Lemon & Race.

House Democrats under Nancy Pelosi today held a hearing on "Race and Justice" in America. No Republicans were invited. The speakers were limited to race baiters who make their living off the grievance industry. No mention was made of the dysfunction in the black community, unwed mother birth rate over 75%, rampant criminality, substandard education, poverty, joblessness, etc. The entire focus of the hearing was the supposed ever increasing racism in America. And not surprisingly, the attendees came to the collective conclusion that the only way to protect blacks is to elect Democrats to the House.

The racial grievance industry and the Democrat left that is wed to it has, over half a century, proven immensely harmful to our nation - and to the black community, it has been an utter disaster. At this point, these two groups jointly pushing a canard for money and power is beyond merely immoral - it is evil.

I've been talking about the problems of race for years now on this blog. Rare is the person on the left who likewise addresses the problems head on. But hats off to CNN's Don Lemon who has indeed waded into the mud with brutal honesty:



While I appreciate the comments, the canard that the right only brings up the problems of the black community when "they want to stick it to the black community" is just off the charts ridiculous. One, every time someone on the right with a public voice brings it up, they are met with a full scale attack from the racial grievance industry. Two, in the most recent instance, the right has brought it up in response to the race hustlers' calls for the lynching of George Zimmerman. That was not to "stick it" to the black community, it was to finally start pointing out that the black community is being tremendously ill used. And that is a message that needs to be shouted from the rooftops every day.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

Romney's Very Good Night

Tonight was the Town Hall style Presidential debate. Romney had another very strong performance, though with a big stumble on Libya. Obama was far more engaged, making it an interesting night. But if the issue in this next election is the economy, than I think that tonight put Romney next to the finish line with a two-step lead over Obama.

Update: Via Hot Air, a CBS News snap poll has Romney winning on the economy, 65% to 34%.

First to Candy Crowley's performance as a moderator - it was horrid. One, her selection of questions was ridiculous - there were several questions that read like they had been written by MSNBC in coordination with Kos - questions on the Lilly Ledbetter act, contraception and assault weapons bans? Spare me. Two, when she jumped in to support Obama's assertion that he had labeled the Benghazi attack as an act of terrorism on Sept. 13, that was horse manure. Yes, Obama mentioned the word terrorism in that speech, but he wasn't specifically referencing Benghazi, and he spent the next two weeks blaming the youtube video.

Obama was far more Bidenesque tonight, trying to interrupt, showing visible disdain for Romney, and repeatedly accusing Romney of lying. But the bottom line is that Obama spent far more time trying to attack Romney than explaining either his vision for the future or effectively defending his record.

But all of that said, Romney was just eloquent in speaking about the state of the economy, and nearly as good in outlining his plan for the future. A black gentleman told Obama that he had voted for him in 2008 but was not excited about pulling the lever this time around - what could Obama do to make him excited to pull the lever. When Romney addressed the question, it was his high point of the evening, and a damning indictment of the past four years. Video to follow. Here is the transcript:

I think you know that these last four years haven't been so good as the president just described and that you don't feel like you're confident that the next four years are going to be much better either. I can tell you that if you were to elect President Obama, you know what you're going to get. You're going to get a repeat of the last four years. We just can't afford four more years like the last four years.

He said that by now we'd have unemployment at 5.4 percent. The difference between where it is and 5.4 percent is 9 million Americans without work. I wasn't the one that said 5.4 percent. This was the president's plan — didn't get there.

He said he would have by now put forward a plan to reform Medicare and Social Security because he pointed out they're on the road to bankruptcy. He would reform them. He'd get that done. He hasn't even made a proposal on either one.

He said in his first year he'd put out an immigration plan that would deal with our immigration challenges — didn't even file it.

This is a president who has not been able to do what he said he'd do. He said that he'd cut in half the deficit. He hasn't done that either. In fact, he doubled it.

He said that by now middle-income families would have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by $2,500 a year. It's gone up by 2,500 (dollars) a year. And if "Obamacare" is passed — or implemented — it's already been passed. If it's implemented fully, it'll be another 2,500 (dollars) on top.

The middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a president who has not understood what it takes to get the economy working again. He keeps saying, look, I've created 5 million jobs.

That's after losing 5 million jobs. The entire record is such that the unemployment has not been reduced in this country. The unemployment, the number of people who are still looking for work, is still 23 million Americans. There are more people in poverty — one out of six people in poverty. How about food stamps? When he took office, 32 million people were on food stamps; today 47 million people are on food stamps. How about the growth of the economy? It's growing more slowly this year than last year and more slowly last year than the year before.

The — the president wants to do well; I understand. But the policies he's put in place, from "Obamacare" to Dodd-Frank to his tax policies to his regulatory policies — these policies combined have not led this economy take off and grow like it could have. You might say, well, you got an example of when it worked better? Yeah, in the Reagan recession, where unemployment hit 10.8 percent. Between that period — the end of that recession and equivalent period of time to today, Ronald Reagan's recovery created twice as many jobs as this president's recovery. Five million jobs doesn't even keep up with our population growth. And the only reason the unemployment rate seems a little lower today is because of all the people that have dropped out of the workforce.

The president has tried, but his policies haven't worked. He's great as a — as a — a — a — as a speaker and — and describing his plans and his vision. That's wonderful, except we have a record to look at. And that record shows he just hasn't been able to cut the deficit, to put in place reforms for Medicare and Social Security to preserve them, to get us the rising incomes we — median incomes are down $4,300 a family, and 23 million Americans out of work. That's what this election is about. It's about who can get the middle class in this country a bright and prosperous future and assure our kids the kind of hope and optimism they deserve.

Romney had some weak moments - Libya in particular, where Romney stumbled and stuttered (as I screamed at the television screen). Obama was asked about security in Libya and why more security was denied. Obama did not answer the question. Romney managed to pull defeat from the jaws of victory. Instead of pointing out the obvious - that Obama had failed to answer, followed with an explanation of why, Romney got blindsided by the President's claim that he had told Americans this was a terrorist act on 13 September, with the odious Candy Crowley intervening in support of Obama. Video to follow.

But at any rate, Romney will have a second bite at the apple on Benghazi at the last debate on Monday. But as Allahpundit sagely notes at Hot Air, as regards the economy and Benghazi, "only one of those is an issue that people will vote on."

The biggest laugh line of the night - Obama's answer to the last question asking Obama to explain away the biggest misconceptions America might have about him:

I think a lot of this campaign, maybe over the last four years, has been devoted to this notion that I think government creates jobs, that that somehow is the answer. That's not what I believe. I believe that the free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world's ever known. I believe in self-reliance and individual initiative and risk-takers being rewarded. . .

One could well ask then why Obama made subsidized green jobs a centerpiece of his plans for economic recovery and why every one of his "jobs plans" were largely plans to subsidize government union employees. Or one could well ask why such a miniscule part of his Stimulus - a few percent - went to supporting small business.

My impression was that Romney won this debate convincingly on the only issue that counts, the economy, and that while Obama was aggressive, he just could not defend his record. If Frank Luntz's focus group is any indication, the majority of people share my view. In Luntz''s group, most had voted for Obama in '08, yet the majority swung strongly towards Romney at the conclusion of this debate.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

The Wages Of Straying Off The Liberal Plantation

Buzz Bissinger, the lifelong Democrat and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who recently came out for Romney, discovers that the left is surprisingly intolerant. Heh.



The most interesting part of the interview above was when the CNN's Howard Kurtz takes offense at Bissinger's quite accurate claim that left wing ideology pervades mainstream journalism and reporting. Kurtz defended CNN's stable of reporters. That would be the same CNN that gave rise to the "tea-bagger" joke and led the sliming of the Tea Party movement? That would be the same CNN whose last "town hall" debate had more plants than a florist shop. Kurtz is living in a bubble. CNN hasn't yet gone full frontal MSNBC or NYT, but they are not all that far away.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

More On Jared Loughner's Slaughter In Arizona & Leftwing Media Hypocrisy

Two exceptional essays by Byron York and Ed Morissey on the mass murder by Jared Loughner and the media / left's rush to tie this act to Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. Byron York compares this rush to the media / left's actions after the Ft. Hood shooting by Nidal Hassan. Morissey builds on that, pointing to CNN's scurrilous reporting, and points to some words used by the left - the very tip of the iceberg - during the last campaign by Obama and the DNC concerning politics and bullseye's on targets for Democratic pickup.

This from Byron York:

On November 5, 2009, Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire at a troop readiness center in Ft. Hood, Texas, killing 13 people. Within hours of the killings, the world knew that Hasan reportedly shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before he began shooting, visited websites associated with Islamist violence, wrote Internet postings justifying Muslim suicide bombings, considered U.S. forces his enemy, opposed American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as wars on Islam, and told a neighbor shortly before the shootings that he was going "to do good work for God." There was ample evidence, in other words, that the Ft. Hood attack was an act of Islamist violence.

Nevertheless, public officials, journalists, and commentators were quick to caution that the public should not "jump to conclusions" about Hasan's motive. CNN, in particular, became a forum for repeated warnings that the subject should be discussed with particular care.

"The important thing is for everyone not to jump to conclusions," said retired Gen. Wesley Clark on CNN the night of the shootings.

"We cannot jump to conclusions," said CNN's Jane Velez-Mitchell that same evening. "We have to make sure that we do not jump to any conclusions whatsoever."

"I'm on Pentagon chat room," said former CIA operative Robert Baer on CNN, also the night of the shooting. "Right now, there's messages going back and forth, saying do not jump to the conclusion this had anything to do with Islam."

Actually, that was responsible reporting at the time, at least until it became conclusively shown that Nidal in fact was motivated by Salafi Islam to carry out his mass murder. But as York goes on to discuss, in the very hours after this murder, with no evidence initially and then with the mounting evidence to the contrary, the left wing generally, and the left wing media in particular, have been falling all over themselves to tie this to Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, and the rise in "hate speech" that the left wants everyone to believe is a phenomena unique to the past two years.

Ed Morrisey points out the massive hypocrisy of CNN to speculate that Palin and the Tea Party were responsible in any way for this mass murder and adds:

. . . as has been repeatedly pointed out in the hours since, Democrats have also used crosshairs and bulls-eye imagery in their own political communications, including one in Arizona “targeting” J. D Hayworth of Arizona. As far as the “reload” comment, it was less than three years ago that Barack Obama himself talked about responding to political opponents with a gun analogy:

Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight?

That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

The comment drew some laughs and applause. But it also struck a chord with his Republican rival. John McCain’s campaign immediately accused the Democratic candidate of playing the politics of fear. They also mentioned that Obama said he would use a gun that would be illegal under Obama’s plans to cut down on illegal firearms.

Getting hysterical about the use of war terminology in politics is about as hypocritical as one can possibly get, as Howard Kurtz explained yesterday, especially for journalists covering politics . . .

To add a few thoughts, as to the Tea Party at least, the left would like us to believe that a determination to stop deficit spending, to lower taxes, and an inchoate desire to return to the Constitution at the time of the founding somehow is an invitation to violence. To the contrary, it is a call for a return to law.

The same cannot be said of at least a portion of the violent left wing rhetoric that has been with us since the days of Vietnam. Indeed, that was a world that gave us The Weathermen and many others who called for violence and who, in fact, did commit politically motivated violence, murder and mayhem. And to pretend violent rhetoric is an artifact of the right is ridiculous. The left's violent rhetoric was raised to an art form during the Bush years and, indeed, is still with us.





And on a closely related issue, where is the media outrage when we have seen, over the past few years, vile reverse racism, all of it accepted without comment by the left. Seemingly at the drop of a hat, the left calls virtualy anything they don't like "racism," wholly irrespective of racial animus. These people in fact have motivated mass murders, including the sniper murders by John Allen Mohammed and the murders by Omar Thorton, who last year at a distributorship in Connecticut, killed eight of his co-workers.




Silence.

Read More...

Summary only...

Ann Coulter, Rick Sanchez, Racism & Kiddie Porn

Rick Sanchez is out of his depth arguing over the culpability of Andrew Breitbart in the Shirley Sherrod matter with Ann Coulter. The argument goes to the Congressional Black Caucus sliming of the Tea Party as racists as well as Rick Sanchez's problem with kiddie porn. Heh.



(H/T Stop The ACLU)

Read More...

Summary only...

World Class Dumb and Even Dumber Still

____________________________________________________

World Class Dumb - Michael Steele

This mensa reject played the race card on Republicans over criticism that boils down to the fact that he is burning through money faster than he is bringing it in - which, as RNC Chairman, is failing at his primary duty. (Update: See this from Another Black Conservative: "To date, Steele has done nothing to regain the confidence of conservatives like myself. If anything his constant missteps has pushed conservatives further away.")





- & Even Dumber Still - Va. Gov. Bob McDonnell . . .



. . . who announced "Confederate History Month" in Virginia, then tried to explain why it didn't involve racism. Here is a hint Bob - if you have to explain why the imagery involved in your act is not really racist, you have completely lost the issue.

Do either of these two bozo's have a clue how they have played into the narrative of the left's race baiting industry, that racial animus is at the core of the Republican party and opposition to Obama. In normal times, these acts would be plain dumb. But we are in a situation today where the left is throwing race cards out like candy, doing their gutter best to smear the right in general and Tea Party advocates in particular as racist in order to end all debate on Obama's profligate spending and destructive policies. That takes the above acts from simple dumb to a world class absolutely numb-nuts level of dumb. With people like these in leadership positions, we really could see Republicans yet again pull defeat from the jaws of victory.

It should be noted that these remarks come on the heels of today's honest report from CNN's Shannon Travis who travelled with the Tea Parties:

[H]ere's what you don't often see in the coverage of Tea Party rallies: Patriotic signs professing a love for country; mothers and fathers with their children; African-Americans proudly participating; and senior citizens bopping to a hip-hop rapper. ... It is important to show the colorful anger Americans might have against elected leaders and Washington. But people should also see the orange-vested Tea Party hospitality handlers who welcome you with colorful smiles.

There were a few signs that could be seen as offensive to African-Americans. But by and large, no one I spoke with or I heard from on stage said anything that was approaching racist.

Almost everyone I met was welcoming to this African-American television news producer.

A salute to Mr. Travis. Now, which of the above narratives do you expect to play across the MSM?

Read More...

Summary only...

Cafferty On A Roll

Jack Cafferty goes nuclear on Pelosi and the left again. A few days ago, he was calling for everyone to remember the hypocrisy of the Obama administration when they went to the polls. Today . . . . he seems to want a pound of flesh . . .



Cafferty is of course correct in all he says. I had marked off Cafferty years ago as just another far left ideologue with no intellectual honesty. I was wrong.

(H/T Hot Air)

Read More...

Summary only...

Shameless (Updated & Bumped)

And it is not something that the White House even intends to discuss.

This sent Jack Cafferty ballistic.



We know what happened when LBJ lost Cronkite. What does it mean when Obama loses Cafferty? Far less, I am sure, but still no small thing, particularly given Cafferty's call to "remember" this when it comes time to vote.

Read More...

Summary only...

Cafferty Draws Divine Ire

Jack Cafferty, CNN's far left commentator, the other day made the ridiculous charge that the only way to explain how close the polls are is rampant racism on the right. His accusation in support of The One has drawn the attention of The Real One. Or at least one of The Real One's representatives on earth. Father Johnathan Morris, blogging at Fox, has responded to the odious Mr. Cafferty in an articulate and interesting post.

This from Fr. Morris writing at Fox:

Jack,

I’m appalled.

Yesterday on your CNN blog you made the outrageous claim that the only way to make sense of the closeness of this presidential race is America’s racism against Senator Barack Obama.

In your words,

“Race is arguably the biggest issue in this election, and it’s one that nobody’s talking about. The differences between Barack Obama and John McCain couldn’t be more well-defined. Obama wants to change Washington. McCain is a part of Washington and a part of the Bush legacy. Yet the polls remain close. Doesn’t make sense…unless it’s race.”

I don’t know which is more shocking 1) your offensive suggestion that many McCain supporters recognize Barack Obama’s superiority (it’s so well-defined!), but refuse to vote for him because they are racists. 2) your simplistic analysis of the differences between the candidates, particularly your wild assertion that Obama, a Washington senator, is not really part of Washington because he wants to change it 3) your frightening disconnect with the majority of Americans and what determines their vote.

. . . Jack, until the Democratic Party breaks free from this ideological stranglehold, it is more likely that a conservative, Republican, black man or woman will rise to the office of President of the United States of American than the Democrat’s Barack Obama. He is an exceptionally talented man, but his values do not coincide with the majority of America –as Gore and Kerry proved. And that’s got nothing to do with color. . . .

God bless,

Father Jonathan

Do Read the entire article. Fr. Morris's analysis is fairly lengthy and quite good. I may have to break out my WWI-era German belt buckle - the one that says "Gott Mit Uns."

As to Mr. Cafferty, he should be just a bit worried. It appears that God is listening, and who knows what His tolerance level for stunning idiocy is on any given day?

Read More...

Summary only...

Rothschild v. Blitzer

Lynn Forester De Rothschild appears on CNN to explain to Wolf Blitzer why she has decided to support John McCain and Sarah Palin. It is quite the interview. Best lines (paraphrased)

- I have led the Americn dream. I am supporting McCain Palin so that the American dream is available to everyone.

- A woman's right to choose is being vastly overused by the left to keep women in line.

- I didn't leave the Democratic party, they left me.

- Ms. Rothschild, a woman of middle class background, when accused of being an elitist, replied "I am not the elitist, Wolf, you are.

And Ms. Rothschild is not the only one to jump ship of late, of course. Gateway Pundit reports that Donald Trump also threw his support to McCain Palin this week.

Read More...

Summary only...

Experience . . . Judgement . . . . Dissimulation

Anderson Cooper asks the right question, just not the obvious followup.



Wow. Why didn't Cooper ask Obama why he ignoring that she has been a governor of one of the 57 states, running a $13 billion budget and 25,000 employees. You can't get much more deceptive or be more dissumlating then B.H. Obama.

And if Obama wants apples and apples comparisons, what was he managing while she was Mayor of Wasilla? Recall from Biden's speech, he praised how Obama got 150 people improved health care during his time as a Saul Alinsky follower.

Snowball . . . meet hill.

Read More...

Summary only...

A Great Maliki Interview

CNN has a rare and illuminating interview with PM Maliki today in which they discuss most of the Democratic talking points.


_____________________________________________________

This from the CNN transcript:

ROBERTSON: Mr. Prime Minister, you surprised a lot of U.S. officials when you went on the offensive in Basra. Why didn't you tell the Americans what you were doing?

AL-MALIKI: I think this is not correct. Initially the desire was for those operations to be an Iraqi responsibility and undertaking. and we did ask the coalition forces -- both the U.S. and British forces -- not to participate or get involved directly because that would give an excuse to some militant groups to say that this is a foreign force attacking us. But as far as General [David] Petraeus is concerned he was informed and he was in the picture about what we were going to do, and we told him this is an Iraqi operation that will target gangs -- some outlaws who were controlling the ports or are involved in smuggling or killing, and we made it very clear to them that we want it to be an Iraqi operation and when there is a need for assistance from Multi-National Forces we will make a request. So they were informed, and there was agreement with both the Americans and British sides that this should be an Iraqi operation. Legally we also had to make the operation an Iraqi one, because we were handed over the security portfolio in Basra and so it legally became an Iraqi responsibility, and during our discussions with coalition officials they told us they could not go into Basra because the security portfolio had been handed over and Iraqis are in charge of Basra. . . .

ROBERTSON: There was no quick victory over the forces you went against. Some people are saying that you miscalculated did you?

AL-MALIKI: No, what happened was that we were in a confrontation against the entire infrastructure of these militias in Basra. Based on the planning we did ahead of the operation we did not go there to confront this entire outlaw force, but despite the surprise they [security forces] had with the counterattack by the Mehdi Army, we found that we were able with our capabilities and improved readiness to achieve this major victory, and by end of the operation the entire infrastructure of these militias was broken down, and we believe what happened created a record for our forces in terms of their readiness and achievements. I believe, as some senior Iraqi officers in the Iraqi Army said, that what happened in Basra was a lesson and an example for how forces can confront militias and gangs. It is a lesson worth being taught in military academies.

ROBERTSON: As a result of the offensive in Basra fighting broke out in Sadr City. I was in Sadr City yesterday. The militias are still in very firm control of parts of Sadr City. The Iraqi Army needs the support of American Army to go on the offensive against ... this battle against the militias are far from won?

AL-MALIKI: Yes, confronting the militias does still needs more effort, in Baghdad the situation is different, the security portfolio [responsibilities] has not been handed over to the Iraqis, so our readiness is not at full level yet, but what's happening in Sadr City is still less than what some people expected the militias to do. Many expected the militias to have a decisive victory over Iraqi security forces, but this did not happen. Today, also, Iraqi forces went into Sadr City and are pursuing the criminals and militiamen who are on the run now.

ROBERTSON: What is the long-term solution to bring security in Sadr City? It's an area U.S. troops can't go into. It's become a haven for militias, even special groups who are getting weapons from Iran, training from Iran to attack here in the Green Zone. What is the long term solution?

AL-MALIKI: With regards to Sadr City and another city, Shula, we have opened the door for confrontation, a real confrontation with these gangs, and we will not stop until we are in full control of these areas. Politically, we have managed to gather a wide national front to politically confront this issue. Yesterday the Political Council for National Security had a meeting and issued a resolution with a number of points and action necessary to end the existence of this gang. The operation has started and will not stop until a decisive victory is achieved, a victory that will not enable these people to attack the Green Zone or other areas, now [that] they are suffering from a breakdown in their operations. Operations will not stop until the problem is finished and we are able to start reconstruction and begin to establish stability. Reconstruction and stability can not be established without putting an end to those criminal gangs who receive funding from beyond the borders. Another measure that is part of the mechanism of confronting those gangs is to rely on the tribes that stood side by side with the state in confronting these gangs, and they can provide a strong fist, a striking arm that can help get rid of those criminals.

ROBERTSON: Why did Iran help you convince Muqtada al-Sadr end the fighting?

AL-MALIKI: I am not aware of such an attempt. What happened on the ground and the breakdown in the structure of this militia is what made Muqtada al-Sadr issue his statement to withdraw his militants from the streets and condemn these operations, and he denied having any heavy weapons [artillery], which gave the government the right to search for these weapons, confiscate them if found, in addition to arresting anyone in possession [of heavy weapons]. What happened was something to save Muqtada not to help us.

ROBERTSON: Many people say that this has actually weakened you because it set back security in Basra, it set back security in Sadr City, that you've been obligated to the Iranian government for resolving this. This makes you weaker the critics say.

AL-MALIKI: [Laughing] This is one of the issues that media outlets should look into thoroughly. Before we launched the operation in Basra, the ports were completely under the control of these militias, smuggling was a routine, burglary and looting were also ongoing. Now Basra is back as a city under the control of the state, and its inhabitants are optimistic now about what the state can do for them. Now and for the first time Iraqis stand strong by their state after they saw the state take a decisive stand against this gang that is on cornered and on the run. These facts? The state came out with the maximum power, nationalism, popular and national support that expressed itself, and for the first time, the one who is cornered and defeated is this gang. A decision was taken yesterday that they no longer have a right to participate in the political process or take part in the upcoming elections unless they end the Mehdi Army and the unanimous decision agreed on by the political powers today. And this is the first time political powers dare say this -- the solution comes from dissolution, which means solving the problem comes in no other way other than dissolving the Mehdi Army. This is a very important point, this government, previous governments or coalition forces were not able to achieve any decisive victory the way it was achieved here, and the way it came out of the battle with full support from all different sides. . . .

ROBERTSON: Why aren't you going after the militias and the political parties such as the Islamic Supreme Council for Iraq, your political allies who have the Badr militia, the Fadhila party, your political allies who have a militia as well, why aren't you targeting them?

AL-MALIKI: If you look at the situation in detail, you would find that I have dealt with all those who have gangs and militias. Those you have mentioned, some of their elements who have committed crimes were arrested, but these parties did not object. The difference between them and Muqtada al-Sadr is that when we arrest some of the gangs who work with him, he objects, but when we detained some elements that committed crimes, the Islamic Council did not object. Second, the operations that happened in Basra targeted entire organizations, and a couple of days ago the secretary general of Thar Allah organization, a dangerous gang, was arrested. In addition, too, some elements from al-Fadhila had to flee the country and go to Kuwait when they realized they were going to be arrested because they are wanted by the justice system. In the past, we have also targeted al-Qaeda, the Islamic Army, the Brigades of 1920s Revolution, Islamic Shiite organizations in Karbala, Basra and Diwaniya. This is the truth that should be understood in the world media. We did not provide any sanctuary or opportunity for any outlaws, whether they were followers of the Mehdi Army or Muqtada al-Sadr or the Islamic Council or even of the Dawa party. This is the truth all Iraqis know and are proud of -- we deal with all outlaws equally.

ROBERTSON: One of the biggest threats for American troops now -- American commanders say one of the biggest threats for their troops are Iranian-backed special militia groups, who have Iranian weapons, who are trained by Iranian forces. These Iranian weapons are made as recently as last year. What are you telling the Iranian government to do about this?

AL-MALIKI: They don't only threaten U.S. troops. They are a threat to Iraqi forces too. Any security incident -- a bombing, assassination or kidnapping -- targeting Iraqis or foreigners on Iraqi soil is a challenge for the government. Therefore we don't want it being said that what special groups carry out only targets the U.S. side. An attack on any organization or individual on Iraqi territory is an attack on the Iraqi government. We understand that this comes because of the background of the deep differences between Iran and the U.S., and we are encouraging them to go back to the negotiating table with Iraqi mediation. Now also there has been agreement, and both sides have indicated willingness to go back to dialogue with Iraqi mediation. We are not only the mediators, we are the side that is on the receiving end of many of the consequences of the differences between Iran and the U.S., so Iraq has got an interest in creating an understanding between Iran and the U.S., at least to make Iraq at least avoid being affected by these differences. We will always reject the idea of any side using Iraq as a launching pad for its attack on others. We reject Iran using Iraq to attack the U.S., and at the same time, we reject the idea of the U.S. using Iraq to attack Iran, because we want to have peaceful positive relations with all sides. . . .

ROBERTSON: It is widely accepted that the surge has brought increased stability to Iraq, but at the same time politicians, yourself included, don't appear to be making the political compromises necessary to bring long-term stability --the compromises on the economy, the compromises on oil rights, a lot of important issues. Why aren't you moving any more quickly?

AL-MALIKI: I believe that the reality is not like this. The government, despite its heavy involvement in the dealing with security issues, did make many forward steps to improve or complement the political process. One of the problems we are facing in the establishment of the new system in Iraq is that there are some sides that have very high level of demands and hopes, and they were actually banking on political involvement from outside the country to change things inside the country. We made a lot of compromises regarding a lot of issues, like the Political Committee for National Security, the Executive Council, the debaathification, reforming the government, the general amnesty, but we can't continue to give compromises. We can't continue to give compromises forever and continue giving open-ended compromises. These are steps that we have taken within the framework of the political process and the constitution and we can't take further steps that go beyond our authority in the constitution and the framework of the political process here.

ROBERTSON: One of the concerns in the Sunni community is that you are not taking on enough of the Awakening Councils' security members -- the Sons of Iraq -- not taking enough of those in to the Iraqi police, into the Iraqi army, not integrating them properly into the Iraqi security forces. Why is that, and what concerns do you have about these now very big Sunni militias?

AL-MALIKI: The Sunnis have more members in the security forces than the allocation based on their percentage of the population upon which the government of national unity was formed. Their percentage of the population is 20 percent, and they are more than 40 percent of the security institution. I started the Awakening and support councils and by getting them into the security forces, I gave them more than their allocation. In Anbar alone there are 25,000 policemen, a big number in Nineveh, Diyala, Salaheddin, and we decided to integrate 20 percent of Sons of Iraq, or so-called Awakening, into the security forces, and the rest we decided to integrate into other state institutions because we can not accept huge numbers above Iraq's need and capacity in the police and army. So we decided to take a percentage based on specific terms to join the security forces and the remainder goes into the other government institutions. If the demand, as some believe, or unfortunately as some coalition force members who worked in this field believed, that they bring 150-thousand people under the title of Awakening and get incorporated into security forces under a sectarian title, this means taking the country back to sectarian confrontation -- Sunnis and Shiites struggling with each other within the institution. So we rationed, and the allocation for our Sunni brothers in the police and army was weakened by the electoral process. But as part of integrating them and others so that we don't have those with the title of Awakening and others under title of militias -- and this is the policy we want to use to break down barriers. But some of those who have adopted the Awakening and backed by some coalition officers want to integrate them into the police and army with their title as Awakening. This is what negatively affects the stability and security and is rejected by us. We accept them as citizens based on conditions and for them to not infiltrate the security forces, because we found many of them, men of the former regime, or al-Qaeda or terrorist organizations who wanted to infiltrate like militias did into the police. And you saw the results of that recently. Those too wanted to infiltrate through the Awakening, but we became aware of this danger and knowing the background allowed us to interact with them, provide support, absorb them and pick up their payrolls and include them in the security forces based on the allocation and security conditions.

ROBERTSON: This week is an important week in the United States. Ambassador [Ryan] Crocker, General [David] Petraeus giving their reports on the state of the surge -- looking ahead on what U.S. troops should do -- U.S. surge drawdown will end in the summer. They are considering a pause, maybe weeks or months to examine when they should pull all American troops out. What do you want the U.S. to do? Should there be a pause in the drawdown? Do you want it to be weeks? Do you want it to be months?

AL-MALIKI: First of all, I told him that the surge has created positive results -- and created successes. Second, through the partnership between the coalition forces and the Iraqi forces, there has been great development in the Iraqi security forces -- and proof of that is what happened in Basra and Karbala and other areas in Iraq. Iraqi security forces have become highly qualified to take over security responsibilities and these facts on development, equipping and readiness and Iraqi capabilities and the fact that increasing the number has achieved what was wanted. And there is no growing need for this increase [the surge]. I believe the American forces can draw down. I don't believe the decision for a drawdown should be paused as long as Iraqi security forces -- based on the first agreement the more Iraqi forces move forward, the more U.S. forces move back until all security responsibilities are handed over and coalition forces remain in a support role. And in a support role, you don't need such a big number. . . .

Read the entire transcript.

Read More...

Summary only...

Benazir Bhutto Murdered in Pakistan

Pakistan, already a deeply troubled country facing a growing threat from the Deobandi and Salafi Islamists, just took a big turn for the worse. Harvard educated opposition leader and former PM Benazir Bhutto has been murdered in Rawalpindi. The precise details are still unclear. Initial reports are that she was shot in the throat and chest by a suicide bomber who then detonated himself.

It is not clear who was responsible for this attack, though the initial speculation is that the Deobandi and Salafi Islamists of the Taliban and al Qaeda are responsible. They had repeatedly threatened Bhutto's life over the past several months. Bhutto had been an effective opponent of the Islamists when she had previously held the position of Prime Minister of Pakistan. Further, she was campaigning for PM in the current election on a promise to crack down on the spread of these Islamists if elected. Bhutto herself had previously expressed the belief that her life was threatened by a combination of these Islamist groups and several individuals in the Pakistani government who supported these groups. Bhutto's death comes 12 days before national elections that she was widely expected to win.

Further details from the Washington Post here. See also NY Times; CNN, Fox News & the BBC

The Telegraph has a brief biography of PM Bhutto. And see this at CNN.

See this post from Bill Rogio on the past assassination attempts on Bhutto and background on the tenuous security situation in Pakistan.

What this means for Pakistan, democracy, islamic militancy and the world are all open questions at this point. The same can be said about the potential this event has for catapulting concerns with the war on terror back to prominence in the upcoming presidential primary votes. In any event, it seems clear that the world has become a more dangerous place and that it has lost both a strong proponent of democracy and a staunch opponent of the rising tide of Islamic militancy.

Read More...

Summary only...

Interesting News From Around The Web

After the Sudan kerfufle, Mattel decides to delay release of its new line of “Tickle Me Mohammed” dolls. ““We really thought it would help soften the image of Muslims,” said the unnamed Mattel source, “and help to bring about the peaceful world order which they have been fighting for almost non-stop over the past 1,400 years.”

Party identification has an independent correlation with mental health. A recent study has found that Republicans are more mentally stable than those who identify themselves as Democrats or Independents.

The anatomy of a hate crime at QandO. Hate crime legislation is pandering of the worst sort and has no business in the statutes on either side of the pond.

Crusader Rabbit detects a possible correlation between nine years of socialist government and slowed economic growth in New Zealand. Could the bushy tailed one be on to something?

MK down under points out what promises to be a major case as regards illegal immigration into the U.S. A federal judge yesterday threw out a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Prince William County’s (Va.) new ordinance denying services to illegal aliens.

Dinah Lord asks whether violence is integral to Islam? The answer is yes, at least as to the orthodox interpretations of the Koran.

Classical values considers some existential questions of multiculturalism.

Hillary “Catch Me If You Can” Clinton . . . . a woman who does not want to subject herself to possible criticism and analysis by answering any questions. I mean, its not like she’s running for public office.

Cheat Seaking Missles has a good analysis of the incompetent, if not intentionally deceptive CNN Youtube debate.

"But such is the political oportunism of today's Democratic leadership. They believe in nothing (except power for its own sake); they stand for nothing; and having decided to live by the polls and, as Hanson points out, 'mortgage lasting principle to transient popularity, then you become enslaved by them as well.'" So sayeth Dr. Sanity.

Read More...

Summary only...

Interesting News From Around the Web

They are calling it a “dirty-bomb plot” thwarted. Police caught two Hungarians and a Ukrainian with a pound of weapons grade powdered uranium. Uranium is considered weapons grade when it consists of 85% or greater uranium 235. The uranium recovered by the police was 98.6% uranium 235.

‘The Prophet would have not have disapproved of 9/11, because it was carried out in his example. When he came to Medina, the Prophet had a revelation, of jihad. After that, it became an obligation for Muslims to convert others, and to establish an Islamic state, by the sword if necessary.” An interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

The choice of questions and questioners approved by CNN amounts to a fiasco. Gateway Pundit tells the sordid tale.

Some problems are surfacing in Britain’s NHS. More than 90,000 patients die and almost one million are harmed each year because of hospital blunders, according to a just released report.

Al Qaeda and Iran are the wolves at the door. China is not far behind, and poses a much more potent threat.

And in the “working hard for a good cause” category, one enterprising Chilean prostitute has auctioned off 27 hours of sex for approximately $4,000 to be donated to a charity for poor children. To break that down, that’s about $150 per hour or . . . well, probably best to stop the itemization there . . .

According to Sarkozy, the cause of the riots in the Parisian suburbs were the result more of a “thugocracy” than social problems. As to the social problems, Sarkozy seems likely to beat the unions in France as he seeks to reform the French economy.

Read More...

Summary only...

Interesting News From Around the Web

In the little bit of good news to come out of Pakistan of late, the Pakistan military is mounting a major offensive against the radical Muslims. The penultimate Pakistani nightmare is losing control of their nuclear arsenal to the radicals. The US has had ongoing efforts to insure security of those weapons, though the effectiveness of the program is, not suprisingly, coming under scrutiny now.

The problem with overreaching is the little you gain is greatly outweighed by the damage you may do. The Clinton campaign is experiencing more than a little of that right now, after a debate and commentary so rigged in her favor even Kos and CNN are criticizing it. At least it did not rise to the level Scott Ott foresaw, with CNN allowing Clinton additional time to "deliver rebuttals to any statements she makes with which she disagrees." But it apparently wasn't that far off. Instapundit has the roll up of commentary on this here and here. If the Clinton campaign is having to do this at the Democratic debates even while they have a double digit lead nationwide, what tricks are we going to see come the real Presidential race?

In another sure sign of the onset of global warming, South America is experincing its coldest winter in 90 years.

Right Truth is blogging on an extremely important case of a Saudi Sheik using the libel laws of foreign countries to silence authors in America writing about terrorism. Do watch the video:

Read More...

Summary only...