objected strongly to a ban on privately financed travel, and they were joined by major lobby groups. An independent office of public integrity was shot down in committee.

Be sure to read the whole post.

UPDATE: Fixed a coding problem, so the poll now runs correctly. It displays poorly, but it works!

Does Captured Document Tie Saddam To Taliban?

Ray Robison presents another interesting translation of a captured document at Fox News that has some buzzing about another link between Saddam Hussein and terrorism. Robison produces a manual written for Arabs fighting in Afghanistan for the Taliban that covers strategy and tactics for disguise and deception, fairly obviously written for soldiers working to defeat the Northern Alliance and avoid Western intelligence agencies:

An Arab regime, possibly Iraq, supplied how-to manuals for Arab operatives working throughout Afghanistan before 9/11, and provided military assistance to the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

That's the most likely conclusion drawn from an apparent training manual unearthed in captured Iraqi government computer files translated and analyzed exclusively for Fox News, and made public for the first time. ...

The training manual warns, in stark how-to terms, of the dangers of "information leaks," and instructs Arab operatives inside Afghanistan to dress like Afghan tribesmen, to avoid being followed ("Routine is the enemy of security"), to always be armed, and "to behave as if enemies would strike at any moment."

The manual also cautions Arabs to "beware of rapid and spontaneous friendships with Afghans who speak Arabic," and "always make sure about the identity of your neighbors and classify them as regular people, opponents or allies."

Robison hedges his bets here, and for some good reason; nothing in the document explicitly ties Iraq to the manual. While Iraq certainly qualifies as an Arabic nation that would have some reason to send troops covertly to support the Taliban, one could also say the same about Syria or even Saudi Arabia. Iraq and Syria both sponsored terrorism, while the Saudis have yet to do so through its own military, as far as we know. That state-run military forces are the intended audience seems beyond doubt; it makes references to hiding military identification, an unlikely precaution for run-of-the-mill jihadis.

His argument gets a boost from the New Yorker. In February 2003, the magazine ran an article reporting on the assistance granted by Saddam to the Taliban and al-Qaeda by sending a secret force called Unit 999 to conduct training:

"In interviews with senior officials, the following picture emerged: American intelligence believes that Al Qaeda and Saddam reached a non-aggression agreement in 1993, and that the relationship deepened further in the mid-nineteen-nineties, when an Al Qaeda operative — a native-born Iraqi who goes by the name Abu Abdullah al-Iraqi — was dispatched by bin Laden to ask the Iraqis for help in poison-gas training. Al-Iraqi's mission was successful, and an unknown number of trainers from an Iraqi secret-police organization called Unit 999 were dispatched to camps in Afghanistan to instruct Al Qaeda terrorists."

The pattern looks incriminating, and certainly gives any intelligence unit reasonable cause to tie Saddam to both AQ and the Taliban. It's not exactly a smoking gun, but it provides yet another piece of evidence towards that conclusion.

NY Court Upholds Judicial Restraint

The highest state court in New York turned back an attempt to force the Empire State to recognize same-sex marriage via judicial fiat, ruling that the issue belongs to the legislature and not the courts:

New York's highest court today turned back an attempt by gay and lesbian couples to win equal treatment under New York State's marriage law, saying that the state constitution "does not compel recognition of marriages between members of the same sex." ...

The majority opinion agreed with lawyers for New York City and New York State that there was a rational basis — grounded in the stability of the family as a child-rearing institution — for limiting marriage to a union of one man and one woman.

But it left open the possibility that the state Legislature could decide to allow same-sex marriages.

"We hold that the New York Constitution does not compel recognition of marriages between members of the same sex," Judge Robert S. Smith wrote in the majority decision. "Whether such marriages should be recognized is a question to be addressed by the Legislature."

That path has always existed for advocates of gender-neutral marriage. The efforts of plaintiffs to sue their way to public policy changes undermines the fabric of representative democracy, and the decision by this court restores some badly-needed common sense to the controversy. Lawsuits such as these threaten to diminish government by the people and replace it with government by unelected and unaccountable star chambers. The pursuit of public policy changes through lawsuits usually reflects the lack of support for the plaintiff's viewpoint, and when successful almost by definition results in the imposition of de facto law that is unsupported by popular sentiment.

As I have written before, I have no particular animus against gay marriage. However, it should only be adopted as public policy through the legislature. Despite the rhetoric involved, a lack of public recognition of gay relationships through the mechanism of civil marriage does not put the government into our bedrooms. In fact, the demand for civil marriage forces government into our bedrooms. We do not ban homosexual relationships; we simply choose not to give them official recognition. That decision belongs to the legislatures or to the people via referendums, and not to judges.

The ball, therefore, goes back to the New York legislature. The plaintiffs here cannot appeal this decision further as they raised no federal issues. Gender-neutral marriage advocates have to return to the difficult but necessary task of building popular support for their position rather than hope for a judicial diktat shortcut.

UPDATE: The highest court in New York is the Court of Appeals, not the Supreme Court, which is an intermediate court. Thanks to the many readers who noted the error.

France: Gitmo Detainees Provide Needed Intel

The French government has found itself in the uncomfortable position of defending Guantanamo Bay's prison after a court discovered that their investigators interrogated detainees at the American detention center. Reuters reports that government lawyers argued that their interrogation helped to prevent terrorist attacks on France:

Responding to the report that French intelligence agents had interviewed six men on trial in France for links with a network plotting terrorist attacks while they were held at Guantanamo, the French Foreign Ministry said it had made no secret of three visits to the camp between 2002-2004.

"These missions, which were of an administrative nature, were aimed at identifying precisely French citizens who might have been at Guantanamo and at assessing their situation in a general manner," it said in a statement dated Wednesday.

It added that the aim was also to gather information needed to allow France to prevent terrorism and that representatives of other government officials had taken part in these missions to help achieve both these goals.

France received its citizens almost exactly two years ago, and they have held all of them since, implicit recognition of the potential threat they posed. Now we find out that the government felt it necessary to interrogate them while in American custody to prevent further terrorism. That, of course, corroborates what we have said all along -- that the men held at Gitmo present a danger to us and to the West and have information that we need to prevent further attacks.

Will the national news media report this? I doubt it. The New York Sun's excellent blog, It Shines For All, picked this up from the wires, but I suspect most other outlets will let this one hit the bit bucket.

Taliban Man Denied Admission To Yale Degree Program

Sayed Ramatullah Hashemi will not get a degree from Yale, Hot Air reports in a blogospheric scoop later confirmed by the New York Times. The former ambassador-at-large for the oppressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan found out that Yale decided that they had endured enough embarrassment over their decision to allow Hashemi to enroll at the Ivy League school at all, and barred him from entering a degree-granting program after a cascade of criticism and protest:

A student at Yale University who was once a roving ambassador for the Taliban regime in Afghanistan has been denied admission to a degree-granting program at Yale, one of the student's financial supporters said yesterday.

The student, Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, apparently can continue to take courses at the university as an untraditional student in a non-degree program, as he did during the past academic year, said Tatiana Maxwell, the president of the International Education Foundation, which was created to raise money to send Mr. Hashemi to Yale. ...

Yale was sharply criticized by conservatives in opinion articles in The Wall Street Journal and in other newspapers and magazines, as well as on cable news shows and blogs, for opening its classrooms to a former representative of the Taliban, who harbored Al Qaeda and are trying to destabilize the government of Afghanistan.

At the same time, a number of Yale students and professors supported Mr. Hashemi's presence at the university. They argued that he would benefit from a Yale education and from the culture of tolerance and open inquiry that prevails at a university in the West; they also said they would benefit from having him at Yale.

It's odd that Yale would have trotted out the diversity argument, considering the regime that Hashemi represented. Let's recall that the Taliban beat women for not covering themselves from head to toe and men for shaving their faces. Ancient Buddhist carvings, considered artistic and historical treasures, exist no more thanks to Taliban tolerance. The Taliban also reintroduced the lovely Islamic tradition of tolerance by crushing homosexuals to death or throwing them off of towers.

The latter point seems especially germane when it comes to Yale. After all, they have taken the position that the American military cannot stage ROTC classes at the campus due to their "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding homosexuals in the military (which I also oppose, for several reasons). Yale's students and faculty argued that the university would benefit from having Hashemi's diverse viewpoint represented on campus, but they kicked out the military for a much milder viewpoint and action than that of Hashemi and his colleagues.And while they argue that Hashemi would have benefited the Yale community by his inclusion, no one appears to wonder whether Yale students might benefit from having the ROTC on campus and the diversity of political opinion it might create.

Yale invited Hashemi -- he didn't just show up and fill out an application. They went out of their way to get him to choose Yale, because as their admissions office stated, they didn't want to lose another "high profile" candidate to Harvard. Regardless of all the arguments about diversity and openness, all of which get belied by Yale's policies towards the American military, Yale obviously chose Hashemi as a tweak at the Bush administration. They thought that Hashemi's presence would embarrass the White House and give Yale some sort of moral authority.

Instead, they have demonstrated themselves to be hypocrites, and still do with this decision. Rather than deny him admission altogether, they denied him his application to a degree program, but will still allow him to attend the nondegree program. They're hoping he gets the hint and disappears voluntarily. Yale passed up an opportunity to take a clear stand against the intolerance and hatred that Hashemi represented.

Previous posts:

Going To Yale Instead Of To Jail
Yale's Response To Alumni Critics: 'Retarded'?
Now Batting For Taliban Man ... Jewish-Conspiracy Man!
Taliban Man Ups The Ante

North Korea Continue Provocation Despite Incompetence

Sometimes one has to admire tenacity in the face of ongoing embarrassment. North Korea continue to threaten more missile launches despite the spectacular failure of the one Taepodong-2 missile two days ago. The Bush administration responded by noting that the missiles have shown themselves as no threat to the US and refuses to give in to extortion:

The Bush administration on Thursday dismissed North Korea’s threat to test-fire more missiles and pressed for international efforts to get the secretive communist regime to “cease and desist” such actions.

“We’re certainly not going to overreact ... to these wild statements out of Pyongyang and North Korea,” said Undersecretary R. Nicholas Burns. “We’ve seen them before.”

The North Korean Foreign Ministry, in a statement carried by the state-run Korean Central News Agency, insisted that the communist state had the right to missile tests and argued the weapons were needed for defense. ...

The South Korean press was reporting Thursday that the North had three or four short- or medium-range missiles on launch pads ready for firing.

Incompetence in Pyongyang's missile production provides one reason why we feel comfortable referring the matter to multilateral diplomacy. Indeed, Bush wants to keep other countries front and center for two reasons. Primarily, we cannot be seen to respond to extortion. North Korea wants direct talks with Washington to resolve all of the peninsular issues, but that can't happen while Kim continues to operate his huge counterfeiting operation that produces American currency fakes by the millions. That decision, by the way, was Kim's, not ours. We also cannot unilaterally impose security solutions throughout the region without including the representatives of the other interested states, especially Japan, China, and South Korea. Russia also has some interest in the resolution.

Another reason, though, is the rudimentary missile-defense system we have deployed in the region. It has had its share of difficulties, but the technology continues to improve. This system exists only because the Bush administration took missile proliferation seriously and abandoned the anachronistic anti-ballistic missile treaty that kept only the US and Russia locked out of defending themselves from nutcases like Kim Jong-Il. It should have been abandoned after the fall of the Soviet Union and the first inklings of ICBM development in states like Iran and North Korea, but even the post-9/11 withdrawal from the ABM treaty caused a firestorm of controversy. The world press castigated Bush as a "bull in a china shop" and labeled it a "betrayal of humankind’s best hopes".

The Washington Examiner picks up on this thread in today's editorial:

As they debate and discuss various options at the United Nations and in capitals around the globe, the rudimentary U.S. missile defense system is poised to shoot down anything launched from North Korea that threatens the American homeland or the critical interests of our regional allies like Japan and Australia.

Noticeably absent are the voices of those who, since President Reagan first proposed such a system in 1984, have fought development and deployment of the missile defense system the U.S. must now depend upon in dealing with North Korea. These folks have claimed over and over that the system they derisively call “Star Wars” can’t possibly work, would be too expensive, would incite a new world arms race, etc., etc. Names that come to mind in this regard include senators like Joe Biden, D-Del., Jack Reed, D-R.I., Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., and the Clinton-Gore administration that delayed and dilly-dallied with work on missile defense for most of the ’90s. ...

It is a sobering thought to wonder how much more secure the United States and its allies would be today in the face of madness like North Korea’s launches if instead of a limited defense still in development we could depend upon the robust protection first proposed many years ago.

The arms race continued regardless of the existence of the ABM treaty. In fact, this mirrors the curious denial we experienced about the rise of Islamofascist terror. We willfully ignored evidence that we would soon require a missile shield in the actions of Iran and North Korea, relying on the Chinese to defend us against the latter through economic and diplomatic pressure rather than preparing our own defenses. Politicians like Joe Biden -- who wants to run for President in 2008 -- scolded Bush for finally recognizing that we had left ourselves vulnerable to nuclear extortion:

I am deeply concerned that unilateral action on national missile defense, and walking away from a treaty that has helped keep the peace for 30 years, may unleash a dangerous, new arms race. If the price of rushing forward with an unproven missile defense program is proliferation of nuclear weapons in China, the consequent ratcheting up of missile production by India and Pakistan, then the United States and the world will be less secure, not more secure.

Thanks to George Bush, and no thanks to Joe Biden and his cohorts, we have at least some defense against the North Korean threat and do not need to appease a master manipulator. If we had not listened to Biden, Bill Clinon, Madeline Albright, and the Democrats during the 1980s and 1990s, we may have already developed a comprehensive defense against nutcases with ICBMs and have them deployed to protect our allies as well. We should remember this during these midterms and in 2008.

Mobile Labs Could Not Have Produced Hydrogen As Described, Part III, And Rebuttal

In the final installment of ChemicalConsultant's analysis, he addresses the engineering of the mobile labs in relation to the hydrogen production explanation, as well as the folly of using these facilities instead of simply buying trucks to transport prefilled containers of hydrogen. He also provides a rebuttal to comments made in the thread for Part I.

8. A bank of 5 Air Storage Cylinders is reported in the Major Components of the Trailers section. These serve no purpose for making hydrogen, although Annex D suggests that perhaps they were used as a source of sparging gas (see Comment and Assessment, Aeration and stirring). The investigators do point out that the sparging tube is too short to reach the alleged reaction liquid. Even if the tube were long enough, the air would dilute the hydrogen produced. Also mentioned in the Major Components section are two feed tanks. If the trailers were really used for making hydrogen, these would be unnecessary since water could be monitored and fed directly from the main water tank.

9. Annex D does not report whether the Iraqis ever explained why a mobile system would be preferable to using only pre filled cylinders. Instead of wasting space with a reaction system, 10 or more cylinders could be easily cushioned to be driven over rough terrain and used to fill at least 20 2.5 m3 balloons far more rapidly, thus decreasing the system vulnerability in a combat situation.

10. I have also read an article from The Observer, June 15, 2003 which quoted an “experienced” observer, Martin Furmanski. He claimed that large numbers of balloon launches are required to collect meteorological data for unguided rockets and field artillery. He also claimed that typical balloons require 4 m3 of hydrogen. The alleged Iraqi process takes 3 hours (see Process Description) to miraculously make 10 m3 from 1 kg of sodium hydroxide. This means that supposedly three hours are spent out in the field, then, even if 10 m3 were produced, less than 3 balloons are filled and then the process is repeated. Sounds hard to get large numbers of launches this way.

Mr. Furmanski also mentions the Marconi Military Meteorological System manufactured in the UK, reportedly purchased by Iraq in 1985. Back in 2003, I found a link on the Marconi website to this equipment. Regrettably, I failed to print it out at the time, but as I recall, it made no mention of in-field hydrogen production. The photos didn’t show any of the equipment that appeared in Annex D. Marconi also claimed that the balloons could be filled within 20 minutes and then the mobile unit could move elsewhere. That would only be consistent with pre filled hydrogen cylinders.

Rebuttal For Part 1 Comments

Thanks [to Dave] for providing the links to the two patents you cited in your response to my Part I. Some of us 120 year olds like to keep up with what’s going on. I did take a look at the 2003 patent application which you say deals with the same process as the 1909 patent.

Lines 29 through 41, p1, of the 1909 patent describe mixing molten caustic soda (NaOH) with finely divided aluminum. Claim 7 of the patent, lines 24 through 29, p 2, of this patent says that the ratio of caustic soda molecules relative to aluminum ranges from one to three, i.e. an excess of soda. The 2003 patent application (which became a patent later) involves adding small amount of aluminum to a strong caustic solution stepwise until the aluminum is in excess. Is it ok if I tell your boss at the chemical outfit where I assume you work that you view these as the same process?

You and Simon666 didn’t seem to note the typo in the 2003 application, section 0055, You, Simon and the Andersens wrote the equation as

Back in 1909 when I learned how to balance chemical equations I was told that if you have 12 H and 6 O on the left side you are supposed to have the same on the right, not 9 H and 6 O. The compound that’s being made is alumina trihydrate (tri as in three) so you should have had 2 Al(OH)3 on the right.

The 2003 application is quite interesting so I will be following up with a detailed analysis. In brief I would like to point out that the Andersens in part claim that it is essential for add the aluminum and possibly water stepwise for the “catalytic” process to work whereas the Al Kindi process described in the Iraq Survey Group Final Report (i.e the Duelfer report) annex mixes aluminum and NaOH dry, then adds water.

ChemicalConsultant is reviewing the comments on all of the threads and may present further arguments in the coming days.

UPDATE, 7/13: I'm closing the comments. I think the debate has gotten off-track a little bit (but still handsomely done by all sides), and it's now just two or three people talking past each other.

Cindy Sheehan: I'd Rather Live Under Hugo Chavez Than George Bush

Cindy Sheehan continues to embarrass all of the politicians who hitched their wagons to her star when she spent last summer haranguing George Bush for a second meeting with him to protest her son's death in Iraq. When she restricted herself strictly to bashing Bush on the war, the Democrats loved her, turning her into a national celebrity. However, when she used that attention into a platform for a radical leftist agenda, the same politicians who feted her suddenly caught a case of collective amnesia.

And for good reason, as it turns out. Her latest foolish and embarrassing stunt came today when she embraced Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez and declared that she would rather live under his rule than that of the duly elected President of her native country. That wasn't all she had to say, either:

O'Donnell: Would you rather live under Hugo Chavez than President George Bush?

Sheehan: Uh, yes.

O: Yes?

S: You know, Hugo Chavez is not a dictator like you introduced him. He's been democratically elected eight time, and ---

O: Saddam Hussein was democratically elected.

S: Yeah, hold on a second, he, uh, he is not anti-American, he has helped the poor people of America, he has sent aid to New Orleans, he has sold heating oil to disadvantaged people in America, in the United States of America, at low cost. His country loves him, and for us to say that we have some kind of influence over Venezuelan policy is wrong. The people of Venezuela have elected him overwhelmingly eight times.

Imagine that! Hugo Chavez got elected with overwhelming margins in eight straight elections. Amazing how popular a man can be when he stages a coup to seize power. Freedom House has this to say about Venezuela and its benificent leader:

The Republic of Venezuela was established in 1830, nine years after independence from Spain. Long periods of instability and military rule ended with the establishment in 1961 of civilian rule and the approval of a constitution. Until 1993, the social-democratic Democratic Action Party (AD) and the Social Christian Party (COPEI) dominated politics. Former president Carlos Andres Perez (1989 - -1993) of the AD was nearly overthrown by Chavez and other nationalist military officers in two 1992 coup attempts in which dozens were killed. ...

In February 1999, Chavez won with 57 percent of the vote, taking the reins of the world's fifth-largest oil-producing country.

A constituent assembly dominated by Chavez followers drafted a new constitution that strengthened the presidency and allowed Chavez to retain power until 2013. After Venezuelans approved the new constitution in a national referendum on December 15, 2000, congress and the Supreme Court were dismissed. Although he was reelected as president, new national elections held in July 2000 marked a resurgence of a political opposition that had been hamstrung in its efforts to contest Chavez's stripping of congress and the judiciary of their independence and power. Opposition parties won most of the country's governorships, about half the mayoralties, and a significant share of power in the new congress. Nevertheless, that November, Chavez's congressional allies granted him special fast-track powers that allowed him to decree a wide range of laws without parliamentary debate.

Freedom House rates Venezuela as "partly free". But Cindy Sheehan wants us to believe that Hugo Chavez isn't a dictator and that living under his rule, without an independent legislature and judiciary, is preferable to living in the United States.

We have yet to hear from the politicians that flocked to her side last year on the unquestioned moral authority of these latest pronouncements. One of those politicians would be Coleen Rowley, running for Congress in my MN-02 district. She announced her intention to join Camp Casey in Crawford at the height of the circus last August. Now one has to Google her site to find the barest mention of Sheehan, but former MN-06 candidate Scott Mortenson notes her support of Sheehan as one of the main factors for his endorsement of Sheehan in this race.

Your potential constituents would like to know, Coleen -- do you consider Hugo Chavez an overwhelmingly popular democrat as your ally Sheehan insists, or a autocratic strongman?

The Vatican Discards Appeasement Policy Towards Muslim Nations

The Vatican has begun to dismantle the policy of appeasing Muslim governments that oppress Christian minorities, an approach that reached its zenith when Pope John Paul the Great kissed the Qu'ran. The Vatican will instead insist on protecting Christian minorities in the ummah as Islamists increasingly targets them for abuse and worse:

'Enough now with this turning the other cheek! It's our duty to protect ourselves." Thus spoke Monsignor Velasio De Paolis, secretary of the Vatican's supreme court, referring to Muslims. Explaining his apparent rejection of Jesus' admonition to his followers to "turn the other cheek," De Paolis noted that "The West has had relations with the Arab countries for half a century...and has not been able to get the slightest concession on human rights."

De Paolis is hardly alone in his thinking; indeed, the Catholic Church is undergoing a dramatic shift from a decades-old policy to protect Catholics living under Muslim rule. The old methods of quiet diplomacy and muted appeasement have clearly failed.

The estimated 40 million Christians in Dar al-Islam, notes the Barnabas Fund's Patrick Sookhdeo, increasingly find themselves an embattled minority facing economic decline, dwindling rights, and physical jeopardy. Most of them, he goes on, are despised and distrusted second-class citizens, facing discrimination in education, jobs, and the courts.

These harsh circumstances are causing Christians to flee their ancestral lands for the West's more hospitable environment. Consequently, Christian populations of the Muslim world are in a free-fall. Two small but evocative instances of this pattern: for the first time in nearly two millennia, Nazareth and Bethlehem no longer have Christian majorities.

The instruction of turning the other cheek has long been prone to misinterpretation. Nothing in Christianity requires its adherents to blithely sentence themselves or their brethren to abuse or death, nor did Christ teach that in his instruction. Jesus taught us patience, and not to blindly return every provocation with violence. He taught peace as the first resort, but even Jesus did not use that as an exclusive strategy. The Bible shows Jesus violently ejecting the moneychangers from the temple, for instance, hardly a turn-the-other-cheek moment. He also told his apostles, "Let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one" (Luke 22:36). The Old Testament, of course, has a number of passages where God directs His people to commit total war on other populations.

St. Thomas Aquinas developed a formal Just War Doctrine, which recognizes that Christians must love peace but not shrink from confronting evil. That doctrine has grown in use over the centuries in Western thought to become a moral imperative. World leaders have often referred to its teachings, even those who aren't Catholic and lead secular nations. The one "nation" that has rejected the concept in its entirety recently has been the Vatican, ironically.

This change has been evolutionary rather than revolutionary. The Jerusalem Post notes that Catholic dissatisfaction with the lack of reciprocity offered by Islamists started during John Paul's pontificate. The Mohammed cartoon crisis accelerated this epiphany. At first, they scolded the Dutch newspapers and took the position that criticism of the Prophet should not have been tolerated -- and then watched as Muslims killed Christians in retaliation. That finally convinced the Church that offering appeasement did nothing to protect fellow Christians, and that the Church needed to act in defense of the faithful instead of offering apologetics for Islamists.

Reciprocity will apparently become the first principle in dealing with Muslims. Where Muslims offer the same protections to Christians that the West offers to Muslims, then the Church will preach tolerance and understanding. Where reciprocity fails to occur, the Church will start becoming more activist in speaking out against abuses. It's about time.

MT Ate The Greatest Immigration Post Ever

An hour ago, I wrote perhaps the greatest single post on immigration ever seen in the blogosphere. Unfortunately, Movable Type ate the danged thing, and so my brilliance will have to go unrecognized, alas. I'm sure you'll all take my word for it .... right?

Hello?

At any rate, the New York Times reported that George Bush may demonstrate some flexibility on a borders-first approach to immigration reform. Bush called a plan to compromise between the House and Senate plans by Mike Pence "very intriguing," according to a White House aide in charge of legislative affairs:

Republicans both inside and outside the White House say Mr. Bush, who has long insisted on comprehensive reform, is now open to a so-called enforcement-first approach that would put new border security programs in place before creating a guest worker program or path to citizenship for people living in the United States illegally.

"He thinks that this notion that you can have triggers is something we should take a close look at, and we are," said Candi Wolff, the White House director of legislative affairs, referring to the idea that guest worker and citizenship programs would be triggered when specific border security goals had been met, a process that could take two years.

The shift is significant because Mr. Bush has repeatedly said he favors legislation like the Senate's immigration bill, which establishes border security, guest worker and citizenship programs all at once. The enforcement-first approach puts Mr. Bush one step closer to the House, where Republicans are demanding an enforcement-only measure.

"The willingness to consider a phased-in situation, that's a pretty big concession from where they were at," said Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma, whose closeness to Mr. Bush dates to his days as a top Republican National Committee official. "It's a suggestion they are willing to negotiate."

Bush did send some encouraging signals, but I doubt it will be enough. I went into more depth on this in the post that vanished into the ether, but Bush did not do much to endorse Pence's plan, which calls for illegals to self-deport in order to qualify for a guest-worker program and eligibility for American citizenship six years later. The Pence plan eliminates most of the amnesty-style points of the Hagel-Martinez bill that John McCain favors, but it still puts these illegals ahead of those seeking legal entry and citizenship. Besides, Bush took pains today to underscore the need to treat the 11 million illegals with "respect", which doesn't sound like he's on board with the idea of deporting them.

If Bush has adopted a more open mind on phased implementation, that will help with some of the opposition to the Senate plan he favors. It will likely fail to impress immigration hardliners who want border and employment security first, last, and only. The Pence plan may not even impress them, and anything less will not lower their opposition to Bush's immigration policies.

Addendum: La Shawn Barber has an excellent column on immigration in today's Examiner. Be sure to read it all.

Lieberman Gets A Little Help From His Friends

What would you do if I sang out of tune? Would you stand up and walk out on me?

Just as Ringo Starr got by with a little help from his friends, so Joe Lieberman hopes to do with a big assist from key members of his caucus. Some heavy hitters on the Left will come to Connecticut to rally support for Lieberman in the primary:

Sens. Joe Biden of Delaware, Barbara Boxer of California and Ken Salazar of Colorado plan to campaign in Connecticut for Lieberman between now and the Aug. 8 primary. Their goal is to reassure the party faithful of the three-term senator's loyalty to Democratic causes, including women's issues, labor and the environment.

"It will be a reminder to voters of the work he's done on progressive issues," Lieberman spokeswoman Marion Steinfels said Wednesday. "Some of his colleagues wanted to come here and campaign for him on issues that matter to him and them."

The rush of support from his Senate colleagues comes two days after Lieberman, the party's 2000 vice presidential nominee, surprised Democrats by announcing that he would start collecting signatures for an independent campaign if he loses the primary.

The Lamont campaign discounts the impact this will have on the race. However, one has to remember that Boxer has been adamantly opposed to the war and a bitter antagonist to the Bush administration. Biden has an almost identical Poole rating over the last three sessions of Congress as Lieberman. Salazar had run as a centrist in Colorado's 2004 Senatorial race, but has been pushed leftward by the netroots.

It's quite obvious that the Democrats want to see Lieberman re-elected, and will do anything to avoid the embarrassment of having him run as an independent to do so. While they have steered clear of the question about endorsing him in such a three-way race (with Hillary Clinton being an exception), the pledges of support from a far-Left candidate such as Barbara Boxer shows that the Democratic Party wants no part of a Lamont campaign in November.

Will Boxer and her friends help Joe get by? I think that Lamont has more worries than he knows.

More Dishonesty At The Gray Lady

Today's editorial on the North Korean crisis at the New York Times sounds eminently reasonable, at least at first. The editors manage to place blame for the missile standoff where it belongs -- on Pyongyang and the Kim regime. However, the Times manages to blame the current cessation of talks on the Bush administration for what it sees as a technicality:

Everyone's long-term interest lies in reanimating the diplomacy that has sputtered to a halt over an unrelated banking dispute. The Bush administration should have moved many months ago to overcome that obstacle.

But now it is North Korea that has clearly put itself in the wrong. Washington should obviously not reward that bad faith by abruptly rushing back to the bargaining table. But reviving those talks in a more considered way would serve America's own best interests.

Notice that the Times doesn't bother to explain this "unrelated banking dispute". The little tiff that the Gray Lady references is no mere technical dispute over transfer fees or some other esoteric debate. North Korea has a grand-scale counterfeiting operation that may have put tens of millions of phony $100 bills into circulation. CNN reported on this tiny little misunderstanding two months ago:

"Banco Delta Asia provided a tolerant environment for illicit North Korean activities," said Daniel Glaser, from the U.S. Treasury Department.

The North Korean companies laundered money and attempted to pass it through the bank, he said.

The fake $100 bills are of such high quality it is almost impossible to distinguish them from the real thing. U.S. officials contend the regime of Kim Jong Il has manufactured and put into circulation tens of millions of these counterfeit bills, labeled supernotes, around the world.

These charges are backed up by the U.S. secret service, which says it has made a connection between the highly deceptive counterfeit notes and North Korea.

"Our investigation has revealed that the supernote continues to be produced and distributed from sources operating out of North Korea," said Michael Merritt, from the U.S. Secret Service.

In fact, supernote distribution channels involve terrorists and criminals in Pyongyang's complex strategy to get hard currency and attack the dollar's value. The US has indicted the IRA's Sean Garland for distributing the supernotes. North Korea also used organized crime "families" to pass the counterfeits inside the US; a Chinese gang linked to North Korea got stung by the FBI in an operation called Royal Charm. The climax came at a fake wedding, where instead of limos to carry the guests to the reception, vans took them to prison instead.

Pyongyang also used a front company called Zokwang, a trading company, to launder their counterfeits through Banco Delta Asia in Macau. When the US found out about it, we blacklisted it and had the assets for Zokwang frozen. The bank itself has barely remained in business, with its legitimate international business all but gone. Zokwang disappeared from Macau, but reportedly still operates from China. After watching its money-laundering operation frozen, Kim broke off cooperation from the six-party talks. He wants to have those assets unfrozen and the bank allowed to operate once more through legitimate international channels, and refuses to re-engage until that happens.

In other words, Kim wants the proceeds from his counterfeiting ring back, as well as his money-laundering operation so that he can continue to dump millions more of these fake $100 supernotes into the world economy. He wants his Macau connection back on line so that he can continue to damage the US economically through counterfeiting operations.

This is what the Times neglects to mention when it holds George Bush responsible for the breakdown in the six-party talks. The media pretends that this never happened when they push Bush to hold bilateral talks with Kim, rewarding him for his crimes rather than blocking them. The Times simply cannot be trusted to tell the truth even when our enemies commit such blatant actions against us, and instead continue to use their energy to serve their intensely partisan interests.

Ken Lay Can't Cheat Death

Former Enron chief Ken Lay died suddenly today of a massive coronary at age 64. Lay had been scheduled for sentencing in October, but the convicted fraudster found out that cheating death takes a little more savvy than cheating stockholders:

Pastor Steve Wende of First United Methodist Church of Houston, said in a statement that church member Lay died unexpectedly of a "massive coronary.''

Wende said Lay and his wife, Linda, were in Aspen, Colo., for the week "and his death was totally unexpected. Apparently, his heart simply gave out.''

The Lays owned property in Colorado, the only state outside the Southern District of Texas, which includes Houston, where he was allowed to go before that sentencing. ...

According to a statement from the Pitkin County Sheriff's Office, deputies and an ambulance had been sent to Lay's Old Snowmass home at 1:41 a.m. for a medical emergency. Lay was then transported to Aspen Valley Hospital where he was pronounced dead at 3:11 a.m. A coroner's autopsy is pending.

Many people will find themselves bitterly disappointed that Lay never served a day in prison for his crimes, especially the stockholders who lost so much money after believing in Lay's lies. The man who became the poster boy for the excesses and manipulations of the 1990s bubble wound up dying on vacation at his summer estate. The Lord will exercise justice, certainly, but Lay made it out of here without having to answer fully for his deeds.

It's a shame, for so many reasons.

UPDATE: I'm not "taking it down", and I challenge those who see something objectionable about this post to tell me specifically -- from what I wrote -- what it is. Ken Lay enriched himself to the tune of millions of dollars through misrepresentation and fraud, and beyond that through abusive business practices, setting up false shortages to drive prices higher based on panic. Thanks to Ken Lay and a few other bubble fraudsters, we now have Sarbanes-Oxley sucking at productivity in every publicly-held corporation in America.

I feel sympathy for his family, but none for Lay himself. He died rich and left behind many who watched their investments disappear into thin air, never to return. He paid no restitution and died at his summer estate, in the lap of luxury.

FYI, even when I write bad posts, I don't take them down or delete them. I live with my mistakes.

A Brief Aside On Mobile Labs

George at Seixon has followed my posts about the mobile laboratories that the CIA and the Iraqi Survey Group now insist were designed for hydrogen production. I'll post Part III of ChemicalConsultant's critique of that analysis later tonight, but George has a few pertinent questions of his own. Besides the fact that Iraq's oil refineries could have produced all the high-quality hydrogen needed for any meteorological needs, George points out that the Iraqis had already bought several mobile production facilities abroad, and at a much lower cost:

The simplest question one could have asked would be whether or not Iraq was able to easily obtain hydrogen generators rather than having to fabricate their own. Many have scoffed at this question, claiming that Iraq was so bogged down with sanctions that they probably had to make do with DIY solutions. A lazy assumption will often lead to a wrongheaded conclusion, and in this case, quite horrendously wrong. One only needs to comb through the Oil for Food Program Distribution Plans to find a most inconvenient fact that would seem to blow the whole story out of the water.

In January 2000 during Phase VII, the UN approved the delivery of one 1 m3/hour electrolytic hydrogen generator (07-30-01065), in addition to 2500 meteorological balloons of various sizes ranging from 10g to 1000g (07-30-01064). During Phase VIII in July 2000, the UN approved the delivery of two 3 m3/hour electrolytic hydrogen generators (07-55-01143), in addition to 2000 weather balloons (07-55-01145). February 2001, during Phase IX, the UN approved the delivery of two 3 m3/hour electrolytic hydrogen generators complete with spares, installation materials, and consumables for 5 years (07-55-00017). Also approved were 100 3KVA electric gasoline generators (07-55-00016) and an assortment of weather balloons. In August 2001, for Phase X, the UN approved five 3 m3/hour electrolytic hydrogen generators with consumables for 5 years, 100 more electric generators, and more weather balloons. The same order was approved in January 2002 for Phase XI. For June 2002 during Phase XII, three more hydrogen generators, 100 more electric generators, and of course more balloons. The itemized list for January 2003 and Phase XIII, the last phase of the program, is not available on the Oil for Food website.

From Phase VII through Phase XII a total of 17 electrolytic hydrogen generators were approved for sale to Iraq under the Oil for Food Program. One of these produced 1 m3/hour, while the remaining 16 produced 3 m3/hour. By comparison, the supposed setup for the production of hydrogen in the trailers would produce considerably less than 3 m3/hour, according to the Duelfer report’s analysis of the documentation provided by the Iraqis. The exact production rate is never specified in the report, only that half the process of filling up 10 m3 on the tanks (5 x 40l x 50 bar) would take 3 hours, for an estimated 1.7 m3/hour production rate.

With these facts, which have most likely never been revealed until now, it would seem that Dr. David Kay may have been more right than wrong in suggesting the notion of hydrogen production to have been a rather silly one. Why would the Iraqis go to so much trouble to fabricate large, inefficient, road-bound hydrogen generators when they already had access to and could order smaller, efficient, portable systems? In fact, the Iraqis were importing and ordering hydrogen generators far more suitable for their needs while building the trailers. The preponderance of evidence suggests that the Iraqis had no reason to create these systems to produce hydrogen, and evaded UN inspection of these vehicles, with a cover story on the shelf in case they were ever found.

Indeed. George wrote this post three months ago, and it covers much more than just this question. In fact, George reminds us that the al-Kindi facility's main purpose was missile development, not meteorological research. Why did Iraq need to build these superfluous and much less efficient mobile hydrogen generators at the same place they developed missiles -- which could conceivably carry CW and BW warheads?

Many questions remain about these mobile laboratories, and the official ISG explanation -- which David Kay called "the silliest one" -- does not begin to answer them.

Teddy Picks An Interesting Deadline

Ted Kennedy decided to take another judicial nominee to task for membership in a club that excludes women by drawing a strange deadline for political-correctness epiphanies. In his written questionnaire to Jerome Holmes, nominated to the appellate court, the Senator wants to know why Holmes failed to resign before February 2nd of this year:

"What is your reason for failing to resign from the club any earlier than February 2, 2006?" Mr. Kennedy demanded in writing of Oklahoma lawyer Jerome A. Holmes, nominated to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Documents provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee and obtained by The Washington Times show that Mr. Holmes belonged to the Men's Dinner Club of Oklahoma City but quit after expressing interest in becoming a federal judge.

Mr. Holmes told the committee in writing that he never perceived the dining club to harbor any bias toward women but he resigned to clear up any appearances of impropriety.

"Its membership consisted of widely respected business, community and government leaders, including at least two judges of Oklahoma's courts of last resort," he explained to Mr. Kennedy. "I recognized in February 2006 that some might perceive the Men's Dinner Club as being an improper organization of the kind discussed above. That was unacceptable to me."

As the Washington Times notes, that Groundhog Day deadline appears mighty suspicious, since Kennedy only terminated his own 50-year membership in a males-only Harvard alumni club less than a month earlier. Normally one would expect such circumstances to keep a politician somewhat less eager to act as the morality police on club memberships, but Kennedy's hypocrisy apparently knows no bounds.

The issue amounts to almost nothing, anyway. At some point we will see the Judiciary Committee start to bludgeon nominees for associations with the Boy Scouts as evidence of their intolerance and animus towards women. If Kennedy wanted to remain a member of the Owl Club even twenty-two years after Harvard banished it from the campus for its exclusionary membership policy, it would make little difference to me or anyone else. The Owl Club, contrary to popular belief, does not equal the Ku Klux Klan, and neither does the Men's Dinner Club of Oklahoma City. Persecuting people for such associations is yet another example of political correctness run amuck.

However, Kennedy's use of this particular issue shows him for the contemptible lout that he has proven himself to be over the course of his career. Kennedy belonged to the Owl Club for fifty years, almost half of which occurred after the Harvard expulsion on this very issue. Either Kennedy was too dim to notice that they didn't admit women and that they didn't have on-campus offices for over twenty years, or he has decided that his resignation four weeks prior to that of Holmes gives him the moral authority to lecture him on the evils of single-gender socialization.

Either way, the question itself is repugnant, and Kennedy's moral outrage is laughable and pathetic. It reveals that Kennedy will do anything and say anything for cheap partisan point-scoring.

North Korea Tests Seventh Missile

As Monty Python once said, here comes another one:

North Korea test-fired another missile Wednesday, intensifying the furor ignited when the reclusive regime launched at least six missiles, including a long-range Taepodong, earlier in the day.

CNN reports that this missile landed in the Sea of Japan like the first six did. The tests have all come on the same day for Japan and North Korea, and that day is just about over now. That may be the last of them, or we may see another grouping like we did last night.

The UN Security Council meets this morning to discuss the situation based on a request from Japan. The UNSC may be forced to take some action as the provocation here is too overt to ignore. Japan and the US would like to see even tougher economic sanctions on the Kim regime, but up to now Russia and China have balked. Even with this provocation, I doubt they will be budged from their position.

Israeli Cabinet Approves Deeper Gaza Incursion, Buffer Zone

After Hamas fired a longer-range Kassam rocket that hit the city of Ashkelon, the Israeli cabinet has decided to respond to this escalation by pushing the Palestinians farther away. The IDF will deepen their northern incursion into Gaza and start leveling residential structures in their rocket-staging area, intending to set up a permanent buffer zone:

The Security Cabinet approved a deeper military incursion into the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, following the Kassam that demonstrated a new, longer rage by landing in an Ashkelon school on Tuesday night.

The IDF has been given the green light to enter residential areas, but will not reoccupy the Gaza Strip, an official at the meeting said. A buffer zone will be created in the northern part of the Strip. ...

Defense Minister Amir Peretz ordered the IDF to increase its activities in the Gaza Strip as part of "Operation Summer Rains."

Peretz stressed that one of the goals of the operation was to "remove the threat of Kassams."

Ze'ev Boim, a member of the cabinet said, "as far as I'm concerned, the people of (northern Gaza towns) Beit Hanoun and Beit Lahiya can start packing."

If the Israelis mean to set up a buffer zone that encompasses Beit Hanoun and Beit Lahiya, it looks like they will take the first two miles or so off the top of Gaza, according to this map. Four former settlements will be reabsorbed, but the Israelis do not plan on annexing the land. They want to clear the area and set up what amounts to a no-man's-land to keep those 40 square kilometers or so from acting as a staging ground for the Kassams. (One frustrating aspect of this conflict is the lack of good maps of Gaza, even from this Palestinian source. Beit Hanoun is the orange blob next to the arrow showing the passage to the West Bank.)

As we have noted numerous times, the Kassams represented a casus belli long before the Palestinians invaded Israel from Gaza and abducted Gilad Shalit. The Israelis have now responded, somewhat tardily, to this series of provocations, and only when they escalated into a real threat to Ashkelon. The IDF will place themselves within range of these rockets instead of their civilian population being the targets, and the reaction time to future launches will shrink dramatically. The new Olmert government appears more ready to use military action to counter terrorist threats.

As for eliminating these two towns, the Israelis can expect plenty of diplomatic heat over that solution. That sounds like ethnic cleansing, and the memory of Slobodan Milosevic will hang heavy over that threat. However, Israel cannot simply allow Hamas and Islamic Jihad to continue to shoot rockets into Israel, and the fact is that the Palestinian Authority has never taken any steps at all to stop them. The role of Hamas in these attacks makes them an act of war, and Israel has the right to respond -- but they cannot simply demolish residential areas to do so, at least not under common interpretations of the rules of war. The Israelis will need to refine that idea, perhaps by establishg the buffer close enough to both towns to see the specific launch sites and demolish them as an acceptable response to the provocation.

It also points towards a much longer Israeli operation than described by the IDF and the media. Even if Shalit gets released unharmed at this point, the Israelis will not back down on the rocket attacks. Hamas in the West Bank apparently cannot and/or will not force an end to the attacks, and therefore Israel must put some plan into place to protect its civilians from random aerial attacks.

Mobile Labs Could Not Have Produced Hydrogen As Described, Part II

In Part II of ChemicalConsultant's analysis, he addresses the residue left in the mobile labs and the quality of hydrogen assumed in the CIA's explanation of the hydrogen production explanation.

5. I am surprised that both the Iraqi and “Russian” systems use an excess of aluminum instead of an excess of sodium hydroxide. Since the product sodium aluminate is soluble in water at the amount of water used (see the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics), there would be almost no residue if there were an excess of sodium hydroxide relative to aluminum. There is no explanation why so much aluminum would be used, especially when using excess sodium hydroxide would mean that the tank would only need to be washed out, instead of removing an alleged residue. Once it became apparent that the trailers were in danger of being captured, I think the Iraqis put the described residue in the reactor.

6. The Process Description describes how the solids are added, the reactor sealed and then water is added. Since only 25-30 liters are added and the useable capacity is given as 633 liters (see Comment and assessment- Reactor capacity), there are 600 liters of space occupied by air above the reactants. Air Products data for nitrogen (MW= 28) close to air (effective MW =29) show that 1 m3 weighs 1 kg/ 0.862 m3 = 1.16 kg so 600 liters of air weighs about 1.16x0.6 = about 700 g. Thus, if the actual amount of hydrogen were made to fill the 5 bottles to 50 bar (this means not following the Process Description but rather the amount I calculated in the last sentence of 4.) , the mix pumped into them would be 0.84/ (0.7+0.84) = about 55% by weight hydrogen. This would substantially lower the buoyancy of the balloons reducing the weight of instruments that could be carried by the radiosonde balloon. Furthermore, no explanation is given for why only 10% of the available reaction volume was used.

7. In the Process Trials section the report claims that a 2.5-3.3 m3 balloon was inflated from the 5 cylinders filled to a pressure of 50 bar. The Iraqis deserve the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for making 0.21-0.26 kg of hydrogen using 1-1.5 kg of NaOH! Even if the bottles were really filled only with hydrogen at 50 bar, only 3 to 4 balloons could be filled and then the more than 3 hour process would have to start again. On the other hand, one standard industrial gas cylinder filled to standard commercial pressure would fill two balloons. Since these cylinders have been available for decades, I find it hard to believe that there have been nothing like them available in Iraq. Iraqi refineries could produce hydrogen, either as a byproduct, by cracking a refinery liquid or gas or reacting petroleum coke, another refinery product with steam. Coke gas was used for observation balloons in the US Civil War. 20th Century technology removes the impurities in coke gas leaving nearly pure hydrogen.

The Notes on the Process section states the target purity for the hydrogen product is 99.9%. This is impossible with the on-site process unless those Nobel Prize nominee Iraqis also converted nitrogen into hydrogen while the gases were going from the reactor to the cylinders. The target purity is routinely achieved by conventional hydrogen manufacture which is probably where the Republican Guard got their specification. Maybe this is the hint that conventionally manufactured hydrogen was available in Iraq. Also, since Russia has modern chemical technology, I’m surprised nobody asked the Iraqis why the Russians would have made a small water dependent hydrogen production system. Such a reactor couldn’t work in most of Russia for a large part of the year because the water would freeze.

In Part III tomorrow, ChemicalConsultant addresses the engineering of the mobile labs in relation to the hydrogen production explanation, as well as the folly of using these facilities instead of simply buying trucks to transport prefilled containers of hydrogen.

Iraqi Insurgents Want To Fight Foreign Terrorists

The Iraqi government will consider a request by the native insurgents negotiating for a national reconciliation to take up arms against the al-Qaeda network in Iraq. The eleven groups want the Iraqis to outfit them with weapons, claiming that they have the intel to wipe out the foreign terrorists:

Iraq's government is studying a request from some local insurgent leaders to supply them with weapons so they can turn on the heavily armed foreign fighters who were once their allies, according to two Iraqi lawmakers.

Leaders claiming to represent about 11 insurgent groups asked for weapons to fight foreign al-Qaeda elements in Iraq, said Haider al-Ibadi, a Shiite lawmaker and member of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa Party.

"They want to take part in the war against terrorists," said al-Ibadi, who supports the proposal. "They claim they could wipe out the terrorists and work with the government."

AQI seems to have a serious PR problem in Iraq. Rather than being seen by the Iraqis as "minutemen", as Michael Moore once claimed, even the Iraqi terrorist groups have had enough of Osama and the depravity of his allies. They seem perfectly willing to place a knife between their shoulder blades in order to work themselves back into the good graces of the Iraqi people.

Still, it sounds too cute. They want arms to fight the terrorists. If the native insurgents want that, they should have enlisted in the Iraqi Army. These groups could simply provide the Iraqi Army with their intel and let the government handle the problem. Any compromise along these lines represents an endorsement of private militias, a very bad idea for a nation struggling with unity and security issues as it is. Giving them weapons only guarantees that these weapons will one day turn against the government that hands them out.

The Iraqis should stick to basics. The first goal they need to meet is to ensure that the government controls the application of deadly force. Cutting deals with groups that had dedicated themselves to destroying the government on the promise that they would suddenly act as agents of that government pushes them away from that goal and into an open invitation for other disaffected Iraqis to form their own armed militias.

North Korea Launches Missiles, Fails Miserably

North Korea attempted to launch three missiles this afternoon after sitting on the one Taepodong-2 ICBM for the last few weeks. Unfortunately for Kim Jong-Il, the arrows he shot into the air fell to ground -- and we know where:

North Korea launched a long-range missile Wednesday that may be capable of reaching the United States but it failed after 35 or 40 seconds, two State Department officials said.

The missile was one of at least three that were fired. The two others were short-range missiles. All landed in the Sea of Japan, said the Japanese government, which was unable to confirm that they included a long-range missile.

The officials in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the long-range missile was the Taepodong-2, North Korea's most advanced missile with a range of up to 9,320 miles.

The launch came after weeks of speculation that the North was preparing to test its advanced Taepodong-2 missile from a site on its northeast coast. The preparations had generated stern warnings from the United States and Japan, which had threatened possible economic sanctions in response.

Pyongyang apparently planned these launches to coincide with the American launch of the space shuttle to distract attention from the space program. They certainly got everyone's attention, but they probably wish they hadn't. The failure of all three is a huge embarrassment to the Kim regime. It appears clear that while Pyongyang continues to build missiles, they don't build them particularly well -- and the billions of dollars spent in development has gone up in smoke, or down in the Sea of Japan, as it were.

CNN reports from its Situation Room that the missiles fell into the sea just offshore of the northern island of Hokkaido. That seems to indicate that North Korea sent the missile on a route that would have taken the missile towards Alaska, or perhaps a polar route to North America. Shooting missiles at the US on our national holiday guarantees a rather hostile reaction from America.

We have not yet officially responded, but our response should remind North Korea that we will not sit quietly while nutcase dictators shoot missiles at us or our allies. Even when such dictators produce such stupendously incompetent products, we will not rely on their technological incompetence for our national security. We cannot allow such provocations to go unanswered. Japan especially will want to respond strongly since the smaller Nodongs appeared to be aimed at them.

One has to wonder at the sudden and early failure of all three rockets. After all, the Kim regime has successfully launched the Nodong before. It seems a little strange that all three missiles failed so quickly after their launch. Besides sheer incompetence, two explanations could apply. On one hand, the North Koreans may have launched them because they could not safely defuel them; they could have aborted the missiles shortly after launch to ensure that they did not fly long enough to provoke an American response. If that were the case, though, one would expect that they would have notified at least the Chinese in order to ensure that we did not overreact to the launches.

Alternately, the US could have activated anti-missile defense systems and taken all three of them down immediately after their launch. So far, the news reports do not address that possibility. We moved a lot of those assets to the theater when Kim staged the rocket. Could we have had three successful tests of that system? If so, we mau have neutered the threat from both North Korea and Iran. That's wishful thinking, and unless the administration starts talking about that soon, we can probably discount that possibility.

Whatever happened, one fact is certain: Kim has been caught with his pants down.

UPDATE: I'm still watching CNN, and their expert on North Korea, Han Park, tells them via phone from Seoul that the North Korean missiles posed no threat to the United States and we shouldn't react at all. He also says that North Korea wanted to show their expertise at weapons production in order to sell their wares abroad -- and figures that the results reflect positively on Pyongyang.

In other words, Park wants us to believe that North Korea actually impressed people by staging a demonstration of missiles that can't fly even for one full minute. Riiiiiiiiiiight.

UPDATE II: CNN now reports that six missiles got fired today, including another Taepodong-2. No word yet on the success or failure of the second TD-2.

UPDATE III: The White House only confirms five tests. Presumably the second TD-2 test was a bad call by CNN.

Salem Communications Launches The New Townhall

Salem Communications launches its mission of conservative media convergence at the new Townhall today. The site looks gorgeous, and it has content aplenty to keep people abreast of the latest news, views, and radio show topics and guests. They have included a number of podcasts, including our shows of the Northern Alliance Radio Network. I plan on returning to the studio this weekend, so be sure to check out the podcast if you don't get the chance to listen to our Internet stream. They already have an archive of our latest shows, so take some time to listen when you get the chance.

In fact, be sure to explore all of the facets of the new site. It brings viewers all they can want from conservative media and much, much more.

UPDATE: Speaking of launches, congratulations to the fine folks at NASA for an excellent launch of the Space Shuttle Discovery:

NASA's first-ever Fourth of July launch came after two weather delays and last-minute foam trouble that conjured up worries that have dogged NASA since Columbia was brought down by a chunk of fuel tank insulation foam 3 1/2 years ago.

The foam problem resurfaced during last July's flight of Discovery and again Monday, keeping the space agency debating safety all the way up to the eve of liftoff.

As Discovery thundered away from its seaside pad at 2:38 p.m. and into space Tuesday, video showed was no initial sign of significant foam loss. Engineers will spend the next few days poring over the video before the shuttle returns to Earth.

I've been watching the video replay of the launch on the NASA channel on DirectTV, and it looks pretty clean. The boosters and external tank separation went flawlessly, and just now we heard confirmation that the orbiter engines have fired normally for manuevering in space.

Two great launches on Independence Day!

A Parade Of Celebration

We just returned from the annual Independence Day Parade here in Eagan, and we had a wonderful time with our daughter-in-law's family, who have a tradition of serving brunch before the parade. We had the perfect day for a parade -- sunny but not too hot, a cool breeze, and a spot in the shade. The FM had to use her wheelchair to get to the spot on the route as she is still on oxygen. and I needed a folding chair because my back can't take sitting on the ground, but other than that, it was a fine traditional celebration of our independence.

The festivities started with Old Glory (click on images to enlarge):

It had real heroes on display. Here we have our local fire department:

And although you can't see him in this picture, we have Jared Swyter, a returning soldier from Iraq, who was adopted by our local YMCA. We gave Jared an ovation when we could finally see him, and he looked a bit surprised to get it. Glad you're back home, Jared:

Hey, we also had our local politicians out in force as well:

That's not entirely fair. I met Tim Wilkins, our state representative, for the first time today. He had asked me to volunteer for the parade today, which would have been fun, but the back injury made it impossible. He sent a personal note wishing me a speedy recovery, and we flagged him down so that we could introduce ourselves. (He wishes all CQ readers a happy 4th, by the way.) I wish I had gotten a picture of Tim if only to show you the clever shirt he wore. Many of our local politicians marched in the parade, but it was hard to tell them apart from their supporters, except for Tim; he wore a shirt that said I'M TIM.

We also met some of Mitch Berg's drinking buddies:

But the highlight of the parade came when the Eaganettes made their appearance. The Little Admiral marched in today's parade as an Eaganette for the first time. I didn't get a clear shot of her in the parade, but here she is waving her flag on the sidelines afterwards:

I hope all of you get a chance to see a parade today. This is our first parade in Eagan since we moved here eight years ago, and we had a wonderful time.

A Look Back At A DC 4th

Last year, we were honored to have been given a private tour of the Pentagon by a CQ reader assigned there. In honor of this year's Independence Day, I would like to remind CQ readers of the tour and what it meant to us. We wish you happiness and an appreciation of the gift of freedom on this Fourth of July.

When I first announced my trip to Washington, DC, I received many kind offers from local readers for assistance and pointers. One of the kindest offers came from a CQ reader, who wishes to remain anonymous, who gave me and my family a chance to tour the Pentagon on July 4th. Needless to say, we gratefully accepted this offer, and early this morning we started out our celebration of Independence Day by meeting him for the tour.

He started us off in the west wing, the portion of the building that terrorists attacked on 9/11. We could not take pictures of the outside, but remarkably, we had no trouble taking pictures of the interior. The Pentagon has a beautiful memorial at Ground Zero for the victims of 9/11. (More pictures of the memorial and other experiences will be found in the extended entry.)

Our friend also showed us the direction that the plane took in hitting the Pentagon, from the window just below the entry point. It came in just over the Sheraton hotel in the background, clipping a light pole, bounced off the freeway, killing a cab driver, and hit just short of the Pentagon. This time sequence explains why the Pentagon took less damage than one might expect; the bounce took off some of the momentum and fuel before the plane hit the building, meaning that the impact did not travel as deeply and the fire did not burn as hot.

Notice the foreground construction work. The Pentagon is building a memorial for 9/11 which will be completed soon, and will sit directly in front of the impact spot. Funding comes from private sources, and if you want to contribute, please go to this website.

We spent time in other areas of the Pentagon as well. For those of us who have worked in the defense industry, a visit to the Pentagon comes as quite an eye-opener. First, the renovations to the interior make the place quite pleasant -- nothing like the function-only military that us old-timers would expect. The military and civilian staffers have a mall-style food court, numerous business such as banks and health clinics, and much more inside the world's largest office building for their convenience. The newer areas are especially well designed, and some of the many hallways have decor themes that teach history and give the place a distinctive flavor.

Being a military facility, of course, it didn't take long for us to find something that struck fear into our very hearts. For instance, while everyone else was on holiday, look who got left in charge of press relations:

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

All kidding aside, this tour deeply impressed our entire family. Not only did the Pentagon remind us of the sacrifice of our fellow citizens, both military and civilian, but it also demonstrated the kind of country in which we live. Number the countries that allow their citizens to walk around taking pictures of their most central military planning facility for their enjoyment and remembrances, and I'll bet you have fingers left over. This lesson came on the perfect day, and I will be forever grateful to the gentleman who gave up his holiday morning to escort us through the Pentagon. He will remain anonymous to my readers at his very understandable request, but rest assured he will be long remembered by us.

The Pentagon Flag

Yesterday, our family toured the DC area by bus, which allowed us to see most of the sites we intended to visit on our trip. We made it to the Vietnam War memorial, where the First Mate found the name of a family friend, William Rowland (picture in extended entry), who gave his life for his country in June 1968. The tour took us through other inspiring and thought-provoking monuments, such as the World War II memorial, the FDR monument, and Arlington Cemetery, where we visited John Kennedy's gravesite and thousands of others.

We found all of these exhibits and remembrances remarkable. However, we found one particular display to resonate most with all of us, one that moved us the most. At the Smithsonian American History Museum, one of the newest exhibits greets visitors almost immediately upon entry. That is a three-story-long American flag -- a star-spangled banner with a story.

After the attack on the Pentagon on 9/11, the building had a huge, gaping hole in its side, a wound that matched the one our nation felt after the terrorist slaughter. The next day, a group of rescue workers and military personnel at the Pentagon got a garrison flag and draped it from the top of the building right over the cavernous maw. This flag told the terrorists that we would not allow them to scare us -- that America would not cut and run from this unthinkable attack. The flag remained in place for a month, reminding us and the world that we would rebuild, and then we would make sure that the people who thought they could cow us with senseless attacks would soon learn differently. A year after it made its appearance over the Pentagon, the flag came to the Smithsonian, with the dirt and grease of its exposure to the damage still part of it.

When we celebrate the Fourth today in our nation's capital, we will remember men like William Rowland, who gave a small gift to a little girl thirty-eight years ago, and gave the ultimate gift to his country shortly thereafter. We celebrate leaders like FDR, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, John Kennedy, and the thousands buried with him at Arlington who died to make men free. But mostly I will remember that flag that hung at the Pentagon on September 12th as the perfect encapsulation of American tenacity and fierce protectiveness of its liberty and freedom, and the defiance towards those who seek to make men slaves to tyranny and oppression.

Happy Independence Day to all of my wonderful friends at Captain's Quarters.

Whither Lieberman In The Caucus?

Tom Maguire at Just One Minute picked up the same news report as I did on Joe Lieberman's decision to run as an independent. The anger from the Democratic base has pushed him into making that decision by giving their support to Ned Lamont, supposedly for being outside the mainstream of Democrats, especially on the war. However, Tom points to the Poole analyses for the past three sessions of Congress -- and the Democratic base seems somewhat misinformed.

In the 109th Congress, for instance, Lieberman's position finds him the 17th most conservative Democrat out of a caucus of 44 -- hardly an extremist among Senators. Lieberman occupies the 16th most conservative slot in his caucus in the 108th Congress. In the 107th, Lieberman came in at almost the dead center, at #20. Joe Biden and Joe Lieberman have almost identical scores in the last two sessions, and Harry Reid has a more conservative rating than either in both of them.

If the netroots think that Lieberman has moved outside of the base, perhaps that reflects more on their perspective than on the reality of Lieberman's performance.

Bin Laden Unit Closes At CIA

Reflecting a different approach to the war on terror, the CIA has closed its Alec Station unit that dedicated itself to the capture of Osama bin Laden, the New York Times reports today. The unit had focused entirely on Osama for over a decade, long before the 9/11 attacks and even the al-Qaeda chief's infamous fatwa against the United States:

The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday.

The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.

The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."

The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Plenty of outrage will come from this decision, and one can expect some to take the opportunity for a little partisan sniping. Michael Scheuer, who wrote a book criticizing the Bush administration as soft on terror over a year ago, decried the end of the unit he named after his son when he ran it before his retirement. "This will clearly denigrate our operations against al-Qaeda," he told the Times. Scheuer says that the move reflects a mistaken notion that the AQ hierarchy represents more of an inspirational threat than an operational threat.

Administration officials disagree. They claim that they still will have people dedicated to the capture of bin Laden, but that Alec Station represented an old approach that no longer has validity since the destruction of much of the AQ hierarchy. They need greater flexibility to address the fluidity of terrorist organizations, post-Afghanistan. That has some rationality; most of the terrorist attacks since the Taliban fell in 2001 have been conducted not by the original AQ network but by terror cells only affiliated with AQ by inspiration, such as Madrid, London, and others. The most active and coherent AQ network works in Iraq, but outside of that, Osama appears to have lost most of his operational capability -- or at least become very quiet.

However, if Michael Scheuer wants to lay blame for the mothballing of Alec Station, he needs to lay it at the feet of the 9/11 Commission and the politicians who insisted on enacting their slate of reforms without debate.

Alec Station's assets haven't disappeared, after all; they got swallowed up by the Counterterrorist Center. The CTC sprang into being from the 9/11 Commission's insistence on creating more bureaucracy in our intel community. Instead of taking the alphabet soup of agencies and councils handling intelligence and simplifying them into two or three spheres -- domestic (FBI), international (CIA), and military (DIA), the panel chose to keep all the agencies but created a national directorate of intelligence to sit on top of them all. This directorate would then provide additional analysis at the CTC and the office of the Director of National Intelligence -- pushing raw intel at least two additional layers away from the President and forcing data to go through more paper-shuffling before it became actionable.

The result? The new directorate has sucked resources away from the field agencies and created a new bureaucratic fiefdom for John Negroponte. Last March, the House tried to withhold appropriations from the DNI after it grew to over seven hundred employees, most of them drained away from the intelligence agencies that now report to Negroponte. We have warned over and over again about the folly of these 9/11 Commission recommendations, but when John Kerry seized on them as a campaign issue, he forced the Bush administration to adopt them almost in toto. (Not coincidentally, the recommendations for reforming Congress failed to get the same attention and have yet to be fully implemented.)

When people insisted on the kind of bureaucratic expansion and analytical centralization on which the 9/11 Commission insisted, this result became unavoidable. Robert Grenier ended Alec Station in his capacity as the CTC director -- because he wanted the assets in the CTC. Who knows how many other programs and special task forces the CTC has closed down for the same reasons?

Palestinians Pledge To End Negotiations But Keep Shalit Alive

The "Army of Islam" that holds abducted IDF soldier Gilad Shalit has declared an end to negotiations for his release, but at the same time pledges to keep him alive in keeping with the teachings of Islam -- if he is still alive:

Palestinians holding an Israeli soldier said this morning that they had ended negotiations on his fate after Israel ignored an ultimatum to begin releasing prisoners.

The Hamas-led militants holding Corporal Gilad Shalit had said that if Israel had not begun releasing some of the 1,500 prisoners by 6am today it would "bear the consequences". A spokesman for the Army of Islam, one of Cpl Shalit's abductors, said they had "decided to freeze all contacts and close the files of this soldier" but added: "We will not kill the soldier, if he is still alive."

Israeli and Palestinian officials believe the soldier is still alive and negotiations are taking place all over the Middle East to secure his release.

The faction of the Palestinian Authority that remains under the control of Mahmoud Abbas now believe that Ismail Haniyeh has lost control of the al-Qassam militant wing. The terrorists who have kidnapped Shalit take orders directly from Khaled Mashaal in Damascus, and Bashar Assad has clung to Mashaal in order to maintain some form of proxy war against his neighbors. With his army pushed out of Lebanon and his most reliable ally pulled out of a spider hole, Assad has little left except Hamas and Hezbollah to maintain his power in the region.

Egypt already knows this, which is why Hosni Mubarak has put pressure on Assad to get Shalit released. Mubarak has no love for Hamas, as they have strong relations with the Muslim Brotherhood, Mubarak's chief domestic problem. Mubarak, as the Guardian notes, also wants to be seen as the regional power broker in order to secure his American funding and to gain power at the expense of Syria. He went to Saudi Arabia yesterday in an attempt to form a loose alliance against the nascent Syria-Iran axis, and probably found a receptive audience.

Syria lies at the heart of this crisis. Its sponsorship of Hamas and its terrorist activities have given Assad influence over a significant part of the Islamofascist networks of terror arrayed against the West. If Mubarak and King Abdullah cannot resolve the crisis by returning Shalit to the Israelis, it may be time to inform Assad that his continuing sponsorship of terror has made him a target in the war on terror. Our armies will soon march out of Iraq, and we could march them to the Mediterranean via Damascus if Assad doesn't wise up.

Mobile Labs Could Not Have Produced Hydrogen As Described, Part I

In Part I of ChemicalConsultant's analysis of the mobile weapons laboratories, he calls into question the CIA's calculations of the production capability of the facilities described. In his calculations, he posits that these mobile facilities could not have produced the hydrogen necessary for the mission the CIA claims.

1. The reaction to produce hydrogen gas from aluminum, sodium hydroxide is:

This means that it takes 80 grams of NaOH (molecular weight about 40) to make 6 grams of H2 (molecular weight about 2) and uses 54 grams of Al (atomic weight about 27) in the process. On a kilogram basis, 1 kg NaOH makes 6/80 = 0.075 kg or 75 g H2 and uses 54/80 = 0.675 kg or 675 g Al.

My reference is www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Al/chem.html.

2. According to the Fast Facts link on the website of a major hydrogen producer, 1 kg of hydrogen gas at 1 atmosphere at 70o F occupies 11.986 cubic meters (m3) or 1 m3 weighs 1/ 11.896 = 0.084 kg or 84 g.

My reference is www.airproducts.com/products/fastfacts/charts_n_tables/32100/hydrogen.asp. Please note that the spaces on either side of n are underlined.

3. The Iraqi Survey Group Final Report, Annex D, Biological Weapons

Process Description section, states that “This is a batch process designed to produce sufficient H2 to fill 5x40l bottles to a pressure of between 40-50 bar”. This is equivalent to 50x5x40l =10,000 liters or 10 m3 at atmospheric pressure. Thus, from 2. , 0.84 kg of hydrogen must be produced. The next sentence in Process Description; the report states “This requires 10-12 kg of Aluminum powder, 1-1.5 kg flaked/ granulated NaOH, and 25-30 liters of water.” 1 kg of NaOH would only make 0.075 kg. However, from 1. , what is actually needed is 0.84/0.075 = 11.2 kg NaOH, using up 7.56 kg aluminum.

4. At first I thought that there might have been a typo. I went back to the Process Outline section of the report which described the purported Russian system which is one tenth the volume of the Iraqi reactor. I found that the ratio of reagents for the Russian system is the same as the report states for the Iraqi system. Thus the 100 g or 0.1 kg NaOH would only make 7.5 g hydrogen instead of the 84 g needed for the 1 m3 balloon. How is it that the “experts” who wrote the report and those who approved it did not catch these errors?

In part II tomorrow, ChemicalConsultant talks about how the residue in the mobile labs should not have been present and appear to be a deliberate ruse. He also shows how the formulas used for the Duelfer analysis would have produced hydrogen so impure as to be useless.

UPDATE: The molecular weight of NaOH is 40; thanks to those who pointed out the typo.

The Deadline Passes In Gaza

The deadline for Israel to acquiesce to Palestinian demands for the release of Gilad Shalit has come and gone -- and the "Army of Islam" has announced that no further announcements on Shalit will be forthcoming:

The deadline made by Cpl. Gilad Shalit's captors on Monday, stating that they would kill the soldier at 6:00 a.m., came and went Tuesday without concrete word or new information.

Army Radio reported, however, that an armed group in Gaza, "the Army of Islam," announced nearly one half hour after the deadline passed "from now on no new information would be given," regarding Shalit.

According to government officials, Israel would continue its ongoing military operation against Hamas as if there were no ultimatum, and has warned key international players that the military action will be escalated if Shalit is killed. ...

"If, God forbid, they should hurt the soldier, our operations will be far worse," Justice Minister Haim Ramon told Channel 2. Interior Minister Roni Bar-On told Y-Net that "the kidnappers will pay a price they have not yet paid if they harm the soldier."

To underscore this point, the Israelis have mobilized a fleet of bulldozers on the northern border of Gaza. The IDF has made a very limited incursion in that region, primarily looking for Kassam missile sites that have rained explosives on Israeli civilians for months. If Shalit turns up dead, which seems likely now, the Israelis will have big plans for those bulldozers.

Israel has made it clear that they view Shailt's abduction and the border crossing that enabled it as an act of war, and they do not intend to let the Palestinians off the hook this time. If their abduction turns into murder, especially a torture murder, Gaza will pay a price for their insistence on terror over statesmanship.

On another front, the IDF captured the terrorists who murdered and mutilated an Israeli teenage civilian to prove their manhood:

Three Aksa Martyrs Brigades terrorists suspected of kidnapping and killing Itamar resident Eliyahu Asheri last week, surrendered to elite IDF troops in Ramallah early Tuesday morning after a three-hour standoff.

According to Army Radio, large IDF forces had surrounded the Palestinian Authority Police building in the West Bank city. Soldiers and Palestinian gunmen exchanged fire during the operation. ...

OC Central Command Maj.-Gen. Yair Naveh said last Thursday that Asheri was murdered by his kidnappers approximately one hour after he was abducted. 'There was no attempt by the kidnappers to negotiate his release while he was alive,' Naveh said.

The IDF had attacked the PA building and beseiged the terrorists for a while before they finally surrendered. AAMB is part of Fatah, making the latest wave of terrorist attacks a pan-Palestinian affair.

Court Grants Stay On San Diego Cross

Justice Anthony Kennedy has granted a temporary stay on the removal of a controversial war monument featuring a 29-foot cross atop Mount Soledad. This appears to indicate a renewed interest in the case on behalf of the Supreme Court, which refused to intervene three years ago:

The Supreme Court intervened Monday to stop, at least for now, the removal of a large cross from city property in southern California.

A lower court judge had ordered the city of San Diego to remove the cross or be fined $5,000 a day.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, acting for the high court, issued a stay while supporters of the cross continue their legal fight.

Lawyers for San Diegans for the Mount Soledad National War Memorial said in an appeal that they wanted to avoid the "destruction of this national treasure." And attorneys for the city said the cross was part of a broader memorial that was important to the community.

The 29-foot cross, on San Diego property, sits atop Mount Soledad. A judge declared the cross, a symbol of Christianity, was an unconstitutional endorsement of one religion over another.

The plaintiffs may have preferred that the Supreme Court of three years ago would review this case. This new panel seems less likely to associate a cross in a national cemetary as an endorsement of a particular religion, even a 29-foot cross. This monument has been on Mt. Soledad for over 50 years and is an obvious landmark to residents of Southern California. The new court, with the addition of John Roberts and Samuel Alito and the subtraction of Sandra Day O'Connor, will no doubt have more sympathy to reality and not to the hypersensitivity of one atheist in San Diego.

Two Women Enter, One Woman Leave

When two scribes go to war ...

Whenever I bet on a fight ...

... I always bet on the fighter wearing the largest earrings. Check out Michelle's steely-eyed stare, too. Ana Marie appears unnerved -- never a good sign before Michael Buffer says, "Let's get ready to ruuuuuuuuuummmmm-bulllllllllllllll!!"

I hope for both their sakes that the referee is the guy with the cigar, and not the guy who has to re-read his placard in order to remember what it said. At least Stogie Man has the good sense to notice the two good-looking women right in front of him.

UPDATE: I linked to Wonkette earlier, but should have linked to Ana's new site instead. Hat tip to Alex at Damned Machines for the correction.

Lieberman Starts His Independent Bid (Updated)

Senator Joe Lieberman has begun his preparations for re-election as an independent, in case Ned Lamont beats him in the primary. The Hartford Courant reports that Lieberman announced his intention to collect signatures ahead of the August 8th primary, a necessary step given Connecticut's August 9th deadline for submissions:

Lieberman, 64, a three-term senator whose outspoken support of the war in Iraq has brought months of grief and inspired a strong primary challenge from Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, announced his decision this afternoon at a brief press conference at the State Capitol.

"I've been a proud, loyal and progressive Democrat since John F. Kennedy inspired my generation of Americans into public service and I will stay a Democrat, whether I am the Democraitic party's nominee or a petitioning Democratic candidate on the November ballot," Lieberman said. He added that he would, even if re-elected as a petitioning candidate, remain a member of the Senate Democratic Caucus.

Even should he lose in August -- and the most recent public poll shows him leading Lamont by 15 percentage points among likely primary voters -- Lieberman would retain his status as a registered Democrat. His name would not, however, appear on the ballot line with other Democrats.

Lieberman began making courtesy calls to leading Democrats late this morning. Among them were Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Connecticut's Democratic state chairwoman, Nancy DiNardo.

This puts party leaders in a tight spot. They cannot appear too eager to back Lieberman's independent bid if Lamont wins the primary, as Lamont will be the selected candidate of the state's Democratic voters. Doing so would undermine the party system itself, even if Lieberman agreed to caucus with the Democrats should he win. Lieberman's tiptoe of calling himself an "independent Democrat" will not matter much to the Connecticut voters they will defy with their endorsement against their elected nominee.

The Courant reports that Lieberman leads Lamont by fifteen points at the moment. National Democratic leaders better hope he can maintain that lead through the primary and make the point moot, but that seems unlikely. His filing will get some Connecticut voters angry, especially those who believe in party first and the primary system. That may not be enough to erode a fifteen-point lead in five or six weeks, but it certainly won't help. Lieberman has to guess that those voters have probably already committed to Lamont, but that is assuredly a risk.

The Lamont Blog has a response one could not describe as measured or even accurate:

In addition, Joe has just created a world of shit for his supposed friends Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Chris Dodd, Diane Farrell, Joe Courtney, and Chris Murphy. I wonder what they all think of this.

This is how he treats his friends. This is how he treats his party. On the slowest news day of the summer.

These are the actions of a very weak candidate, and a selfish and cowardly man.

What a sorry sight to see an 18-year incumbent senator running scared from a little primary challenge like this. No backbone. No courage. No integrity.

And not a Democrat anymore, either.

Lieberman remains a Democrat, even with the independent bid, especially since he's committed to caucusing with the Democrats if elected. While one can understand why the Lamont campaign would want to make hay of both the announcement and its timing, the assignment of cowardice seems more than just a little ironic. Lieberman hasn't pulled out of the primary, after all; he still plans on contesting it. More to the point, the entire reason for Lamont's campaign and its surprisingly large following is that Lamont wants an immediate retreat from Iraq, cutting and running rather than fight the terrorists in the one place that even Osama understands as the center stage of the war on terror. Throwing around accusations of cowardice seems a bit odd under the circumstances.

I suspect that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will have some uncomfortable moments in the next few weeks. Undoubtedly they will hope that Lieberman will win the primary and let them off the hook. They may do more than just hope, which may result in a nasty split between the hard-Left and the DLC factions, just as the midterms approach. It looks like the Democrats may well wind up with the split that appeared imminent in the GOP until a couple of weeks ago.

UPDATE: TParty from the Lamont Blog sent me a very nice e-mail politely informing me that his site is not affiliated with Lamont's campaign, so I thank him for that clarification. He also brought up another interesting point:

I wonder if, say, conservatives in Pennsylvania in 2004 would have had similar feelings about Arlen Specter running against Pat Toomey in the primary yet promising to run as an "petitioning Republican" if he lost.

Regardless of political philosophy or ideology, I think that is a pretty weasely and cowardly stance to take.

Actually, I think many of us predicted he would do just that when we debated whether George Bush should have dumped Specter for Toomey. In any event, it is a good point, although I don't think we would have termed it cowardly -- vengeful and selfish, perhaps, but not cowardly. If the GOP had some balls and endorsed Laffey over Linc Chafee in Rhode Island, we might have seen Chafee run as an independent, too.

However, I think that a rational reading of Lieberman's record shows that he votes in support of the Democratic agenda far more often than Chafee does for the Republican agenda, and perhaps more than Specter does, although that might be close. In this case, the Democrats are doing themselves no favor by pushing Lieberman under a bus on one issue, and they leave themselves open to some significant risk. However, that's precisely what primaries are for, and what makes politics so much fun.

Mobile Labs Could Not Have Produced Hydrogen As Described, Prologue

I have written several times about the issue of the mobile laboratories in Iraq and the subsequent conventional wisdom that they served as hydrogen generators for weather balloons instead of WMD production facilities. In April, I pointed out that the hydrogen theory came as a minority opinion within the CIA/DIA teams that reviewed the two labs captured by the Coalition. One month later, Joseph Shahda translated a key memo showing that the Iraqis spent $33 million on the mobile labs in September 2002, while America decided to take military action against the Iraqis, and that the same agency that controlled Iraq's WMD programs (the Military Industrialization Committee) arranged to purchase these facilities.

One key point (besides the memo) that undermines the argument for a civil hydrogen production facility is the ease in which the Iraqis could already produce and store hydrogen. Oil refining creates hydrogen in fairly large quantities as a normal byproduct. If the Iraqis wanted hydrogen for weather balloons, they could have simply pumped it into tanks and used normal trucks to transport it where needed. Now we have another argument against the hydrogen production explanation.

A CQ reader with a doctorate in physical chemistry from the University of Minnesota and with over sixteen years of experience in weapons and materiel laboratory work in the military has written a paper on why the hydrogen lab explanation cannot possibly explain the existence and the engineering of these mobile laboratories. Preferring anonymity for professional reasons, "ChemicalConsultant" has allowed me access to a condensed version of an analysis that he has sent to Joby Warrick at the Washington Post, Reps. Curt Weldon and Jane Harman, and former CIA director John Deutsch, now at MIT -- none of whom have responded to ChemicalConsultant or addressed these concerns.

I will put ChemicalConsultant's CV, stripped of any personal identification, in the extended entry below. Over the next three days I will post his analysis of the physics of hydrogen production and why that explanation makes no sense whatsoever. At the end, I will interview ChemicalConsultant and post the transcript.

Curriculum Vitae

I am a retired physical chemist with 31 years of industrial chemical experience in the characterization of silica based materials and the development of new siliceous products and applications. In the course of my career I have authored 17 peer reviewed papers, been an inventor of 5 patents, chaired technical symposia and reviewed, for technical journals, the submitted papers of other scientists.

1977-1999

Senior Research Fellow 1990 to 1999.
Manager, Analysis, Characterization and Testing Department 1985 to 1990.
Supervisor, Materials Evaluation Section 1977 to 1985.

Significant accomplishments:
• Implemented a long term project which provided fundamental technical understanding of largest volume product line, soluble silicates. Results included technical papers, patents and a licensing agreement with a customer.
• Interfaced with corporate sales and marketing personnel and their customers to provide technical support to corporate sales and growth goals.
• Implemented the application of state of the art chemical instrumentation to support corporate research projects in soluble silicates, zeolites, silica particulates and microspherical glass beads.
• Evaluated the performance of subordinates and supported their professional growth.
• Implemented a laboratory data base management system that improved communication of analytical results to project chemist.
• Received the first R&D Achievement Award for Technical Excellence.

1968 - 1977

Senior Chemist 1973 to 1977.
Chemist 1968 to 1973.

Significant accomplishments:
• Implemented the application of state of the art chemical instrumentation to support corporate research projects in zeolites, petroleum refining catalysts, adsorbents and industrial chemical catalysts.
• Interfaced with corporate sales and marketing personnel and their customers to provide technical support to corporate sales and growth goals.
• Published and presented papers on materials described above.

Military Experience

Retired as a Lieutenant Colonel, USAF Reserve, June 1986.
Assignments:
Hq, AF Systems Command (5 years)
Hq, Air Force Materials Laboratory (12 years)

Active Duty:
Hq, Air Force Weapons Laboratory (2 years)
Hq, Ogden Air Materiel Area (1 year)

EDUCATION:
Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
B.S. in Chemistry, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY

Public Openness Reaches The New York Times

The New York Times reports today on the burgeoning bipartisan demand for full disclosure on federal spending via public, searchable databases that would expose pork to the maximum public scrutiny. Jason DeParle reports that while both the Left and the Right have different motivations, both see a fully searchable database for the federal budget as a promise of more accountability in governance:

Exasperated by his party's failure to cut government spending, Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, is seeking cyberhelp.

Mr. Coburn wants to create a public database, searchable over the Internet, that would list most government contracts and grants — exposing hundreds of billions in annual spending to instant desktop view. ...

On the right, support for the plan reflects an old concern about spending and a new faith in the power of blogs. Supporters picture a citizen army of e-watchdogs, greatly increasing the influence of antispending groups in Washington.

"Now that you've got the Internet, you'll have tens of thousands of watchdogs," said Bridgett G. Wagner of the Heritage Foundation, who is leading a coalition of conservative groups that support the Coburn bill. "That's what people see in it."

Among the bill's leading supporters is Mark Tapscott, the editorial page editor of The Washington Examiner, who has promoted it there and on his blog, Tapscott's Copy Desk. While most spending is already a matter of public record, Mr. Tapscott argues that it is often buried in obscure documents. ...

A number of blogs popular among conservatives have praised Mr. Coburn's bill. Instapundit, among the most popular, has pushed it. Seeker Blog called it "the best news I've heard out of D.C. this year." Captain's Quarters demanded "Give us the Pork Database," and Porkopolis hailed the measure with the slogan, "Show Me the Money."

It's nice to get recognized, but the Times rightly focuses on the work of Mark and Bridgett. Both have tirelessly worked to get national attention to the corrupting influence of pork -- as well as entitlement spending, which has gained less traction -- and every day do more to shine sunlight on pork-barrel politics. Had it not been for Bridgett and Mark, I know I would have had a difficult time finding my voice on this topic, and I'm honored to work with them. Glenn Reynolds and NZ Bear have taken the lead in organizing blogger efforts, and Bill Allison at Sunlight Foundation has given an excellent effort from the Left.

DeParle notes the differing motivations of the Right and Left in supporting this initiative. Conservatives see this as a shaming mechanism that will shrink government through public outrage. Liberals see it as a way to demonstrate the good works that government programs perform and to get more funding for them. Both of these are honorable motivations and both represent excellent reasons to have this data at the fingertips of every taxpayer in America. After all, we want to know which dollars work for us and which don't. If we have a program that actually does more good than harm, then we can have those facts established when we debate its funding level. If we see the money disappearing with little or no return on the investment, we can either halt the program or get everyone responsible for it replaced with people who will perform better.

This provides everyone with an equal understanding of the facts. It informs the American voter of the real consequences of his choices. Both liberals and conservatives should have nothing but support for such a system.

As a conservative, I fully expect that a pork database, properly set up, will wind up shaming our elected officials into severely curtailing their earmarks, especially when combined with a public reporting system of political contributions and financial disclosures such as the site Open Secrets. I could be wrong, but I rather doubt it.

However, one effort has already begun to hamstring the database. Rep. Thomas Davis (R-VA) wants to exclude contracts from the database, limiting it to only grants. Liberals have cried foul on this proposition, and rightly so. Pork does not limit itself to grants, and corruption does not limit itself to non-profit groups. We need to access data on contractual awards in order to get sunlight on sweetheart earmarks to corporate contributors. That kind of relationship formed the heart of the corruption case of Randy "Duke" Cunningham, who pushed through millions of dollars in contacts in return for kickbacks from the companies that received them. Any reform that does not include contractual awards is a sham and a farce. Davis may mean well, but his explanation that competitive bidding takes the corruption out of the process is either laughably naive or cynically deceptive.

We need to continue to press for this database in order to force Congress to adopt real accountability for their actions. Until we have that, no reform effort endorsed by Congress will gain us anything. Accountability will give us leverage to insist on further reforms and produce the kind of leaders we can eventually trust with the power we give them.

Zarqawi's Little Black Book

One of the key physical devices for active intel in any terrorist takedown is the cellphone. The data we recover off of these leads us to a number of other active terrorist cells, as well as point the NSA to new potential nodes in the AQ network. CNN reports that the cell phone recovered from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's corpse gave us plenty of intel, some of it leading to key members of the new Iraqi government:

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had the phone numbers of senior Iraqi officials stored in his cell phone, according to an Iraqi legislator.

Waiel Abdul-Latif, a member of former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's party, said Monday that authorities found the numbers after al-Zarqawi, leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, was killed in a U.S. air strike on June 7.

Abdul-Latif did not give names of the officials. But he said they included ministry employees and members of parliament.

He called for an investigation, saying Iraqis "cannot have one hand with the government and another with the terrorists."

This shouldn't come as much of a surprise to anyone. At least a few Sunni political parties have long been thought to have acted as fronts native insurgencies, and their election to the National Assembly would give them the opportunity to infiltrate the bureaucracy. The Iraqis now have a good idea which of these leaders have connections through Zarqawi to the foreign insurgency, and one can imagine that the Iraqis will not treat such traitors kindly in their current mood. This might also explain why a few Sunni parties suddenly staged a protest walkout when one of their legislators got kidnapped this weekend.

CNN also reports that the Arabic proclivity for oddball conspiracy theories continues unabated. The latest, provided by a woman identifying herself as Zarqawi's first wife, claims that Zarqawi's network agreed to sell him out to the Americans -- in exchange for us leaving Osama bin Laden alone. This theory got published in La Repubblica in Italy, which came as news to Zarqawi's family in Jordan, who have not heard from the woman in over two years. This apparently did not deter La Repubblica from printing the ridiculous allegations or CNN from extending its reach.

In order to believe that this has any credibility at all, we have to believe that a woman who hasn't been in contact with Zarqawi's family in two years somehow knows the workings of AQI, and that they would discuss the manner and means through which they sold the Zarq out. Not only that, but we then have to believe that they would try to make a deal with the Americans, the infidels, to kill off Zarqawi, a Muslim. We also have to believe that we would make some kind of diplomatic deal with AQ to leave Osama alone. And in exchange for what -- the death of one man, replaced by another who tortured and brutalized two of our soldiers before dismembering them and leaving them booby-trapped on an Iraqi road?

Uh, yeah, sure. I'd like to know what La Repubblica's editors smoke around deadline, and what CNN's editors smoke when reading the international wires.

Israel: No Negotiations For Return Of Shalit

Israel has rejected a deadline from the Palestinian terrorists holding their abducted soldier, Gilad Shalit, and refused to release any prisoners from their jails in exchange for his return. The terrorists had demanded the release occur by 6 am Tuesday, which sets the stage for a further escalation:

"We will not conduct any negotiations on the release of prisoners," Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Monday, officially rejecting an ultimatum released Monday morning by the kidnappers of IDF Cpl. Gilad Shalit that set a 6:00 a.m. Tuesday deadline for the release of Palestinian prisoners.

"Israel will not give in to extortion by the Palestinian Authority and the Hamas government, which are led by murderous terrorist organizations ... The PA bears full responsibility for the welfare of Gilad Shalit and for returning him safe and sound to Israel," Olmert continued. ...

Meanwhile, IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz said during a visit to Shalit's family that he supported Israel's position not to give in to extortion.

A statement faxed to news agencies by the three terrorist organizations that coordinated the kidnapping said that if Israel did not meet the deadline, it would have to "pay the full future consequences," but did not specify the nature of the consequences.

The terrorists come from the ruling Hamas party. The Jerusalem Post notes that their faxed announcement appeared on the al-Qassam web site, and that the font and point size matched three earlier statements by the kidnappers. Israel underscored the responsibility of Hamas in both starting this crisis and to end it peacefully. They also made a pointedly explicit appeal to Bashar Assad, stating that Israel would hold Syria equally responsible based on their support and sheltering of Hamas and their international leader, Khaled Mashaal.

If Shalit does not appear soon, Gaza may get leveled in a search for him and his abductors. Israel has already started moving tanks and bulldozers into northern Gaza to go after the Kassam rocket sites and to destroy any more tunnels from the Palestinian side of the border. The operation got scaled down significantly from what Israel originally planned, but the IDF could quickly escalated the northern incursion in relatively short order.

By the time we get into the shank of the evening here in the US, we should know the result of this standoff.

Hong Kong Wants Democracy

The return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty in 1997 gave the communist regime control over one of the most productive areas of the Pacific Rim, a move that some rued as a step backwards for freedom in the region as well as an economic boost to an oppressive government. Six years later, the fires of freedom have not dimmed in the former British colony, although the world hardly notices it any more. The Times of London reports in a two-paragraph blurb that an annual freedom march drew more participants than authorites expected:

Pressure in Hong Kong for direct elections remains strong, newspapers said, after the annual democracy march drew a larger-than-expected turnout of at least 28,000. The fourth march marked the handover to China in 1997, under an agreement granting the territory Western-style freedoms. The marches began in 2003 after China tried to pass a national security law.

Other news agencies of lesser reach gave more resources to the event. AsiaNews, an Italian site focusing on events in that region, reported that the police estimated that less than 20,000 showed up, while organizers claimed over 50,000. The Chinese authorities tried to dilute the impact of the protests by holding a parade and festival in the city, which police claimed 40,000 attended.

The promise of "one country, two systems" that China adopted in 1997 as part of the agreement with the UK has not been fully kept. While China keeps Hong Kong open enough to ensure a free flow of outside capital, they have continued to block political reforms and the basic processes of self-government. Cardinal Joseph Zen, the bishop of Hong Kong, added his voice to the calls for the autonomy promised by Beijing, telling followers that only through persistence will their goals be achieved.

Three years ago, media outlets from around the world covered these protests. Last year, the Washington Post still thought democracy important enough to cover it, albeit on page A17. Now the best we can get is two paragraphs in the Times of London, one of the more important media outlets for global news. It seems that freedom and liberty gets a low priority these days, a loss for all free peoples around the world.

Congress Will Override Supreme Court On Tribunals

Congress appears ready to overrule the Supreme Court and establish military tribunals for detainess in the war on terror, allowing for the most efficient process possible to determine the culpability of terrorists captured in the act. Senators from both parties have determined that the Supreme Court has forced them to act to keep al-Qaeda operatives from exploiting the civil court system:

The US Congress is ready to craft legislation to prosecute Guantanamo war-on-terror prisoners after the government's plan for military trials was rejected by the Supreme Court, top senators said.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told the Fox News Sunday television program that Congress could conceivably pass a new law allowing the government to try the prisoners by military commissions by September. ...

Democratic Senator Jack Reed told Fox News that the minority Democrats are likely to cooperate with Republicans and the White House to pass the legislation enabling detainee trials.

"This has to be a process where we understand and recognize that we have to have a legitimate procedure -- legitimate in the eyes of the court, legitimate in the eyes of the American people, that we can move quickly to try these individuals and do justice," Reed said.

"And I think that's something that will come together in a bipartisan basis, I hope, in a deliberate and quick fashion, and do that."

Let's hope that we can take Senator Reed at his word. The ruling from the Supreme Court that essentially grants terrorists Geneva Convention protections despite explicit disqualifications from it needs to get reversed as quickly as possible. The court's majority decision declared that the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) issued by Congress in 2001 somehow did not cover the establishment of military tribunals for unlawful combatants, which leaves Congress the opening to fill the gap.

I actually prefer the method that Justice Stevens explicitly left open to the Bush administration in his opinion: leave them detained until hostilities cease in the war on terror. Radical Islam does not leave many deterrents to its lunatic pawns. Death in combat or a summary execution suits them fine. Public trials give them the opportunity to exploit our civil justice system as platforms for their screeds, as Zacarias Moussaoui showed. However, the perpetual and anonymous detention offered by Stevens does give the terrorists the one situation they find most repellent -- and that could persuade at least a few of them that taking on the US holds nothing but a miserable stretch of decades in an iron cage, with no public outlet for their hatred.

Failing that, the military tribunals clearly give the US the most efficient system of handling these detainees. Terrorists captured on the battlefield or in conspiracies against us abroad do not have any rights to access our civil system, nor to invoke the normal issues of Miranda rights and revelations of intel techniques. Congress is making the right decision in explicitly filling the gap that the Supreme Court left in its decision.

Hamas To Target Schools, Hospitals

Hamas has threatened to retaliate for Israel's response to ongoing Palestinian provocations by committing war crimes. The spokesman for the putative political party's terrorist wing stated that Hamas will attack schools and hospitals unless Israel unconditionally removes itself from Gaza:

Hamas's armed wing, Izaddin al-Kassam, on Sunday threatened to attack infrastructure facilities inside Israel, including schools, hospitals and universities. The threat, the first of its kind since Hamas won the parliamentary election last January, was issued in response to continued Israeli military strikes in the Gaza Strip.

"If they continue with these attacks, we will strike at targets in Zionist territory that we have not struck until now," said the organization's spokesman.

The latest threat came as Egypt continued its efforts to resolve the crisis.

This comes as no surprise from the Palestinians. One must remember that even the political wing of Hamas applauded an attack on a Tel Aviv falafel stand as an act of self-defense, despite the fact that the bomber targeted only unarmed Israeli citizens and residents. Now that Israel has actually performed an act of self-defense after months of rocket attacks from Gaza, Hamas seems outraged at the fact that Israel followed their advice.

Hamas has done nothing but bring misery and further shame to the Palestinians, finally doing the near-impossible and inspiring Western nations to force them to take responsibility for their own actions. Now they reveal themselves as the cowards and hypocrites they are, as well as their terrorist nature, by the deliberate targeting of children and health-care facilities. Will the Western media cover this threat, or will they just report the fact that the idiots in Gaza who brought this attack upon themselves still may face a humanitarian crisis, as if that crisis had nothing to do with the stupid decisions they make for themselves?

Apparently, Fatah has decided not to wait for an answer. They still control the official Palestinian Authority security services, and the Jerusalem Post reports in the same article that hundreds of them have fanned out in Rafah and Khan Yunis to find Gilad Shalit and stop the IDF from pulling Gaza to the ground. They have disguised themselves as Fatah and Hamas militiamen in order to gain better intel. They want to produce Shalit and wave goodbye to the Israeli troops that have them cut off and surrounded as soon as they possibly can. Mahmoud Abbas has no illusions about American or European intervention to save his behind at this point.

Meanwhile, Egypt also wants to put an end to this embarrassment. It expects to hear from Khaled Mashaal in Syria about whether Hamas will accept a deal they have proposed but not released to return Shalit to the IDF. Mubarak warned Syria to expel Mashaal if Hamas did not cooperate in ending this crisis, and one would expect a refusal to have stark diplomatic consequences for Hamas and Syria. The deal includes some sort of prisoner swap, although undoubtedly not on the scale demanded by Shalit's abductors.

None of this should divert attention from Hamas' despicable threats. Deliberately targeting schools and hospitals violates every tenet of war and should reinforce the Palestinians' status as pariahs among civilized people. Hamas continues to demonstrate why it needs to be crushed rather than engaged, and why the West needs to recognize them as every bit of an enemy in the war on terror as Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and al-Qaeda.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, the UN continues its record of inanity on the subject:

As the stand-off between Israeli troops and Palestinian militants entered its second week, the UN special envoy to the Middle East rebuked Israel for destroying civilian buildings in Gaza and urged it to abide by international law.

Days after Israeli jets crippled Gaza’s only power station, Álvaro de Soto inspected the still-smoking ruins to hear that the plant would be shut for at least six months, leaving hundreds of thousands of Palestinians without power.

Israel yesterday restarted fuel supplies and partially reopened the Karni cargo crossing for food and medical supplies into Gaza, after warnings of a humanitarian crisis. But its artillery batteries and warplanes continued to strike the otherwise sealed-off coastal strip, with helicopter gunships firing missiles into the office of Ismail Haniya, the Palestinian Prime Minister.

Note to the UN envoy: the "civilian buildings" are in fact government buildings of a nation that committed acts of war against Israel. Attacking them is entirely within the rules of war. The same goes for Palestinian infrastructure, especially in accordance with its support of their attacks. Armies routinely cut off command and control activities against their enemies; a general who failed to do so would rightly be cashiered, and court-martialed if that failure was deliberate.

Once again the UN draws false moral equivalences to allow the Palestinians to escape the consequences of their own decisions and actions, and they do so with very dishonest rhetorical tricks. Calling the offices of the party that commits terrorist acts on a regular basis "civilian buildings" allows the UN to draw an equivalency between targeting them and Hamas' threat to target schoolchildren and sick civilians in hospitals -- an equivalency that only exists in the minds of the morally warped or terminally obtuse. In this case, considering the UN's recent history, this envoy likely qualifies on both grounds.

Iraqis Put Saddam's Family On Most Wanted List

Apparently the new Iraqi government has received enough intel on insurgent financing to trace some of it back to the wife and daughter of Saddam Hussein. At a press conference, the Iraqi national security advisor unveiled their new most-wanted list, and the two women occupy slots 16 and 17:

Saddam Hussein's wife and eldest daughter are among 41 people on the Iraqi government's most wanted list, along with the new leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, a top official announced Sunday. ...

Al-Rubaie told reporters the government was releasing the most wanted list "so that our people can know their enemies."

Saddam's wife, Sajida Khairallah Tulfah, was No. 17, just behind the ousted leader's eldest daughter, Raghad. Sajida is believed to be in Qatar, and Raghad lives in Jordan, where she was given refuge by King Abdullah II.

The Jordanians deny that Raghad has participated in any actions supporting terrorists or insurgents. The PM notes that Jordan gave Raghad and her children asylum for humanitarian purposes and have monitored their activities. While Rubaie says that some of the countries where their most wanted reside have agreed to cooperate with the Iraqis, Jordan's statement sounds like a clear message that they will not be extraditing Raghad any time in the near future, and they say that the Iraqis have not asked for them to do so.

Interestingly, the new AQI leader only comes in at number 30. Abu Hamza al-Mujaher, also known as Abu Ayyub al-Masri and The Next Guy On The Hit Parade, apparently has not done enough evil to surpass the two women in Saddam's life. That gives a pretty clear indication that the Iraqis think that Raghad and Sajada have kept themselves busy with more than just crochet and needlepoint during their exile from Iraq.

Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri tops the new list from the Iraqi government. Douri remains at large, the highest-ranking Saddam regime member to do so, and has long been identified as the leader and promoter of the Ba'athist dead-enders in the native insurgency. The Coalition came close to catching the King of Clubs a couple of times, and an erroneous report of his capture went out in September 2004. We captured his nephew, a terror ringleader in his own right, in April 2005. His capture would cripple the native insurgencies, but it would take quite an operation to find him; he's suspected of running his operations across the Syrian border.

Will Saddam's wife and daughter follow him into the dock? It Rubaie thought that trying Saddam would prove politically tricky, the impact of hauling the two women into court could be explosive. They may just satisfy themselves to keep either from attempting to return to Iraq for the rest of their lives.

Mosque Raided In Pittsburgh's North Side

The FBI raided a North Side mosque in Pittsburgh on Friday as part of an unspecified "criminal investigation". The residence that served as both a Koranic school and a mosque is not a part of the mainstream Islamic Council of Greater Pittsburgh, the Post-Gazette reports (via Anthony at Irishspy):

The raid began around noon when authorities shut down the intersection of Boyle and Hemlock streets, residents said. The activity centered around a three-story green house located in the 1300 block of Boyle Street. It is home to the Sankore Institute and Light of Age Mosque, which doubles as a school for people seeking to learn the Koran and Islamic religious teachings.

FBI spokesman Jeff Killeen confirmed that the FBI was at the home. Mr. Killeen referred questions to Margaret Philbin, the U.S. attorney's spokeswoman, who said that the FBI executed a search warrant at the home yesterday morning or afternoon.

Authorities did not say if anyone was taken into custody, but residents said several men in tunics and traditional Muslim garb were led out of the house, patted down and searched along Boyle Street. The agents may have executed the raid during Friday prayers known as the Jummah prayer, neighbors said.

The group moved into the neighborhood around February and posted fliers that said "we are here to help you make the North Side a better place to live, worship, work and play." The group urged people "to join us in clothing and feeding the poor, cleaning up our community and making the North Side a safer, more beautiful place for our children."

Neighbors who witnessed the raid said FBI agents surrounded the home for more than four hours yesterday. They said there was a tactical squad at the scene backing up agents.

Closing down an intersection to execute a search warrant sounds as though the FBI expected more trouble than a simple criminal investigation would bring. The fliers themselves sound rather benign, but not benign enough to keep the FBI from bringing a tactical squad for backup. One witness told the P-G that the FBI used a robot to conduct their initial search. Clearly they anticipated something significant for this search and applied extensive resources to ensure it got conducted safely.

Oddly, this does not appear on any of the national wire services or media outlets. Even the normal outrage one would expect to hear whenever the FBI executes a warrant at a place of worship has not materialized. The P-G has no follow-up in today's edition, and no one else appears to have noticed this one report. Even the ACLU, when asked for comment in the article yesterday, only said that any search of a religious site would cause concern but that it would be premature to comment further on the specifics.

Pittsburgh seems an unlikely place for a terrorist conspiracy, but then again so did Toronto. Whatever happened in Pittsburgh the FBI and the DoJ have kept under their hats. Unlike Miami, where news coverage started shortly after the raid began, no news coverage has aired and no statements from the FBI have been forthcoming other than the one requested by the P-G.

Interesting. And a bit unsettling. Did anyone get arrested, and if not, was the raid a mistake?

Zarqawi Buried In Secret

The Iraqi government announced that it has buried Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in or near Baghdad in a secret location and will not return his body to his family. The Jordanian government had bloked his return, but his family as well as Osama bin Laden had demanded that the Americans turn his remains over so that he could be buried near his family in Zarqa:

Mouwafak al-Rubaie would not say when the Jordanian-born militant, who was killed June 7 in a U.S. airstrike northeast of Baghdad, was buried, or give any specifics on the location of the grave.

The U.S. military confirmed the burial but declined to give details.

"The remains of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi were turned over to the appropriate government of Iraq officials and buried in accordance with Muslim customs and traditions," the military said in an e-mailed statement. "Anything further than that would be addressed by the Iraqi government."

Al-Zarqawi's older brother demanded that his body be transferred to Jordan, and accused the United States of lying.

"Bush took his body to the United States," Sayel al-Khalayleh, 50, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from his home in the Jordanian city of Zarqa.

I think we can rule out the idea that anyone wanted to bury Zarqawi in the US. If anything, we would have preferred cremation, in order to avoid anyone turning his gravesite into a martyr's shrine. Besides, what would Bush have done with the body here in the US -- put it on display, perhaps down the Mall in Washington for the Independence Day parade? Khalayleh must be daft.

Zarqawi would hardly receive a hero's welcome from the Jordanians, anyway. His remains may well be more secure in their anonymity in Baghdad. He squandered whatever sympathy he had gained among his fellow Jordanian subjects when he killed 60 of them at a wedding. The victims and their families welcomed his death, certainly more than they would have his funeral.

Maryland Primary Has Democrats Split On Race

The Washington Post reports that the Maryland race to replace the retiring Paul Sarbanes has split the Democratic Party on race. Referring to the candidates' "ethnicity", the Post's new poll shows that Kweisi Mfume and Benjamin Cardin have polarized Maryland's Democratic base:

Former NAACP president Kweisi Mfume leads U.S. Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin in what is shaping up to be a racially polarized Democratic Senate primary in Maryland, even as roughly a third of the electorate has not settled on a candidate, according to a new Washington Post poll.

For the first time in Maryland history, both major parties have the potential to nominate an African American, and the poll suggests that the hopes of all of the major candidates will depend on their ability to cross racial boundaries for support.

As they stand, the racial divisions are stark: In the primary, Mfume, who is black, gets 72 percent of his support from black voters, the poll shows. Cardin, who is white, gets 82 percent of his backing from white voters.

Black Democrats have already shown some interest in Michael Steele, a well-known figure in Maryland politics. The polling shows that Steele could draw 25% of their vote in November if Cardin wins. Given the party's early implicit endorsement of Cardin, he may draw more than that from the anger some may feel at the cold shoulder Mfume received when his candidacy got ignored early in the campaign.

However, Cardin has had trouble breaking out from Mfume and trails him, according to the Post's poll. Cardin says his internal polling shows him easily leading Steele. The last Rasmussen poll taken in April does not show the haed-to-head results for the primary, but does reinforce the idea that Cardin might have it more correct than the Post. It shows Cardin leading Steele by ten points, while Mfume's lead is only within the margin of error. Contradicting what the Post reports on the impact of race on the general election, Steele actually polls higher against Mfume than he does against Cardin.

Mfume may feel pretty sanguine about his recent gains against Cardin, but he shouldn't take it too seriously. Mfume has national recognition and will not need to use a campaign to introduce himself to voters. The Post reports that two-thirds of Maryland Democrats have too little information to form an opinion of Cardin. His problem is taking the right tone for his campaign without alienating black voters. Beating Mfume will result in a Pyrrhic victory if it means that he antagonizes Mfume supporters into staying home in November or -- even worse -- outright support of Steele.

Cardin at least has the advantage in finances. He has raised almost $4 million to Mfume's $520,000, and therefore can flood the zone with his advertising. That will allow Cardin to define himself before either Mfume or Steele can do it for him. Steele has $2.4 million, though, and no primary challenge, and therefore can play havoc in the Democratic primary to whatever extent he wants. The money could also be turned into a disadvantage by a clever Mfume campaign, illustrating the power of the Demoratic machine and their arrogance in locking Mfume out of the fundraising -- turning the former NAACP into an outsider and a bit of a martyr.

This race could get ugly fast. If the two campaigns start going negative, the candidates could easily fracture the base along racial lines. That would have implications for Democrats across all statewide offices, not just the Senate campaign this year. Steele would find himself positioned as the ultimate beneficiary in November, but the split could allow the GOP to make substantial gains in Maryland for several election cycles.

Pakistan To Establish Diplomatic Ties With Israel: Expatriates

The war on terror has taken some interesting turns, but none quite as intriguing as having one of the original Islamist states establishing diplomatic relations with Israel. In the wake of two missives from Osama bin Laden, likely from a hideout in Waziristan, the Pakistanis intend on establishing relations with the so-called Zionists:

Full diplomatic relations between Israel and Pakistan will be established in a short period of time, a group of Pakistani expatriates living in the US predicted last week during a visit to Jerusalem.

An eight-member delegation from the American Muslim Peace Initiative came to Israel as guests of the American Jewish Congress's Council for World Jewry, which has been working to improve ties between Israel and the 160 million Muslims of Pakistan.

The two organizations were instrumental in bringing about an historic meeting between the foreign ministers of Israel and Pakistan last year in Istanbul and a handshake at the United Nations General Assembly last September between Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and then-prime minister Ariel Sharon.

"We don't have an iota of doubt that there should be relations between Pakistan and Israel and between Israel and the entire Arab world," said Dr. Omar Atiq, a member of the delegation who lives in Arkansas. "The ice has been broken. It's just a matter of time. It's not if - it's when. It's around the corner - despite what is going on in the news."

The timing certainly provides some clarity on the centrality of the Palestinians in the Muslim world. Atiq's dismissal of the Gaza confrontation as having any impact on improving relations between Israel and the Muslim world demonstrates what many of us already knew about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: it has no weight on their national interests. The governments of the region used the Palestinians for their own internal politics, not out of any sense of real commitment to the Palestinians.

Now that the Palestinians have shown themselves completely incapable of rational self-government in Gaza, the moderate regimes in the region have started to distance themselves from the PA. Only Syria and Iran still hold a hard-line position, but Assad cannot afford to anger Hamas and Hezbollah, lest his already shaky regime fall. Egypt and Jordan have tried to stay in a middle position, having already established their ties with Israel, and the new Iraqi government recalls all too well the primacy Saddam placed on the Palestinian terrorists. Saudi Arabia may remain the only wild card; they have remained fairly silent during the latest crisis.

If the ex-pats have it correct, the new relations between Pakistan and Israel will represent a tremendous blow to bin Laden and his attempt to radicalize the ummah. It would probably force Osama to concentrate more of his efforts towards the Musharraf regime instead of the West, assuming he can extricate what's left of the AQ assets from the disaster they face in Iraq. Having moderates come to power and establish a network of relations to Israel and the West represents his worst nightmare, and again shows why American resolve in establishing democracy in Iraq had such strategic importance for the war on terror.