Look For This Man

Not to get all hysterical about this, but there are reports that al Qaeda is planning to hit the US again. Authorities really want to get their hands on this man to talk with him. There is a $5 million reward for his capture, so there is considerable incentive to report him if you see him.

Date of Birth Used: August 4, 1975 Hair: Black
Place of Birth: Saudi Arabia Eyes: Black
Height: 5'3" to 5'6" Sex: Male
Weight: 132 pounds Complexion: Dark, Mediterranean
Build: Average      
Remarks: El Shukrijumah occasionally wears a beard. He has a pronounced nose and is asthmatic. El Shukrijumah speaks English and carries a Guyanese passport, but may attempt to enter the United States with a Saudi, Canadian, or Trinidadian passport.

If you have any information at all, contact the FBI.

It Makes You Wonder

I grew up during the height of the cold war. I remember doing "duck and cover" drills in the hall of my first elementary school. A dubious exercise at best since there were large glass skylights in the hallways there. But we were always told that we were not alone. We were part of a bigger organization: NATO. If the Soviets attacked, it would be all of Western Europe that would stand with us. A mutual stand against an invasion or aggression, not just the US alone. An attack on one of us would be considered an attack on all of us. We would all respond as one.

Now NATO is even larger than it was then, More nations have been admitted to the venerable North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Yet, the alliance cannot seem to meet the commitments it has made. So it is that forces in Afghanistan are pushed to the limit because no reinforcements are at hand.

BRUSSELS — More than a week after NATO's top leaders publicly demanded reinforcements for their embattled mission in southern Afghanistan, only one member of the 26-nation alliance has offered more troops, raising questions about NATO's largest military operation ever outside of Europe and the goal of expanding its global reach.

The plea for more soldiers and equipment to fight a resurgent Taliban insurgents comes as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's forces are suffering the highest casualty rates of the nearly five-year-long conflict in Afghanistan, and as European governments are feeling stretched by the demands for troops there and in Iraq, Lebanon, the Balkans and in several African countries.

"NATO's credibility and future are at stake in Afghanistan," said Pierre Lellouche, president of the French delegation in NATO's parliamentary assembly. "They can't fail, otherwise NATO will lose its credibility."

"It's our most important mission, it's our first priority," NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said in an interview at his office here, describing the ongoing combat with the Taliban in southern Afghanistan as "the most intense battle NATO has fought in its history."

Some members of the alliance complain that others are not contributing enough soldiers or equipment, leaving a handful of countries shouldering most of the burden for a high-stakes mission that is becoming increasingly treacherous.

Though no members have criticized others by name, eight of the 26 countries are providing more than three-fourths of the alliance's 20,000 troops now in Afghanistan. Many members are providing fewer than 200 troops. Poland, for example, has contributed only 10 soldiers to the mission, according to NATO officials, although it pledged last week to send about 1,000 more.

There are a lot of excuses coming out of the member states right now. Too many commitments in Bosnia, too much else going on. Risk is more than we thought. Cost is too high. Iraq is draining too many resources. The excuses are endless, the dodging of treaty responsibilities endless. The hiding behind excuses apparently bottomless. The commitment: negligible.

It makes one wonder. Would we really have been able to stand off an invasion of Western Europe? Not because of lack of talent or ability on the part of the NATO soldiers, but because of the failure of will of their governments.

It makes you wonder.

Obama Going To Try It?

All the signs appear to be pointing to it. The tea leaves indicate that Barack Obama wants to take a shot at the presidency. Of course, my particular tea leaf reader may or may not be calibrated properly. But Obama was the keynote speaker at an annual event Tom Harkin holds in Iowa today. He tried to take a tough stance on defense and security, too.

INDIANOLA, Iowa - Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., warned Democratic activists Sunday that the party must take a tougher stance on national security if it wants to succeed in the November elections.

"What Democrats have to do is to close the deal," said Obama, the keynote speaker at Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin's 29th annual steak fry. "We have got to show we have a serious agenda for change."

Obama's appearance in Iowa, where precinct caucuses launch the presidential season, has raised a number of eyebrows about his intentions for a presidential run in 2008. Though only a first-term senator, Obama has burst onto the national scene.

But he wouldn't say Sunday whether he was considering a run at the White House.

"My only attentions right now are focused on '06," said Obama. "Whoever is looking toward 2008 without focusing on 2006 makes a mistake."

Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner also spent Sunday afternoon at the steak fry, and left little doubt that he is looking ahead to 2008.

"You know and I know that it all starts in Iowa," Warner told the audience. "Do your part. We're going to take back the Congress this year and then we're going to take back our nation."

This could get interesting if Obama tries a run. One difference - at least as far as the reporting here. Obama appears to be running for something. Warner is running against.

That may make all the difference in the world.

The War Between Tolerance And Intolerance

Apparently, the organizers of the Islamist protest that occurred today in London are unable to differentiate between the Anglican church and the Roman Catholic church. Since they formed their hate line across from the former instead of the latter. the typical gathering of really brave people wearing face coverings as well. The same mentality that shoots elderly nuns in the back, because they are brave Jihadis.

We have a major problem that too many Westerners are helping create. By giving extremists a pass on rules of civilized behavior, even more extreme behavior is encouraged. Such as this. Picketing Anglican worshipers for some sadly very true words the Pope spoke.

A Letter To The Pope

Ed Morrisey has an open letter to the Pope which is worth reading.

If Islam is ever to peacefully co-exist with other faiths in the manner that Christendom finally learned how to do, then it has to start abiding questions and criticisms without resorting to violence. Islam has to learn to persuade and to attract people through reason, not through forced conversions and coexistence through violent supremacy. Muslim leaders around the world still believe that our faith can only exist at their sufferance, and any question of their doctrinal beliefs has to be met with violence or demands for apologies, not with rhetoric, facts, and reason.

We cannot enable that to continue. We must demand that they renounce violence and intimidation. When you apologize and retreat, they understand that as a triumph for their religion, a victory won with force and threats rather than through intellectual engagement. This encourages more of the same. The West had the opportunity to stand up to the same angry hordes earlier this year during the controversy over the Danish editorial cartoons that depicted Mohammed, and many of us gave into the threats and violence rather than stand up for the freedom of speech, religious practice, and editorial commentary. In both cases, Muslims ironically proved the point of the criticism leveled at them.

Do not apologize for speaking the truth. Stand up to the threats and violence and make the world understand that no one of any faith or of no faith at all has to be cowed or intimidated into silence. Your predecessor, John Paul the Great, risked his life by providing a beacon of courage against the might and will of Communism, and he outlived it in the end. We won't outlive the violent nature of radical Islam, but we can provide the basis for Christianity's survival by standing against it now.

Please read the whole thing. Captain Ed notes that Michelle Malkin has published the email address to send Pope Benedict XVI a message of support. Please do so if you can. You know there will be others sending hate. Let's see if we can overwhelm the negative with the positive. I'll be working on an email myself.

Hard Words - About Time

The Howard government in Australia has taken a hard line with a meeting of Imams. The multicultural spokesman (Good Lord, they have such a position?) told the 100 assembled Muslims who preach at Australian mosques some hard truths.

The Howard Government's multicultural spokesman, Andrew Robb, yesterday told an audience of 100 imams who address Australia's mosques that these were tough times requiring great personal resolve.
Mr Robb also called on them to shun a victim mentality that branded any criticism as discrimination.

"We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of your faith," Mr Robb said at the Sydney conference.

"And because it is your faith that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem.

"You can't wish it away, or ignore it, just because it has been caused by others.

"Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share here in Australia."

Mr Robb said unless Muslims took responsibility for their destiny and tackled the causes of terrorism, Australia would become divided.

Mr Robb, the parliamentary secretary for immigration and multicultural affairs, said it was important for migrants to learn English.

It is vital that those Muslims who do not want to be lumped together with the Islamists reject those people, loud, long and often. Too often, advocates and spokesmen invoke the victim card and direct it at the wrong people. The people who are making moderate Muslims victims are the Islamists, not the Western governments.

Don’t Pass Out, Pass Over

A beer that started with a joke is celebrating its tenth anniversary. Jeremy Cowan and some friends thought it would be fun for Jews to have their own beer. He'Brew was the result, but after a decade and over 2 million bottles sold, it's no laughing matter.

NEW YORK - A company that started out as a joke celebrates ten years in business. Founder Jeremy Cowan says that starting out, he and his friends just thought it would be fun for Jews to have their own beer and brewed up something called "He'Brew." Ten years later, with 2 million bottles sold, it's not a joke anymore.

Cowan says he likes the beer, but wouldn't want to abandon the inside joke that started it all, the punch line being "don't pass out, pass over."

Here's the website for the Shmaltz Brewing Company, makers of He'Brew, Genesis 10:10 and a (heavenly) host  of other brews. Now I have to see if I can find any of this, though that's probably really unlikely in the midwest. You have to love a product that has a sense of humor.

Iran, Venezuela And Mexico

This is not a particularly good set of developments. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is visiting Hugo Chavez and have announced an anti-US front.

Chavez, who Washington calls a destabilizing, anti-democratic force, cast the visit as two countries jointly defying what he says is the imperialist aggression of the world's only superpower.

"Iran is one of the emerging countries of Asia, the Middle East. Venezuela is one of the emerging countries of Latin America," he told a state-owned TV network. "It is a union that seeks a balance in the world and to save the future of your children, my children and our grandchildren."

"It is doing the world a favor," he said.

Buoyed by high oil prices that underpin their popularity at home and tapping into anti-American sentiment around the world, both presidents are awkward foes for the United States.

"Two revolutions are giving each other a hand," Chavez said at the capital's airport where he welcomed Ahmadinejad, chatting with him and walking with his arm across the visitor's shoulders.

Iran established an Islamic republic after a 1979 revolution that ousted a U.S.-backed leader and Chavez says he is creating his own revolution to overturn capitalist and U.S. influence in the South American country.

Iranian-Venezuelan ties have previously focused almost exclusively on cooperation as major oil exporters, but the two leaders emphasized their new bond in standing up to America.

"Nowadays, we have common goals and interests," Ahmadinejad said. "We have to be united … to achieve peace and justice."

"I salute all the revolutionaries who oppose world hegemony," he added in an apparent reference to the United States.

And, at the same time, Chavez has publicly accused the government of Mexico of fraud in the recent presidential election and has withheld diplomatic recognition of the new president-elect, Felipe Calderon. The Mexican government is reevaluating diplomatic relations with Venezuela as a result.

Chavez said last week that his government had not recognized the victory of Mexican ruling party candidate Felipe Calderon because of concerns about alleged election irregularities.

Chavez apparently expanded on his allegations Saturday when interviewed by CNN at the Nonaligned Movement summit in Havana. According to a CNN anchor, Chavez again accused Mexico's conservative National Action Party of stealing the election, and said Calderon's campaign had "destroyed" the opportunity for good relations with Venezuela.

Attack ads by the National Action Party compared leftist candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador to Chavez, calling the candidate "a danger for Mexico."

"The Mexican government rejects completely the judgments expressed about the Mexican electoral process and its results," Mexico's foreign ministry said in an e-mail to reporters. "Even though false, they constitute an inadmissible intervention in the internal affairs of our country."

"The Mexican government is evaluating the level of relations it will maintain with the government of Venezuela for the rest of this administration," it continued.

Time to investigate who is writing the checks for AMLO. This is getting very close to an act of of war. It would cross that line, I think, if Chavez recognizes AMLO. Mexican leftists need to wake up and realize they are being used as tools by the Axis of Egos. Chavez is fomenting civil war in another country and wants a seat on the UN Security Council.

People in this country better damn well stop showing the kind of disarray we have been or there will be a conflict.

Switching Headlines Again

The AP does it again. I've noted the dishonest way that the AP changes headlines and stories without mentioning that they have been revised. Here's yet another egregious change that caught the RCP Blog.

Since I was the one who published the AP story yesterday and was 100% sure that I copied the original headline at the time (between 6:30 and 7:30am), I did a little investigating.

First, you can see pretty clearly that the original headline, "GOP Gains Ground In Battle For Congress," was written based off of the copy in paragraphs six and seven:

Seven weeks before congressional elections, the poll of 1,501 adults conducted Monday through Wednesday showed that the GOP offensive has helped Republicans gain some ground.

Bush's public support has increased — 40 percent of likely voters approve of his job performance — and Republicans have erased an advantage Democrats had last month on the measure of which party would best protect the country. Voters now view Republicans and Democrats as equally capable.

As it turns out, a Google search this morning turned up at least one major media outlet still carrying the original headline:

Go over and take a look, there are screen shots of the switcheroo.

Murder And Mayhem

A Roman Catholic nun has been murdered in Somalia. Are the "clerics" pimping violence pleased with themselves? They murdered a woman who was apparently a nursing sister and was ginned down in a hospital. Shot in the back.

The nun, who was not immediately identified, was shot in the back at S.O.S. Hospital in northern Mogadishu by two gunmen, said Mohamed Yusuf, a doctor at the facility, which serves mothers and children. The nun's bodyguard and a hospital worker were also killed, doctors said.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack, and it was not clear if it was directly linked to the pope's comments. Two people had been arrested, said Yusuf Mohamed Siad, head of security for the Islamic militia that controls Mogadishu.

Earlier Sunday, a Somali cleric criticized the comments the pope made in a speech last week for offending Muslims. The pope had cited the words of a Byzantine emperor who characterized some of the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, Islam's founder, as "evil and inhuman."

"The pope's statement at this time was not only wrong but irresponsible as well," said Sheik Nor Barud, deputy leader of the Somali Muslim Scholars Association.

"Both the Pope and the Byzantine Emperor he quoted are ignorant of Islam and it is noble Prophet," he told journalists at a news conference in the capital Mogadishu.

The intolerant continue to escalate this situation and whip their followers into a frothing rage. It is simply mind-boggling that the irresponsible media continues to carry the words that are spinning this situation out of control.

What The Heck Is Up With Boobies?

I'm looking around the blogosphere today and one of the biggest, baddest hot topics appears to be boobies. Which , while understandable in some circles is unfathomable in others. Nonetheless some folks are more worked up than usual about the subject and are spinning up a regular frenzy about it.

So we thought we'd help pour some gasoline on the fire by linking a picture of a nice pair of boobies.

Oh, and a pretty hot chick, too.

Oh, and about the other kind of important topic of the weekend:

Not Between Christianity And Islam

The Sunday Times has an analysis that points out what is really going on right now with the ruckus being stirred up over some remarks made by Pope Benedict XVI. It actually has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity versus Islam. It has nothing to do with any specific religion. It is both less and more than that.

The clash of civilisations is not between Christianity and Islam, it is between nations that encourage religious diversity and those which practise religious intolerance. It is between those who favour open debate and those who think free speech is anathema. The Pope may or may not have known what a hornets’ nest he was stirring up. Even if he did, there was nothing inappropriate, within context, in what he said.

I think that boils the whole issue down to the bare bones. The loudest screeching is coming from Islamists and those clerics who back and excuse Islamism. Politicians in Muslim-dominated nations are jumping on the bandwagon to appease Islamists and appear strong on the issue. This is a tolerance-intolerance issue playing out, not a religious one.

The Vatican has said he is very sorry his speech caused such offence to Muslims. That is fine but it should not go further than that. He should certainly not be pushed into withdrawing his remarks. As in the case of the Danish cartoons, Muslim zealots are trying to impose their restrictions of free expression on the West. Mindful as we should be of religious sensitivities, that cannot be allowed to happen.

Even though Benedict again today apologized for how his remarks caused offense, the usual suspects are clamoring that more is needed. The Pope should not give these people anything more by way of apology. He has nothing to apologize for.

H/T to Beachhutman who tipped me to this article in comments.

Why It Is Not A Good Idea

To argue statistics with an engineer. Coyote Blog literally dismantles both an article by Kevin Drum and one from the New York Times at the same time, using the same statistics. Pure entertainment.

On its face, California's numbers are impressive.  The CEC's numbers show California to have the lowest per capita electricity use in the nation, using electricity at half the national rate and one quarter the "least efficient" states.

This would be really cool if it were true that a few simple public policy steps could cut per capital energy consumption in half.  Unfortunately, though I am willing to posit California is better than average (as any state would be with a mild climate and newer housing), the data doesn't say what Drum and the article are trying to make it say. 

The consumption data is from here.  You can see that there are three components that matter - residential, commercial, and industrial.  Residential and commercial electricity consumption may or may not be fairly apples to apples comparable between states (more in a minute).  Industrial consumption, however, will not be comparable, since the mix of industries will change radically state by state.  As an extreme example, states with high aluminum production or oil refining or steel making, which are electricity intensive, will have a higher per capita industrial electricity consumption, irrespective of public policy.  The graph Drum and the NY Times uses includes industrial consumption, which is a mistake — it is more reflective of industry mix than true energy efficiency.

Take two of the higher states on the list.  Wyoming, at the top of the per capita consumption list, has industrial electricity consumption as a whopping 58% of total state consumption.  KY, also near the top, has industrial consumption at 50% of total demand.  The US average is industrial consumption at 29% of total demand.  CA, NY, and NJ, all near the bottom of the list in terms of per capital demand, have industrial use as 20.6%, 15.1%, and 16% respectively.  So rather than try to correlate electricity consumption to local energy regulations, it is clear that the per capita consumption numbers by state are a much better indicator of the presence of heavy industry. In other words, the graph Drum shows is actually a better illustration of the success of CA not in necessarily becoming more efficient, but in exporting its pollution to other states.  No one in their right mind would even attempt to build a heavy industrial plant in CA in the last 30 years.  The graph is driven much more by the growth of industrial electricity use outside CA relative to CA.

Do read it all, it really is a rather good example of how to really read data as opposed to misusing data to advance a political agenda.

The Shame Of The Muslim World

Writing in the National Post, Father Raymond J. de Souza says the rioting caused by the words of Pope Benedict XVI "shames the Muslim world". He is quite correct, here. It is past time to say some of the things he brings out in his article.

Benedict was quoting a 14th-century Christian emperor, under siege from the Ottomans, defending the position that spreading religion by violence is contrary to the nature of God. The Emperor, quite reasonably given his circumstances, suggested to his Persian interlocutor such a view did not prevail in Islamic thought.

In response to this historical excursus in an academic lecture by one of the world's most erudite theologians, we are witnessing a wave of madness and malice, no doubt an embarrassment to millions of Muslims.

Roman Catholics are likely angry. Relations between adherents of the two religions simply cannot develop without all conducting themselves as mature adults.

It does a disservice to children to call the wild-eyed statements and deranged behaviour of the past days childish.

It is not only the obscenity of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist terrorist band suppressed in several Muslim states, demanding an apology from anyone, let alone the Holy Father.

It is not only the grandstanding Pakistani politicians passing resolutions condemning a papal speech few read, and even fewer understood. It is not only the extraneous charges about the Holocaust and Hitler by the agitated and excited.

It is that we have seen this before.

When Pope John Paul II made his epic pilgrimage to the Holy Land, Palestinian Muslim representatives jostled him on the Temple Mount, shouted at him, and, in one episode of maximum rudeness, abandoned him on stage during an interfaith meeting. Bashir Assad, the Syrian President, treated him to an anti-Semitic rant when the late pope visited Syria.

Catholic goodwill toward global Islam is severely attenuated by such continued maltreatment of our universal pastors.

And it is well past time that the maltreatment of history ceased too.

The irony of the accusations that Pope Benedict has a "Crusader mentality" is that he was speaking about the period in which the Crusades themselves took place.

Father de Souza makes a number of very good points. Trying to unravel the history of the Middle East at this late date and figure out who wronged who first is pointless. Trying to open a dialog is not. But rioting in response to words does not advance a dialog. Having terrorist front groups treated as legitimate sources for criticism of the Pope is madness. This is the shame Islamists have brought onto the Muslim world. The words of the Pope did not do this. The people who are driving the rioters did.

Politics As High School

Interesting opinion piece in the Washington Post today from Stuart Stevens, who is a partner in a media firm that worked on George W. Bush's presidential campaigns. While he is, quite obviously, pro-Bush, his words are well worth reading.

As far as organizing principles of life go, I've never found anything that beat the theory that all life imitates high school. It's pretty much foolproof and covers almost all of the universe's difficult questions, such as why scientific studies show 82 percent of all males want to punch Tucker Carlson when he wears a bow tie and why some political candidates react the way they do to a president's popularity.

Visualize, if you will, the president of the United States as the ultimate high school quarterback. When the team is winning and he's on a hot streak, all flock to him in the great cafeteria of life. But when the team is losing, suddenly there are a lot of empty seats at his lunch table and downcast eyes as he's passed in the hall. If you're that quarterback, you find out pretty quickly who your real friends are.

Actually, the "life as high school" theory is not at all a new one. I've often noted the same phenomenon. It really doesn't change much as you get older, does it? His point here is that Republican candidates should be running their own races, not get sucked into a referendum on the president. He's quite right. The Democrats want desperately to nationalize the election into a vote on Bush and Bush's policies. Getting sucked into that is not a good idea for Republican candidates for a simple reason: voters are not stupid.

One of the dirty little secrets of politics is that presidential endorsements rarely have any positive impact. In 1986, Republicans went into the off-year elections believing that their strongest card was the popularity of President Ronald Reagan, especially in those red states. It seemed axiomatic to end the campaign by giving the ball to the Big Guy, and race after race closed with endorsement spots of Reagan doing what he did best, looking straight at the camera and suggesting that if you wanted to help him, you'd vote for Candidate X. And then most of those candidates proceeded to lose. In one tight race after another — such as those involving GOP Sens. Mack Mattingly of Georgia, Jeremiah Denton of Alabama and Paula Hawkins of Florida — candidates saw their numbers flatten when the Reagan endorsement aired, then spike downward to defeat. These were all states in which Reagan's numbers were through-the-roof positive, but voters seemed to say, "Thanks very much, Mr. President, it's nice that you're supporting a fellow Republican, but what does that have to do with me?"

The flip side of the marginal positive effect of a presidential endorsement is the limited negative impact that comes from being associated with a president of your own party, regardless of his popularity. It's hardly a secret that if you're a Republican candidate you happen to be in the same party as Bush. If there's a Republican candidate out there who thinks he or she can slip that little factoid past the electorate, well, good luck, and good riddance.

He's exactly right here. One of the facts of politics is that regardless of what voters may think about Congress as a group, most voters feel differently about their own representatives. Trying to run a local campaign as a national referendum is not going to really help either side. But if the Republicans fall into this trap, they may well hurt themselves at the local level. (The converse applies as well. If local Democrats run against Bush instead of against the local Republican candidate, they will likely lose the voter's attention.)

My advice to Republican candidates is that they first must come to grips with the rationale for their own election: Why me? Why now? If in their hearts they disagree with the Iraq war, they should call it like they see it, but without trying to nuance a response seven ways from Sunday in hopes of pleasing all sides. That's French for ending up like John Kerry. Elections are littered with losers who have a need to be loved by everyone.

I think that is sound advice.