Quid Nimis

I was very pleased to see this get coverage in the politics blog of the Washington Times:

More than 70 universities across the country will participate in “Islamo Fascism Awareness Day” teach-ins on April 19. Senator John Kyl and former Senator Rick Santorum have agreed to host showings at Arizona State and Georgetown. Former Cincinnati Reds pitcher and current radio talk show host Frank Pastore will host a showing at UCLA, and “Battlelines” talk show host Alan Nathan will do the same at George Washington U. Bay Area radio personality Melanie Morgan will host the showing at San Francisco State University, and Atlanta talk show host Martha Zoller will do the same at the Georgia Tech.

The event will consist of showings of “Obsession,” a documentary about the terrorist threat from Islamic militants. The film uses interviews with authorities on the Middle East, former jihadists, and experts on terrorism to take the viewer inside the worldview and plans for world domination of radical Islam. Following the film, there will be town hall-style dialogues about terrorism, the U.S. response in Iraq and elsewhere, and other issues. Some campuses will mark the event by other activities, including panel discussions by writers and thinkers on the terrorist threat.

Columbia University, Duke, Dartmouth, the University of Colorado, Georgia Tech, University of Texas, Notre Dame, Boston College, Ohio State, and the University of California at Davis are among the campuses that will participate in Islamo-Fascism Awareness Day on April 19.

Obsession was aired on Fox five times the weekend before the November elections, but I'm not sure anyone noticed.  I've only seen a 27 minute version, but it is excellent and chilling.  It should be required viewing in every grade of every high school in the country.

Anyway, I'll go to the UT  event.  They had a Palestinian Awareness Weekend a couple of weeks ago, complete with a performance of "I am Rachel Corrie," know here at Quid as "I am Pancake."  I had the flier here somewhere...workshops on how to get that bomb belt for your body type..."Kefiyehs: Political Statement as Indispensable Fashion Accessory"...."Just Blame the Jews: One Rule for Highly Successful Palestinians,"  and the list goes on.

So where are we now?  Up to our eyeballs in Depends jokes.  A little too close to home for me, thanks.  I'm moving my mother to nursing care next week.  No pathology, just lots of stress.  The personal care home, which is lovely and close, can't take her cat, who is extremely handsome, friendly, and playful.  Any takers?

Anna Nicole Smith is dead.  Is she a Democrat?  I think a dead person in the presidential race would add to an already diverse selection, and now that John Kerry has declined to run, that slot is still open.

Gavin Newsome is in huge political trouble because he's been outed ... as a heterosexual.  Well, you gay guys: now you know how we felt when we learned that Rock was light in the loafers.  Oh, Gav's an adulterer who betrayed his closest aide, but that's beside the point.  Oh, go listen to some Barry Manilow records and get over yourselves.

On a completely different note -unless I start talking about Yasser Arafat-  I am always fascinated by the news footage of meetings that take place in Saudi Arabia and places Middle Eastern.  I indulge in a bit of Eurocentric aesthetic snobbery and enjoy judging the decor of the meeting rooms relentlessly.   In short, all of these places look tacky tacky tacky and I don't mind saying so.  Like this big Terrorist Meet today in Mecca, where Hamas and Fatah finally agreed in principle to stop shooting at each other (if they honor this cease fire the way they have all of the others, I believe we are in luck).  I look at the room and it's a big square with armchairs all around the perimeter, backed by heavy velvet drapes.  It's carpeted with a cream carpet with a design that looks like Arabic script and there are little coffee/occasional tables that are off-white with gilt accents between and in front of the chairs.  All of the furniture looks like Jean-Paul Sartre Huis Clos This-Must-Be-Hell Empire Style.  I thought the arrangement was unpleasant, if for no other reason than if you have a private adjustment to make, an itch or something, there is no way you can take care of it discreetly.  But then, if you are a Wahhabi, maybe you don't care who sees you scratch whatever gets the itch. I mean, it's always just us guys, like you're in some big velvety locker room.   Furthermore, there were these big gift platters of dates wrapped in cellophane with gold bows that had evidently been given to the guests.  They've been meeting for days and those date things are still there, untouched.  OK, let's say you're Abu Abbas and your host, Prince Blank bin Faisal al-Saud hands you a platter of dates that's bigger than the prize patrol check from Ed McMahon.  You say: thanks, looks yummy.  You think: more effing dates.  I'm going to be spending more time on the john than I will in this room that looks like a nightmare inspired by James Brown's funeral.

[24] "Most blessed of women be Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, of tent-dwelling women most blessed.
[25] He asked water and she gave him milk, she brought him curds in a lordly bowl.
[26] She put her hand to the tent peg and her right hand to the workmen's mallet; she struck Sisera a blow, she crushed his head, she shattered and pierced his temple.
[27] He sank, he fell, he lay still at her feet; at her feet he sank, he fell; where he sank, there he fell dead.

[28] "Out of the window she peered, the mother of Sisera gazed through the lattice: 'Why is his chariot so long in coming? Why tarry the hoofbeats of his chariots?'
[29] Her wisest ladies make answer, indeed, she answers the question herself: [30] 'Are they not finding and dividing the spoil?--A girl or two for every man; spoil of dyed stuffs for Sisera, spoil of dyed stuffs embroidered, two pieces of dyed work embroidered for my neck as spoil?'

[31] "So perish all your enemies, O LORD! But may your friends be like
the sun as it rises in its might." And the land had rest forty years.

We at Quid are always very interested in what people say, what words they use, and who's doing the talking.  A couple of my loyal readers are in the language biz, and they always seem to appreciate it when I delve into that stuff, notably in a piece about inclusive language Psalms and news out of Britain about the schools not using the word "fail" because it's too loaded and connotes...uh....failure. 

Recently, George Bush said the "s" word with his mouth full of  what looked to be cream puff.

Aside: Mr. Bush weighs more than he did last year, despite the novel technique of jettisoning redundant calories at other heads of state in a sort of gustatory premature ejaculation: clearly a deferred success weight loss program. End aside.

I would like to redirect everyone's attention to what he actually said.  Below is the transcript of the entire conversation, which reveals Bush's executive approach.  In a few lines, he covers a lot of ground.  He doesn't get into details because lunch on the last day of the G8 summit isn't the time or the place.  It's part polite banter, it's part action items and it establishes who is talking to whom, and finally, it's a note of frustration with respect to the UN not doing it's job.  He doesn't dwell on it: after sixty years of criminal non-performance, I'm sure that if the UN actually did something constructive and helpful for world peace, the expletive in question would be an amazed, "Damn!"  I have scanned a number of news reports and opinion pieces, left and right, commenting on this incident.  Michelle Malkin simply says that sometimes an expletive is justified.  While that may be true, in this context, it's beside the point.  On the left side of the dial, Liberals are shocked shocked that Bush said a naughty word, that his view of the world is so shallow that he can boil down this incredibly complex situation to a phrase that includes the word [poopy.]  But do they disagree with the substance of what he said?  Yes, for a number of reasons but we'll just look at the top two.  First, to have the temerity to hold anyone accountable for doing the right thing is anathema to the Left.  In one short phrase Bush blamed Syria for supporting the belligerent, and the UN for not exercising its power and influence to stop them.  But you say, doesn't the Left want peace?  No, especially not now.  If the UN/Kofi really did step in and tell "Bashad" to stop this shit, they would be simultaneously doing the principled thing, doing their job and supporting George Bush, the trifecta of Leftist Cardinal Sins.  This last, supporting George Bush, is what the American Left and all of the world's corrupt bureaucrats, tyrrants, despots, dictators and duly elected socialist governments, do not want to do under any circumstances.  If arming terrorists hurts George Bush (and America) great; if innocents die, if Hezbollah commits war crimes, if Iran goes ballistic, and this hurts George Bush (and America), excellent.  If, as an added bonus, the Jews are exterminated, so much the better.

Apart from all of this, does anyone besides me think that it's rich to a hypocritical fare-thee-well that Democrats and the Leftist are upset about how it looks for the President to use the word "shit"?  I've read transcripts of John "Effing" Kerry's campaign events and planning and it's all f*ck all the time and frankly, the entire left half of the country practically had a collective climax when he said "f*ck" in an interview with Rolling Stone.  Reading liberal blogs is like wading through a sewer.  And please, someone speak up and tell me who on the Left was troubled by the revelation that Yasser Arafat was cooling his heals in the Rose Garden while Bill Clinton was exploiting a woman in the Oval Office (I don't care if she did consent to become a human humidor.)   Oh, I'm sorry, it's not the same thing at all: his mouth wasn't full. 

Here's the transcript, from Adam Boulton's Weblog (SkyNews):

Bush: Yo Blair How are you doing?
Blair: I'm just...
Bush: You're leaving?
Blair: No, no, no not yet. On this trade thingy...[inaudible]
Bush: yeah I told that to the man
Blair: Are you planning to say that here or not?
Bush: If you want me to
Blair: Well, it's just that if the discussion arises...
Bush: I just want some movement.
Blair: Yeah
Bush: Yesterday we didn't see much movement
Blair: No, no, it may be that it's not, it maybe that it's impossible
Bush: I am prepared to say it
Blair: But it's just I think what we need to be an opposition
Bush: Who is introducing the trade
Blair: Angela
Bush: Tell her to call 'em
Blair: Yes
Bush: Tell her to put him on them on the spot.Thanks for the sweaters it's awfully thoughtful of you
Blair: It's a pleasure
Bush: I know you picked it out yourself
Blair: Oh, absoultely, in fact I knitted it myself
BUSH: "Right . . . What about Kofi? That seems odd. I don't like the sequence of it. His attitude is basically ceasefire and everything else happens."

BLAIR: "I think the thing that is really difficult is you can't stop this unless you get this international presence agreed." . . .
Bush: Yeah
Blair: I don't know what you guys have talked about but as I say I am perfectly happy to try and see what the lie of the land is but you need that done quickly because otherwise it will spiral
Bush: I think Condi is going to go pretty soon
Blair: But that's that's that's all that matters. But if you, you see it will take some time to get that together
Bush: Yeah, yeah
Blair: But at least it gives people...
Bush: It's a process, I agree. I told her your offer to...
Blair: Well...it's only if I mean... you know. If she's got a..., or if she needs the ground prepared as it were... Because obviously if she goes out, she's got to succeed, if it were, whereas I can go out and just talk
Bush: You see, the ... thing is what they need to do is to get Syria, to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit and it's over
Blair: [inaudible]
Bush: [inaudible]
Blair: Syria
Bush: Why?
Blair: Because I think this is all part of the same thing
Bush: Yeah.
Blair: What does he think? He thinks if Lebanon turns out fine, if we get a solution in Israel and Palestine, Iraq goes in the right way...
Bush: Yeah, yeah, he is sweet
Blair: He is honey. And that's what the whole thing is about. It's the same with Iraq
Bush: I felt like telling Kofi to call, to get on the phone to Bashad [Bashir Assad] and make something happen
Blair: Yeah
Bush: [inaudible]
Blair:
Bush: We are not blaming the Lebanese government
Blair: Is this...? (at this point Blair taps the microphone in front of him and the sound is cut.)

 OK, sometimes you just need to pull the trigger, metaphorically speaking.  You have someone on the payroll, they aren't performing, it's just not working out.  As we like to say, it isn't a good fit.  So, I ask: what is the U.N. doing in South Lebanon lo these many years?  They are "observers,"  or they are "peacekeepers." or something.  Well, whether or not they observed anything, they upheld that 60 year U.N. tradition of not keeping the peace: a perfect record, unsullied by any urges of mutual laying down of arms anywhere they are stationed.  In fact, they have the distinction, these blue-hatted forces, of being bystanders to some of the most horrific war crimes in history.  The Blue Helmets in southern Lebanon undoubtedly observed the tunnels being dug and the weapons being amassed.  Or maybe the title "observer" is as useful a description of their actual function as "peacekeeper"   and they saw none of these developments taking place under their noses.  What I don't understand is why they weren't on the A train out of southern Lebanon when Hezbalú-ayé nabbed the Israeli soldiers.  I think I can answer that: They think that they are impervious.  They think that they are just like the Red Cross.  And maybe they are, but the Red Cross has shown good sense to boogie each and every time they are being used for cover by non-member combatants.

Aside:   Did you know that Israel's Magen David Adom (Israel's Red Cross-equivalent emergency aid society) was only admitted last month to association with the International Red Cross?  Their membership had been blocked for seven decades by (drumroll) members of the Red Crescent.  End Aside.

Out of the 2,000 member U.N force, four  were killed when the IDF shelled Hezbalú positions in southern Lebanon Tuesday.  According to emails from a Canadian serving on the force, who was killed in the shelling, they were dismayed to see Hezbalú take up positions adjacent to them, the UN soldiers.

"...the tragic loss of a soldier yesterday who I happen to know and I think probably is from my Regiment. We've received e-mails from him a few days ago and he described the fact that he was taking within - in one case -- three meters of his position "for tactical necessity - not being targeted". Now that's veiled speech in the military and what he was telling us was Hizbullah fighters were all over his position and the IDF were (sic) targeting them and that's a favorite trick by people who don't have representation in the UN. They use the UN as shields knowing that they can't be punished for it."

Retired Canadian Major General Lewis MacKenzie interviewed on CBC Toronto radio 26 July 2006

Not punished for it? In fact the opposite.  To get the UN Secretary General up in front of the entire international press corps and say that Israel "apparently" deliberately targeted UN peacekeeper/observers/cot warmers is more high quality anti-Israeli propaganda than Hezbalú (or even sugar daddy Ahmadinehjad) could possibly pay for.  

But now we also know that the higher ups in the chain of command knew what was happening to the peacekeepers on the ground and they left them there anyway.  It's a wonder any countries at all let their soldiers do duty with the UN.

To get back to the opener: not only were the UN forces not doing anything useful for the cause of peace or observation, they were passively providing aid and cover for the aggressors in this conflict.  Which is a bit more than they did for the  Tutsis in Rwanda. 

Just a brief note to record for posterity my transliteration/pronunciation fatigue with respect to Arabic words.  Hiz-bullll-uh, Hez-bo-llahh, Hez-bolll-uh, Hiz-ball-ah (this would be the mystical anti-Israeli religious cult that Madonna will popularize next) and the spelling variants: Hizbullah, Hezbollah, yadayadabollah.  For once, I am in deep sympathy with Charles "The Mangler" Rangel who referred to the Iranian-financed, Syrian-supported, not-just- a-terrorist-organization-but-a-way-of-life as Hezbaloo. Or is that Hezbalú? Hizbahlooh?

Cut to  Desi Arnaz, "Hezbalú! Hezbalú-ayé"

From Lucianne.com (hat tip Ann):

Haditha: Is McGirk the New Mary Mapes?
June 9th, 2006

Evidence accumulates of a hoax in Haditha. The weblog /Sweetness &
Light/ has done an estimable service gathering together the articles
which cast substantial doubt on the charge of a massacre of civilians at
Haditha . Because the blog is too busy gathering and fisking the news, I
offered and the publisher accepted my offer to put what he has uncovered
in a narrative form.

Having done so, I can tell you that the story has a whiff of yet another
mediagenic scandal like the TANG memos or the Plame “outing.” While the
Marines quite correctly will not comment on the case pending the outcome
of their investigation, I am not bound by those rules, and I will sum up
the story for you.

(a) On November 20, 2005, Reuters reported that on the previous day an
IED killed a US Marine and 15 civilians in Haditha, a town known to be a
center of the insurgency, a town as hostile to our forces as the better
known Fallujah was. Reuters reported that “immediately after the blast,
gunmen opened fire on the convoy” and US and Iraqi forces returned fire,
killing 8 insurgents and wounding another in the fight. The paper
further reported that “A cameraman working for Reuters in Haditha says
bodies had been left lying in the street for hours after the attack.”
Reuters never named this cameraman but he was almost undoubtedly Ali
al-Mashhadani.

(b) Ali al-Mashhadani had been imprisoned for five months before his
report because of his ties to insurgents. He was subsequently placed
under another 12 days in detention for being a security threat.

(c) Tim McGirk of /Time/ wrote about the incident at Haditha for the
March 27 issue of the magazine. He unsuccessfully lobbied his editors to
use the term “massacre” in the story. McGirk seems hardly a neutral
reporter. He spent the first Thanksgiving after 9/11 in Afghanistan
dining with the Taliban and concluding
<http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:uRXcaBv4zQUJ:www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,185644,00.html+McGirk+Thanksgiving&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1>
of this celebratory meal:

   Our missing colleagues finally arrive, and I leave thinking that
   maybe this evening wasn’t very different from the original
   Thanksgiving: people from two warring cultures sharing a meal
   together and realizing, briefly, that we’re not so different after all.

Right, Tim. We all want to enslave women, bend the world to Sharia law,
behead nonbelievers and otherwise carry on the honored traditions of the
Taliban.

A key source for McGirk’s report that US Marines in Haditha had
deliberately attacked civilians was Thaer al-Hadithi. whom McGirk
inexplicably described as “a budding journalism student”. He is a
middle-aged man, and was subsequently described by the AP as an “Iraqi
investigator.”

McGirk also failed to note that Hadithi is “a member and spokesman for
the Hammurabi.” The chairman of Hammurabi Organization and Hadithi’s
partner in publicizing the “massacre” is Abdul–Rahman al-Mashhadani. It
is unknown if he is related to Ali al-Mashhadani but their names suggest
a possible relationship, and it beggars belief that as /Sweetness&
Light/ notes,

   “Abdel Rahman al-Mashhadani just happened to be given a video by and
   unnamed local. And that he then turned it over to Ali al-Mashhadani
   who just happens to make videos for Reuters.”

Hadithi’s story is that was staying near to one of the two houses where
the massacre occurred and saw it with his own eyes. According to his
version of events he waited one day to videotape what had occurred,
though apparently nothing prevented his doing so from the very window he
“watched” it from as it took place. More troubling is why he waited
months to turn the tape over to anyone.

The actions of his partner al-Mashhadani are equally puzzling. On
December 15, 2005 Mashhadani was interviewed by the Institute for War
and Peace which described him as “an election monitor.” In that
interview he expressed great satisfaction with the election turnout
(which in fact was terribly low in Haditha). Why did he not mention to
this apparently sympathetic group one word about the supposed “atrocity”
which he claimed had occurred three months earlier?

Hammurabi apparently did share the video in March with the largely
Soros-funded Human Rights Watch which in turn provided it to /Time/.

(d) The videotape. On March 21, 2006 Reuters reported that Hadithi and
Mashhadani’s organization, the Hammurabi Organization, had provided the
organization was a copy of a videotape showing corpses lined up in the
Haditha morgue, claiming these were the bodies of civilians deliberately
killed by the Marines. Aside from the suspiciously-timed release of the
video and the fact that chairman al-Mashhadani had never mentioned the
incident or the tape in December when he was interviewed, the video
shows people removing bodies from a home, a report at odds with the
Reuters report the day after the incident which spoke of bodies lying in
the street.

(e) The witnesses to the “massacre”

   (1) The Doctor.

   In the March 27 report, McGirk quotes the local doctor:

       Dr. Wahid, director of the local hospital in Haditha, who asked
       that his family name be withheld because, he says, he fears
       reprisals by U.S. troops, says the Marines brought 24 bodies to
       his hospital around midnight on Nov. 19. Wahid says the Marines
       claimed the victims had been killed by shrapnel from the
       roadside bomb. “But it was obvious to us that there were no
       organs slashed by shrapnel,” Wahid says. “The bullet wounds were
       very apparent. Most of the victims were shot in the chest and
       the head–from close range.”

   Another report however, indicates
   <http://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/haditha-doctor-was-arrested-hates-us-too>
   the doctor bore considerable animus to the US troops.

   (2)The Iraqi eye-witnesses.

   In “Haditha: Reasonable Doubt,” Andrew Walden describes
   <http://www.hawaiireporter.com/> how a similar case against British
   soldiers fell apart , describing the Arabic “blood money” tradition
   which hardly is as exotic as it sounds. Ask the American Trial
   Lawyers Association.

   Reports of the eyewitnesses are conflicting and incredible.
   Al-Haditha was the source of a report by the AP on the death of a
   man whom the /Washington Post/ quoted 10 times as an eyewitness on
   May 27,six months after his reported death, and the young girl
   “survivor” has given between two and four utterly inconsistent
   versions
   <http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2006/06/haditha_lies_ex.html>
   of the events.

   (3) The American eye witnesses.

   There are two American witnesses who have spoken out. Despite the
   press spin, neither has a first hand account of the events.

   Lance Cpl. James Crossan is the source of some very selective quotes
   on the incident. He, however, was wounded in the IED explosion which
   killed the US Marine Martin Terrazas. He was evacuated from the
   scene and saw none of the after-action.

   And then there is Lance Cpl. Ryan Briones. He helped evacuate
   Crossnan and took bodies to the morgue. He was not an eyewitness. He
   claims he took pictures of the bodies at the morgue and has made
   various statements about what happened to the pictures and his
   camera. Aside from the fact that he is not an eyewitness, and his
   claims about his photographs seem unlikely, his story remained
   unuttered until he was arrested for stealing a truck, driving under
   the influence and crashing the stolen vehicle into a house. It was
   then for the first time that he claimed post traumatic distress and
   pointed to Haditha as the source of that stress. (His report of
   taking the bodies to the morgue, moreover, seems inconsistent with
   the first Reuters report that there were 15 bodies left lying in the
   street the day after the incident.)

The sum and substance of this thumbnail sketch on the Haditha claims is
that it follows so closely the template for the TANG and Plame stories.
Take a reporter with an anti-Administration agenda, an interested group
(think of the Mashhadanis as the VIPS in the Plame case or Burkett and
Lucy Ramirez in the TANG case) and a story too good to be checked and
circumstances where the people attacked are limited in what they can
quickly respond to and you get a story which smells to me like it will
soon be unraveled.

This time, I’m betting the consequences to the press which rushed to
judgment will be more disastrous than it was to Dan Rather. I surely
hope so.

Clarice Feldman is an attorney in Washington, DC and a frequent
contributor to Lucianne.com 

Tony Blankley has also written an excellent commentary about the media and Haditha.

 [...]But what further cuts is to listen to media people casually perpetrate libel against not just the still-presumed-innocent Marines but against our services more generally. To see the gleam in the eyes of reporters happily cackling on about "other possible incidents" -- about which they know not whether they even exist -- is to be filled with a fury that we have a system of journalism that permits people with such mentalities to poison the minds of the world with their malice.

 Of course if an American soldier, sailor, Marine or airman is found by a court martial made up of seasoned officers with a practical understanding of the exigencies of combat to have violated the standards of combat, he or she must face American military justice. But in time of war, there is no reason why military censorship should not be enforced to shroud the carrying out of justice from the eager eyes and ears of enemy propagandists -- domestic and foreign.

 Pending the implementation of such a policy, journalists should sharply limit their reporting to the bare established facts, preferably reported once on page A36. (You know, the way they report Democratic Party scandals.)

Readers of this blog know that I am very fond of pictures of dead bad guys, see here and here. Today was a great day for morbid fascination, I can tell you. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was a psychopathic killer in life, and that makes him all the more attractive as a corpse, although even as just a run-of-the-mill dead body he looked pretty good, probably because of all the baby fat and the fact that the photos were taken when he was fresh, not previously frozen. Those of us who have spent any time at all in a fish market can tell these things immediately. Anyway, I understand that al-Jazeera has raised serious objections to publicizing photos of the dead body of this butcher mass murderer psycho terrorist Martyred Prince of the Resistance because it violates the Geneva Convention in a way that publicizing pictures of executed American soldiers and video of Nick Berg's beheading at the hands of the aforementioned M. P. of the R. didn't. I think we should listen to al-Jazeera, because, after all, their journalists were all BBC-trained.

It doesn't take long, though for the more sensitive types to say, hey, let's clean him up a bit. Before you know it, someone has wiped the blood off and started Photoshopping the boo-boos that make Dead Bad Guy connoisseurs giddy with delight. You can see the transformation for yourself :

And cleaned up for the press briefing:

"Then we decided to do a little concealer here and some mascara to bring out his eyes...

After Carmindy gets done with Abu:

Carmindy: "I spent all day with the tweezers!"

Amazing what the judicious use of Crest White Strips will  do!

Stacy:  This just proves it's never too late for a makeover.

Clinton:  Didn't someone say, 'It ain't over til it's over?' At last we get to see those great collar bones! and the jewel tones are perfect.

S tacy: And shutting the eyes and lips of dead guys is so eighties.  This way we get to see the real Abu.