The Soros Alliance

There's a group out there that has a distinctly liberal viewpoint. called the Democracy Alliance. It is one if the causes George Soros is backing.

More on this tomorrow, Something else just came up. (Picking up where I left off)

The Democracy Alliance is made up of nearly 100 extremely secretive, extremely wealthy people funneling more than $50 million in the past nine months to lefty causes. It's quite funny how often on the left you hear conspiracy theories about some Republican cabal or another. Here's a real live one, folks. Here's a group getting together to buy political power.

A year after its founding, Democracy Alliance has followed up on its pledge to become a major power in the liberal movement. It has lavished millions on groups that have been willing to submit to its extensive screening process and its demands for secrecy.

These include the Center for American Progress, a think tank with an unabashed partisan edge, as well as Media Matters for America, which tracks what it sees as conservative bias in the news media. Several alliance donors are negotiating a major investment in Air America, a liberal talk-radio network.

But the large checks and demanding style wielded by Democracy Alliance organizers in recent months have caused unease among Washington's community of Democratic-linked organizations. The alliance has required organizations that receive its endorsement to sign agreements shielding the identity of donors. Public interest groups said the alliance represents a large source of undisclosed and unaccountable political influence.

Democracy Alliance also has left some Washington political activists concerned about what they perceive as a distinctly liberal tilt to the group's funding decisions. Some activists said they worry that the alliance's new clout may lead to groups with a more centrist ideology becoming starved for resources.

Democracy Alliance was formed last year with major backing from billionaires such as financier George Soros and Colorado software entrepreneur Tim Gill. The inspiration, according to founders, was a belief that Democrats became the minority party in part because liberals do not have a well-funded network of policy shops, watchdog groups and training centers for activists equivalent to what has existed for years on the right.

What network on the right? The left simply cannot understand why they keep getting beaten and blame it on a conspiracy. It has a lot more to do with them having a) bad ideas and b) not being able to articulate even those bad ideas without alienating the center. Conservatives learned how to argue their ideas effectively long ago. One thing that shows you what the problem is comes from this comment:

"Like a lot of elite groups, we fly beneath the radar," said Guy Saperstein, an Oakland lawyer and alliance donor. But "we are not so stupid though," he said, to think "we can deny our existence."

There you have it. They are an "elite" that works in secret to gain political power. Want to preach conspiracy theory?

Mumbai Bombing Update

The Times of India is reporting that two people have confessed to the bombings of the commuter trains in Mumbai.

ON BOARD AIR INDIA ONE: Minutes after Air India One, the special aircraft carrying the PM to St Petersburg entered the airspace of Uzbekistan, National Security Adviser M K Narayanan handed over to Manmohan Singh a one-page note. It contained the confessions by two Pakistani fidayeen who have blasted a huge hole in Pakistan's protestations of innocence about ISI's involvement in last week's terror assault on Mumbai. This will give a major boost to the PM's plan to lobby world leaders for coming down hard on the sponsors of terrorism.

The two members of the jehadi suicide squad were arrested by security forces from central India, most probably from Madhya Pradesh, and have since provided significant details about the Mumbai mayhem as well as the larger anti-India terror campaign that ISI has assigned to favourite jehadi gang, Lashkar-e-Taiba. The arrests are described as "a significant catch".

Sources said the terrorists' disclosures will help the PM secure the support of leaders of the G-8 nations, as well as those of China, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Congo and Kazakhastan who are going to be there at St Petersburg for an "outreach session" against Pakistan sponsored terrorism. The PM indicated so much even before being apprised of the details of the confessions by the two jehadis by Narayanan.

He said he'd use the interactions to sensitise the world leaders to India's concerns about terrorism. Describing terrorism as a scourge that afflicts different parts of the world, Singh said: "I'd like leaders to stand united in the war against terror."

The PM's interaction with the media brought out his growing frustration with Pakistan as well as General Pervez Musharraf. Stating that the terror attack in Mumbai could not have been accomplished without "external support", he said improvement in ties would not be possible in the face of continued terrorism.

This is not a good situation. We have two nuclear armed ostensible allies at each other's throats. Someone needs to step in here - that would be a hint to the White House.

Blitz

September 7th, 1940 was the day that German Luftwaffe elements shifted their bombing from radar stations and airfields to civilian targets in London. The goal was to demoralize the populace and force a surrender. The appeasement policies of Neville Chamberlain had not worked in keeping Hitler's Germany in check. In fact, those policies has emboldened the leader of the Nazi party.

Today, the state of Israel has issued warnings to it's civilians in Tel Aviv and issued instructions on what to do when an alert sounds warning of incoming rocket attacks:

The IDF on Sunday told Israelis from Tel Aviv northward to "be alert."

The command said that in the event of a rocket strike, a siren will sound, alerting the public to seek shelter inside in a protected room or an area away from doors, windows and exterior walls.

Those caught outside at the time of the siren should enter a stairwell or get close to wall or shelter and lie down. The Home Front Command also told the public to await further instruction.

A barrage of Katyusha rockets fired by Hezbollah militants in Lebanon late Sunday landed in the lower Galilee's Jezreel Valley for the first time.

It might be to both Hezbollah's and it's puppetmaster Iran to remember how the the first Blitz worked out for Germany. In fact, the Iranian president should consult with the person who instigated the Blitz.

Oh wait, he's DEAD isn't he?

Still More Threats From Iran

Penraker has a number of important posts up about the various and sundry threats Iran is making, There are a lot, and the latest one is very specific in threatening the US directly.

Addressing the huge gathering of rightwingers in this holy city, he said, “The country that wants to attack Iran should know that it will pay a high price.“
He further said that the US does not dare attack Iran because if it does, Iran will endanger all its crucial interests.

“The geographical boundaries of our war with the US will not be restricted to the US territories, but its interests all be targeted all over the world,“ he said.

There are more threats as well, scroll down from the link.

Iran Dissembles

Iran has announced it is willing to talk about the package of incentives and penalties the West offered.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters in Tehran that, "We consider this package an appropriate basis, an acceptable basis (for talks)."

"Now is an appropriate opportunity for Iran and Europe to enter detailed negotiations," he said. "Sending the dossier to the U.N. Security Council means blocking and rejecting talks."

Asefi called on the eight major world powers meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, to choose dialogue with Iran.

"We can achieve acceptable results in this path," Asefi said.

Rice said at the Group of Eight meeting that Iran should contact European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, the envoy who delivered the proposal last month and has been meeting with Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani.

G-8 leaders were expected to discuss Iran's nuclear program at the summit but none directly addressed Asefi's comments.

"If the Iranians want to respond positively, I would hope that they would do so through the channel that is established between the six and the government of Iran, and that is Mr. Solana," Rice said. "There is, indeed, a very good proposal on the table that could be a basis for negotiations … There is also a path ahead to the Security Council on which we are now launched."

Iran has said specialized committees in key state agencies are studying the June 6 offer by the United States, Britain, China, France, Russia and Germany, and that it will formally respond in late August.

The key demand of the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany is that Iran stop enriching uranium during any negotiations.

I have to say, that given the events of the past week, I do not believe this sudden turnaround by Iran. I think they are playing for more time and playing the West for suckers. Iran is obviously behind all the activities in Israel, Gaza and Lebanon. It is rather improbable that they would suddenly sing another tune unless it suits their purpose.

Update: I'm apparently at odds with Captain Ed on this call. I'd rather he was right, but I fear I am instead.

Miscalculation

Hezbollah, and it's Iranian puppetmasters may have really, really overplayed their hand if this report is true.

Israel, with U.S. support, intends to resist calls for a cease-fire and continue a longer-term strategy of punishing Hezbollah, which is likely to include several weeks of precision bombing in Lebanon, according to senior Israeli and U.S. officials.

For Israel, the goal is to eliminate Hezbollah as a security threat — or altogether, the sources said. A senior Israeli official confirmed that Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah is a target, on the calculation that the Shiite movement would be far less dynamic without him.

For the United States, the broader goal is to strangle the axis of Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria and Iran, which the Bush administration believes is pooling resources to change the strategic playing field in the Middle East, U.S. officials say.

Whatever the outrage on the Arab streets, Washington believes it has strong behind-the-scenes support among key Arab leaders also nervous about the populist militants — with a tacit agreement that the timing is right to strike.

"What is out there is concern among conservative Arab allies that there is a hegemonic Persian threat [running] through Damascus, through the southern suburbs of Beirut and to the Palestinians in Hamas," said a senior U.S. official who requested anonymity because of sensitive diplomacy. "Regional leaders want to find a way to navigate unease on their streets and deal with the strategic threats to take down Hezbollah and Hamas, to come out of the crisis where they are not as ascendant."

Iran may be in for a serious surprise. In playing to become a a regional power, it is risking the wrath of other, non-Shia Arab nations who would really not see a splinter-sect theocratic power evolve. The fact that the Saudis themselves denounced Hezbollah's actions should be a red flag that Iran may not quite be sitting as pretty as their whackjob of a president thinks they are.

The Emptiness Of Moral Equivalency

My friend Rick from The Real Ugly American has a post up that shows what is so wrong and so very empty on the left. He took quite a lot of exception to the "incredible courage" of the photographer who "heroically" took a picture of a "heroic" Mahdi Army sniper "heroically" trying to kill Americans for the "heroic" New York Times. Which the NYT "heroically" published to much self-produced public gushing about how "heroic" they were.

I am still beyond anger at a recently published photo from New York Times Photographer Joao Silva of a Mahdi Militia sniper about to fire on American Soldiers.
Only by coincidence searching Memeorandum for other topics of the day did I come across this post by Glenn Greenwald. I felt compelled to ask him a question. Again I am stunned.

Here is my question:

Would you stand there and watch a terrorist shoot at Americans and take a picture?

Here was his answer:

Personally, I would not, because I’m not a jouranlist. But if I were a photographer assigned to that region and to cover the insurgency, of course I would. I’d want Americans to see the reality of the forces we are fighting, rather than suppressing their images.

Photographers should take pictures of all newsworthy events - good and bad. They’re journalists, not propagandists. I want to read about what the insurgents are doing and I want to see them doing it. That’s how people who want to know about the world thing, and it’s what journalists are supposed to do.

What good would possibly come from ignoring the insurgency and pretending that it didn’t exist? That’s what the Bush administration did for the last three years and look where it brought us.

I will address Mr. Greenwald’s nonsensical answer only by saying that it is beyond comprehension. How far removed do you have to be to become detached and unconcerned of the outcome of the event?

Would any of you stand silently and take a picture of a person preparing to shoot your mother, or brother, or child? How about your uncle?

How about the President of the United States, or a Senator? How about a General commanding American forces in a battle?

Would you as an American allow this to happen? Furthermore personally profit from it? Either financially or by gaining praise from your fellow feckless, unconscionable, amoral peers?

Mr. Greenwald posted a comment to Rick's post:

Personally if I were a journalist and happened to be in this position I would attempt to alert American forces to his position if possible or attempt to kill the sniper depending on the circumstances of the situation.

What I really don’t understand about people like you is you are always talking so tough from your house - calling on this photographer to risk his life even further and kill someone who is standing there holding a rifle. And yet you don’t do that yourself. If you think the photographer should be roaming around Iraq killing insurgents, seriously - why aren’t you doing that yourself?

What right do you have to demand that this photographer risk his life in a way that you obviously won’t do yourself?

Comment by Glenn Greenwald � July 16, 2006 @ 12:18 pm

Which, I think shows the emptiness of the moral equivalency that people like Mr. Greenwald espouse. Here's a shocker for you, Mr. Greenwald, I have a very personal stake in this matter. Not a theoretical stance, not a smartass, smarmy, self-righteous "position" on it. A personal stake. It could have been my son on the other end of that sniper's sights. Want to try to lecture me about what I am and am not willing to do? Want to make book on it?

Mr. Greenwald, by your logic, if you are not an expert on any given subject you are not allowed to comment. If you are not willing to take additional risks, you have no right to comment. I expect you will be closing your blog immediately. For you do not have any military experience, but you comment on the military. You don't have any published credentials on a number of subjects you comment on, but you seem to have no trouble commenting. You are a lawyer. You might be competent to discuss that, although I have no proof of that. So you'll of course immediately refrain from discussing anything but the law, right? I mean, you want to live up to the standard you demand from others, right?

Rick hits this one just right, in my opinion. Greenwald just shows how shallow and clueless he and his political beliefs are. There is right and wrong in the world, Mr. Greenwald. I think you've shown which side you live on.

UPDATE: Oh, and by the way, Mr. Greenwald, you really need to read what Sarge wrote in comments. It kind of puts your equivalency in perspective. Better than I could, since he's over there, Mr. Greenwald. While you're pontificating from where? Oh, your house.

UPDATE: The prediction I made earlier about the - ahem - "news" that the NYT saw fit to print would cost them is already coming true. The Anchoress' husband cancelled his subscription today. My guess is there are a lot more than just him. Have a nice day, Pinch. Next board meeting, buddy.

Something Small / Something Big

My son, serving his second tour in Iraq, just sent in this post that he wanted me to share.

Last night I wrote an email to my father about the situation in the Middle East. For the past several months, Iran has been a toxic element in this area, feeding anti-American and anti-Semitic interests money, weapons, and support. I'm tired of it. I'm tired of the world at large tolerating dictators and terrorists. This is the fight of our lives, and if we don't stand united against this threat it will throw the entire planet into chaos. But I digress.

Shortly after I sent that email my fiancée got online and we talked for several hours, and when we parted digital ways for the night, I realized I felt better. So what changed? The Middle East didn't get any less dangerous or volatile in that span of time. It's still going to be several months before I rotate back to the world. Why did I suddenly feel better about the future and life in general? Simple. I spent an evening talking to the best thing in my life, and that put things in perspective. In this day and age of 24/7 news coverage, it's easy to get wrapped up in problems abroad: war, politics, and scandals it's easy to forget that there is beauty in this world. I think my father, in his way, tries to remind people of that with his humor and his photos.

Most of what I post on this site is some kind of doom and gloom. I'm not saying we should ignore the issues around us, but we all need to remember the good things that make life worthwhile. Good friends, good food, good times. Sunrise and sunset. A child's laughter. If everyone everywhere spent more energy on the good things in their lives, maybe the world wouldn't have so many problems.

Oh well. I'm off my soapbox now. Before I send this out though, let me share something with you: the topic of my conversation with my fiancée was our wedding. Next month.

Good things.

(My son and his bride-to-be will marry while he is home on leave from Iraq.)

Pool Harbor - Week One

I wrote about my Father's Day surprise (or sentence depending on how you look at it) yesterday. After a week of battling I've gotten it from this:

To This:

And all it's taken is the replacement of a defective pool filter, Lots of playing with interesting chemical substances (did you know muriatic acid fumes on exposure to air?), enough of those interesting chemicals to put a severe dent in the local supplies, approximately 2,000 gallons of sweat and quite a few interesting new linguistic constructs expressing my joy and good cheer at my Father's Day gift.

For those of you who don't have a pool or who are fortunate enough to be able to pay someone to do all the work, pools are a lot of work, especially at first. (And this is all tongue in cheek, by the way. My family will get a lot of enjoyment out of the pool. Even if it kills me.)

Israel And It’s American Lobby

Frankly, this article from the Washington Post starts out on it's first page sounding downright hostile to Israel. By the time you get to the end of it (if you do - it's five really long pages) it's not quite as bad. The problem is that a long article doesn't always get read all the way through. Here's the first part:

It's not that Olmert is a more commanding figure than Ben-Gurion. Far from it. No, it's about power. And not just Israeli power. It's really about the perceived power of the Israel lobby, a collection of American Jewish organizations, campaign contributors and think tanks — aided by Christian conservatives and other non-Jewish supporters — that arose over the second half of the 20th century and that sees as a principle goal the support and promotion of the interests of the state of Israel.

Thanks to the work of the lobby and its allies, Israel gets more direct foreign aid — about $3 billion a year — than any other nation. There's a file cabinet somewhere in the State Department full of memoranda of understanding on military, diplomatic and economic affairs. Israel gets treated like a NATO member when it comes to military matters and like Canada or Mexico when it comes to free trade. There's an annual calendar full of meetings of joint strategic task forces and other collaborative sessions. And there's a presidential pledge, re-avowed by Bush in the East Room, that the United States will come to Israel's aid in the event of attack.

On Capitol Hill the Israel lobby commands large majorities in both the House and Senate. Polls show strong public support for Israel — a connection that has grown even deeper after the September 11 attacks. The popular equation goes like this: Israelis equal good guys, Arabs equal terrorists. Working the Hill these days, says Josh Block, spokesman for the premier Israeli lobbying group known as AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, "is like pushing at an open door."

Not everyone believes this is a good thing. In March two distinguished political scientists — Stephen Walt from Harvard and John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago — published a 42-page, heavily footnoted essay arguing that the Bush administration's support for Israel and its related effort to spread democracy throughout the Middle East have "inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security."

The professors claim that our intimate partnership with Israel is both dangerous and unprecedented. "Other special interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest," they argue. They go on to say that the war in Iraq "was due in large part to the Lobby's influence," and that the same combine is "using all of the strategies in its playbook" to pressure the administration into being aggressive and belligerent with Iran. The bottom line: "Israel's enemies get weakened or overthrown, Israel gets a free hand with the Palestinians, and the United States does most of the fighting, dying, rebuilding and paying."

A sweet deal for Israel, in other words, but a very bad one for America.

Some of the lobby's critics hailed the essay as a much-needed breath of fresh air and praised Walt and Mearsheimer for their courage and — dare we say it — chutzpah. Their paper, wrote antiwar activist and media critic Norman Solomon in the Baltimore Sun, "is prying the lid off a debate that has been bottled up for decades."

Nobody has ever lobbied me to support Israel (although if I was to get a nice Desert Eagle in .50 caliber, I wouldn't object in the least) it's something I think is the right thing. They are a democracy in a part of the world where that word has a sick and twisted meaning. As a fairly diligent student of World War Two history, the wrongs that were done to the Jews needed to be addressed by the West. I have commenters here who do not agree with me in the least, which really doesn't bother me. Could it have been handled differently? Absolutely. Frankly, it would have been infinitely cheaper to BUY all the land in Israel from the Palestinians before setting up the nation.

Read the whole long article - and it is long - by the end, the Jewish lobby looks pretty good and the authors of the paper don't. But you really wouldn't know that from the beginning.

Huge News From The G-8

Although containing the usual language urging restraint on the part of Israel, the joint statement put out by the G-8 outright condemns Hezbollah and the terrorist elements that have caused the outbreak of war. This is pretty strong for that particular group.

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia - World leaders, managing to resolve sharp differences over an escalating crisis between Israel and Lebanon, declared Sunday that extremist groups in the region cannot be allowed to plunge the Middle East into chaos and must immediately halt their attacks.

The leaders of the world's eight industrial powers issued a strong statement condemning Hezbollah militants but also urged Israel to exercise restraint in its military actions against Lebanon.

The statement said it was critical for Israel to "be mindful of the strategic and humanitarian consequences of its actions." It called on Israel "to exercise utmost restraint" by seeking to avoid casualties among innocent civilians and damage to civilian infrastructure.

….

In their statement, the leaders expressed "deepening concern about the situation in the Middle East, in particular the rising civilian casualties on all sides and the damage to infrastructure." At least 130 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in Lebanon, while about a dozen Israeli civilians have lost their lives.

Merkel, speaking to reporters, said: "We do not want to let terrorist forces and those who support them have the opportunity to create chaos in the Middle East. Therefore we place value on clearly identifying the cause and effect of events."

She said the leaders believe that "first of all, that the Israeli soldiers must be returned unharmed, that the attacks on Israel must stop and that then, of course, also the Israeli military action must be ended."

Merkel also said they are "convinced that the government of Lebanon must be given all support and that the relevant U.N. resolutions regarding the south of Lebanon must also be implemented, and we also demand that in addition to the U.N. activities, another observation and security mission is established. That must be worked out through the U.N."

Almost right, Angela. It would best be worked out by Europe through NATO. That would be effective. The UN would not be.

Lebanese PM Disowns Hezbollah

From Beirut To The Beltway, a blog new to me, has information on the Lebanese Prime Minister's speech to the nation of Lebanon.

AT LAST!!! WHAT TOOK YOU SO LONG?

In an emotional address to the Lebanese people, PM Fouad Siniora declared Lebanon a disaster area, and called for 3 things:

1- An immediate cease fire brokered by the UN

2- The Lebanese state to extend its control over all lebanese territories with UN help. He vowed that Lebanese will additionally abide by the 1949 armstice agreement with Israel.

3- Called on Lebanon's friends to send humanitarian aid and economic assistance to Lebanon

Siniora condemned the unjustified Israeli aggression on Lebanon and held Israel responsible for the humanitarian catastrophy. Most importantly, he said the  "Lebanese state will not rise if it is the last to know."  He reiterated that he did not condone Hizbullah's operation (he did not call Hizbullah resistance).  He said "only the state has the right to make war decisions."

With this, Lebanon's prime minister has officially pulled the plug on Hizbullah. Yet his government is weak, which is why he asked for UN help.

I have said before that I doubted the UN would do a bit of good with the situation in Lebanon. But this is a huge opportunity for Europe to use NATO effectively and step up to do the right thing. Which is to disarm Hezbollah and help the Lebanese government back onto it's feet after years of Syrian abuse.

IAF Targets Launch Sites

Compare, if you will, these two scenarios: An armed group launches explosive laden rockets at civilians during rush hour. No warning, just a rain of rockets. Which is a war crime. Second scenario: Military authorities issue pleas to civilians to leave a certain area and announce airstrikes will be coming in several hours. This, of course, gives any bad elements warning of where attacks will be coming and increases the danger to the pilots flying the strike.

But that is exactly what Israel is doing. They are warning civilians to evacuate Southern Lebanon in a effort to minimize civilian casualties. Then they are going in and hitting every rocket launching site they can identify. They are also hitting every rocket storage area they can locate, including the ones that cowards secreted inside civilian homes. So as to use the civilian inhabitants as human shields. Which, by the way, is a war crime.

Israel Air Force jets attacked ten rocket launching sites in southern Lebanon on Sunday. According to the Israel Defense Forces, a mobile Hezbollah missile battery was hit in the strike.

The Israel Defense Forces on Sunday warned the residents of southern Lebanon to leave their homes within two hours, ahead of Israel Air Force attacks that would follow shortly after the deadline expires.

"We want to say to the population in the south of Lebanon, we want to avoid innocent victims, so we recommend them to leave their villages and homes and go to the north of the country and let us work in the south of Lebanon, because in two or three hours we are going to attack the south of Lebanon heavily," said GOC Northern Command Major General Udi Adam.

IAF strikes on Sunday killed at least 10 civilians and wounded scores in Lebanon's southern port city of Tyre, witnesses said. The strikes also hit the Dahiya neighborhood of Beirut and Baalbek in the Bekaa.

The warning came after a Hezbollah rocket attack killed eight people and wounded 19 others in the northern port city of Haifa.

"Hezbollah's actions do not surprise us," Adam told reporters. "They've been stockpiling these weapons for many years and the Lebanese government allowed this to happen."

He said that Hezbollah "is in Lebanon not to defend [the country] but to wait for the day they would be able to harm Israel. As far as we are concerned, there are no surprises, and only determination will change the situation."

"We have no intention of dragging Syria into this conflict and all of our steps are cautious and measured. The objective is to change the reality here in Israel and this is why our targets in Lebanon keep changing," he said.

"We have a pretty good idea where they are launching their rockets from - villages and small communities - and [as such] we have warned civilian residents to evacuate their homes," he said.

The deafening silence of the left, except to criticize Israel speaks volumes about them. Where are the UN denunciations of the war crimes the Hezbollah terrorists are committing?

NYT Sees Shark, Jumps Same

This is the most clearcut, open admission of the New York Times utter and complete bias that they could possibly come up with. The first paragraph says it all:

It is only now, nearly five years after Sept. 11, that the full picture of the Bush administration’s response to the terror attacks is becoming clear. Much of it, we can see now, had far less to do with fighting Osama bin Laden than with expanding presidential power.

This just floors me. Literally puking up the farthest of the far left's talking points and stating them as pure fact. One could point out that what the NYT sees as "expanding presidential power" could just as easily be argued as "reclaiming powers improperly grabbed by Congress". But that argument would fall on deaf ears, for the gray lady is completely senile at this point.

Over and over again, the same pattern emerges: Given a choice between following the rules or carving out some unprecedented executive power, the White House always shrugged off the legal constraints. Even when the only challenge was to get required approval from an ever-cooperative Congress, the president and his staff preferred to go it alone. While no one questions the determination of the White House to fight terrorism, the methods this administration has used to do it have been shaped by another, perverse determination: never to consult, never to ask and always to fight against any constraint on the executive branch.

One result has been a frayed democratic fabric in a country founded on a constitutional system of checks and balances. Another has been a less effective war on terror.

Nothing about the NYT's complicity in exposing legal programs with proper, even excessive, oversight. Nothing about a newspaper that thinks it's proper to publish pictures of Iraqi gunmen trying to kill Americans. Nothing about the incessant attempts by the NYT to undermine the administration and morale both here and among our troops.

This entire editorial stinks like a week old fish left lying in the sun.

Keller gone by the end of summer. Pinch gone at the next shareholder's meeting. And this editorial alone should be enough to drop the NYT circulation figure by another couple percentage points.

Iran Issues More Threats

Iran issued still more threats against Israel, this time warning of "unimaginable losses". Does anyone doubt these guys will use atomic weapons as soon as they have them? Seriously?

Iran warned its arch-enemy Israel of "unimaginable losses" if it attacks Syria and vowed that it was standing by the Syrian people.

"We hope the Zionist regime does not make the mistake of attacking Syria, because extending the front would definitely make the Zionist regime face unimaginable losses," foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters.

"Iran is standing by the Syrian people," he said of the Islamic republic's sole regional ally.

"We have offered and will offer Syria and Lebanon spiritual and humanitarian support," Asefi insisted, reiterating Iran's denial that it is providing military and financial assistance to the Hezbollah movement.

The Israeli army has said Hezbollah militants had used an Iranian-built radar-guided anti-ship missile in an attack on Friday on an Israeli warship off Lebanon's coast.

There's still more, too:

He also hit out at the United States after President George W. Bush said Israel had "every right to defend itself".

"The United States has had a destructive role by vetoing resolutions and hence encouraging the Israeli crimes," Asefi said, referring to Washington's use of its veto in the UN Security Council Thursday to block a resolution calling for a halt to an Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip.

"The United States should reconsider its policies and correct its wrong attitude of supporting the Zionist regime."

On Friday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasted that Israel was not powerful enough to take on Iran and also warned against an attack against Syria.

"Thanks be to God, despite its criminal and savage nature, the Zionist regime and its supporters in the West do not have the power to look in the same way towards Iran," the fiercely anti-Israeli president said.

"If Israel commits another act of idiocy and aggresses Syria, this will be the same as an aggression against the entire Islamic world and it will receive a stinging response," Ahmadinejad said in a telephone conversation with his Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad.

The transparency of the involvement should be obvious to everyone. Their threats give them away.