Tuesday, May 01, 2007

Al-Qaeda Chief in Iraq Killed? Maybe

Pajamas Media has a roundup on the reported death of Abu Ayyub al-Masri, al Qaeda chief in Iraq.

Abu al-Kareem Khalaf, the Interior Ministry spokesperson, told al-Iraqiya television that al-Masri was killed in the “Naba’i” area of Taji, and did not involve US or Iraqi forces, he said. “We have not seen his corpse yet,” the spokesman said, but stated that the ministry had the information on the basis of reliable intelligence. ...

(He was) reportedly killed in an internal fight between militants north of Baghdad, an Interior Ministry spokesman said

Well that's interesting. There was a five million dollar bounty on al-Masri's head. I wonder if some Jihadi can put in a claim for the dough. The really interesting quesion is what the "militants" were fighting over. A number of acrimonious divisions have been reported between al-Qaeda and elements in the Sunni insurgency. Moreover, the al-Qaeda has recently been reported to have launched attacks on the Sunni population itself in order to keep it in line. In a society where prestige depends on being able to exact venegeance for dead relatives al-Masri may have been playing a game of Russian roulette by making enemies continuously until the day came when he had to lose.


Blogger Karridine said...

And now, al-Masri, your face to face interview with Baha'u'llah, the Glory of God... forever!

5/01/2007 04:06:00 AM  
Blogger Ticker said...

No US confirmation yet.

5/01/2007 04:18:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Why can't they all just get along?

5/01/2007 04:49:00 AM  
Blogger Unknown said...

This does not matter except for those who follor every pass, every play, every move on the field. The game has already collapsed in the USA. Americans are now turning their attention to what kind of new leadership values will win the next election. This male/female fight is about to pay off, or to see one big fight wherein the true narcissists come out to fake us all! As I read many months ago: "The Arabs never miss a chance to miss a chance."

5/01/2007 05:03:00 AM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...

I hope the job pays well because being Al Qaeda Leader in Iraq doesn't seem to have much job security.

5/01/2007 05:32:00 AM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...

Al Qaeda will not appoint another Leader in Iraq. The job has already been outsourced to Harry Reid.

5/01/2007 05:34:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

If al-Masri is dead, will Doug give Mr. Bush any credit? (I'm being rhetorical ;-O)

5/01/2007 05:45:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Not sure what you're saying, r, but one of the scarier things I've heard was Dick Morris saying that the polls are missing an essential block of voters:
If Hillary is the Dem pick in '08, a bunch of folks not now included in the polls will be energized 2 weeks before the election when Ophra issues a call to arms:
How many single women, or resentful women, that have never bothered to vote before, will resist that siren call?
Repeal Women's Suffrage!
Fatah Terrorists Rejoice Deaths of U.S. 'Dogs' in Iraq »

5/01/2007 05:55:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Good to see good humor Allen.
Beats moral superiority every time.

5/01/2007 05:57:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...


5/01/2007 05:58:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

The President of the United States deserves credit when an international murderous criminal, from Eygpt, is killed in Iraq, by Iraqis?

Wonder why he would be so deserving, unless it is also credited to his account that the criminal operated in Iraq, in the first place.

Three cheers to the Sunni antiGovernment Insurgent that killed the aQ criminal mastermind.

Now, back to the Civil War.

5/01/2007 06:01:00 AM  
Blogger BLOGGER said...

Did you submit your site at blogsearch.sg?
You can reach blogsearch by just typing blogsearch.sg in your browser window or click here
This is a service by bizleadsnet directory of web logs.

5/01/2007 06:19:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...


We know what the mocking bird says; but how about you: Does Mr. Bush get any credit for the killing of ANOTHER al-Qaeda big wig?

5/01/2007 06:45:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

See DR, above.
Lapdog Doug.

5/01/2007 06:51:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Just to be magnanimous, tho, I'll subtract him from the toll of innocent US Citizens killed by Illegal felons and narcoterrorists from South of the Border, welcomed by el presidente GWB:

39,999 to go, to call it even.

5/01/2007 06:56:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...


re: Lapdog Doug.

Introspection is the first step to recovery. Best wishes.

5/01/2007 06:59:00 AM  
Blogger Glenmore said...

I guess a jihadi could claim the bounty on al-Masri. We've set a price we are willing to pay to get rid of a key player, and who would better be able to deliver him than one of his cadres? The hope is he would take the money and run, but if he was a good little jihadi and recycled the funds back into the terrorist efforts we might expect him to be inefficiently careful in watching his own back, to avoid history repeating. Delivery might be a little tricky though.

5/01/2007 07:03:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...


re: Just to be magnanimous, tho, I'll subtract him from the toll of innocent US Citizens killed by Illegal felons and narcoterrorists from South of the Border, welcomed by el presidente GWB:

The second step to recovery is concentrating on maintaining focus on a theme, say that of Wretchard's lede: "Al-Qaeda Chief in Iraq Killed? Maybe." You obviously need some work on that. If it will help, Monterey 2007 is not New York City on 9/11.

5/01/2007 07:04:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

re: Abu Ayyub al-Masri

___In a series of operations, al-Qaeda attacked the United States on 11 September 2001.

___In retaliation, among other things, the administration of President George W. Bush placed generous bounties on the heads of hundreds of al-Qaeda upper and middle managers.

___Since 9/11, as a consequence of these bounties, al-Qaeda managers are routinely eliminated. (As a possibly unrelated aside, Saddam Hussein was fingered by his driver/body guard.)

___One such upper manager, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, al Qaeda chief in Iraq is now reported KIA.

___If al-Masri’s death, even in part, came as the result of such a bounty, why does it matter who killed him, as Desert Rat suggests? And why does the administration get no credit in the minds of Desert Rat and Doug?

___If it turns that al-Masri has escaped death on this occasion, why does not Mr. Bush get credit for trying?

We live in a sick age, where millions of so-called citizens willingly, joyfully, cut off the nose to spite the face.

5/01/2007 07:32:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

Of course, al-Masri cannot be partly dead.

5/01/2007 07:34:00 AM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...


I suppose we could just call this self deprecation and ankle biting "fashionable."

Less generously it probably relates more to an overabundance of self-absorption or maybe a lack of intelligence, or at least an unwillingness to use whatever processing neurons are available.

For example, has anybody ever heard a single Democrat politician or well-placed leftie writer discuss the most likely consequences of an American withdrawal from Iraq, and exactly how that withdrawal is supposed to strengthen America's influence in the region?

An issue that will affect thousands, perhaps millions of lives down the road, and it appears to be off-limits. Every nudge towards a discussion of consequences immediately devolves into a script of alleged historical malfeasance complete with ankle chomping.

5/01/2007 09:09:00 AM  
Blogger Roger J. said...

Let's assume the CEO of AQ in Iraq is indeed dead and was whacked by Sunnis. I am beginning to think that AQ may not be as smart an organization as I originally gave it credit for. Here's my thinking:

The AQ tactic of fomenting sectarian violence, presumably aimed to drive the US out of Iraq, was, in retrospect, a dead end strategy. Why? because with the US out of Iraq, the most likely outcome of sectarian violence would be a Shiite victory, and the near elimination of the minority sunnis. It might also have resulted in an independent Kurdistan. Neither of those outcomes seemes to be in AQs interest.

While driving the US out of Iraq might have some appeal for "the arab street," it would also signal to the regional rulers not to rely on the US for any assistance and crack down even harder on internal dissidents. A US withdrawl of the US from Iraq might also result in more defensive preparations within the US homeland, making it even harder to strike the US.

In short, the AQ tactic in Iraq is looking to me increasingly like a dead end tactic the no really good outcomes for AQ. It appears to me to have the effect of reducing AQ to a completely decentralized organization capable of inflicting only sporadic acts of terror on innocents but also becoming increasingly less of a threat in terms of changing dynamics in the mid east.

I would appreciate the views of commenters here on my take--I tolerate criticism well, so don't be shy.


5/01/2007 09:15:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...


Your points are well taken.

Oh, that it were ignorance! No, it is much worse than that, I fear. It is stark, utter, self-destructive madness. How else can one discribe blithe, rejection of reality.

What sort of man is it who lusts for the defeat of his country, when such defeat will ultimately physcially destroy him, his loved ones, and the patrimony of generations?

5/01/2007 09:42:00 AM  
Blogger RWE said...

I think that Al Qaeda's strategy is indeed "ded end " as you say - but that is its objective.

Look at Afghanistan under the Taliban/Al Qaeda; their idea of an ideal society. Not a hell of a lot going on there except some thugs going aound beheading people for watching TV or not growing beards.

They are people who have realized they do not have the ability to rise high until all others are laid low. And "high" is relative.

They are barbarians who embrace barbarism because they could not hold down a job running the Slurpee machine in a 7/11. And they could not hold the job because they would refuse to do so.

Their dead end end state is not just a tactic, it is their final objective.

5/01/2007 09:48:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...


describe - Sorry

5/01/2007 10:17:00 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

Somewhat paradoxically, due to US impotence, the Sunni insurgency is turning on Al Qaida, which is itself essentially in the same position as the US, a foreign entity with an ideology rejected by 95% on the population that is supposedly helping the Iraqis to fight the great evil. The nationalist Sunni insurgency has become so confident that they no longer need Al Qaida’s assistance against the US can now turn their guns against Al Qaida. This is hardly a sign of US strength –- Al Qaida is actually the US’s closest strategic ally in Iraq – but a sign that the Sunni insurgency realizes the US is defeated. While the US cannot defeat Al Qaida in Iraq but the Sunni insurgency sure can. The US occupation created a niche that Al Qaida exploited and now with a US withdrawal just around the corner, Al Qaida in Iraq has reached its sell-by date.

This is another sign that those who cry that a US withdrawal means a bloodbath for the Iraqi people are just as wrong as those who talked about cakewalks five years ago.

5/01/2007 10:17:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

___Abu Ayyub al-Masri

Could any of this GOOD news have to do with fighting al-Qaeda and other Islamists in Iraq? Could the deaths of al-Qaeda leadership play a part?

“Terrorist episodes are down in South Asia, Central and Latin America, and Europe (there's been virtually none in North America for several years). The media is justified in presenting the aggregated picture, but not in pretending that progress has not been made in most of the world.”

“The numbers are also consistent with the fact that al Qaeda has proclaimed Iraq the central front in its war against civilization. It is reasonable to surmise that this focus has contributed to the decline in terrorist incidents in other parts of the world. Likewise, if al Qaeda were no longer tied down in Iraq, it is reasonable to expect that terrorism in other parts of the world would increase.”

Terrorism by the numbers

H/T Powerline

5/01/2007 10:22:00 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

Al Qaida has not attacked the US in six years because the goal of 9/11 -- getting the US to overreact and destroy Arab states -- has been so successfully achieved. A US withdrawal from Iraq will indeed force Al Qaida to again attack on US soil since the Al Qaida game plan is to bleed the US white through foolish military adventures and in response Al Qaida can sell itself as the logical alternative to US imperialism.

So yes, a US withdrawal from Iraq is indeed life threatening for Al Qaida and they respond with further attacks against the US.

5/01/2007 10:45:00 AM  
Blogger Roger J. said...

As I am relatively new to this board, I would appreciate your take on the plot in KSA to attack the oil fields--the economic consequences would, of course, drive up the price of oil world wide with demand as high as it is now--It would also have the effect, however, of making oil shale refining economically feasible and perhaps insulating the US from "oil shocks" for a decade or so.


5/01/2007 11:11:00 AM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Abu Ayyub al-Masri is dead. He joins Zarqawi and Saddam and various other "Mr. Evils" taken out and replaced with someone new who also ends up with a 5 million dollar reward on his head.

The "decapitation of leaders" strategy fails, as it has for the Zionists, when there is no shortage of people willing to step up and lead, even if they die one day as a glorious martyr. Hezbollah, Hamas are stronger now than before the Jews thought the answer was "targeted assassinations".

So, back to the Civil War we go with 500 billion already spent, all our allies peeled off, a divided America, and a new AQ leader with a new 5 million US taxpayer furnished reward on his head...


Meanwhile, the War on Drugs Czar reacted angrily to a question about why cocaine is now more plentiful and 40% cheaper than it was in 1996. We are making progress everyday to rid America of the scourge of drugs and bring those profiting off it to justice, he said.

5/01/2007 11:34:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

In less than 2 hours, on 11 September 2001, the City of New York suffered losses estimated at about $105 billion.

In less than 2 hours, on 11 September 2001, the United States economy suffered losses variously estimated as $500 billion to $1 trillion.
___$250,000,000,000/hr low estimate
___$500,000,000,000/hr high estimate
___$375,000,000,000/hr average

Hugh Fitzgerald places the cost of 36,288 hours (and counting) of fighting in Iraq at $750 billion.

Cedarford puts the cost of fighting in Iraq, after 36,288 hours (and counting) at $500 billion.

per captia per hour cost of Iraq:
Fitzgerald – $0.07/hr/American
Cedarford – $0.05/hr/American

Per captia per hour cost of 9/11
Low estimate - $893
High estimate - $1,786
Average - $1,340

In the 45,024 (and counting) hours since the GWOT began on 9/11 the United States has not been attacked on its territory by al-Qaeda.

In the 45,024 (and counting) hours since the 9/11 attack, thousands of al-Qaeda managers and followers have been killed.

5/01/2007 01:21:00 PM  
Blogger Ticker said...

I took out the garbage this morning. And remembered I had taken it out some days before ... and some days before that. It's a never ending task. Am I stuck in a quagmire?

There are certain categories of problems which are classified as chronic. People who have diabetes; those with some form of manageable cancer, etc. Law enforcement also deals with chronic problems. We don't abandon high-crime areas simply because they are high crime.

The history of Islam is punctuated by more than occasional outbursts of radicalism. There was another Madhi in the Sudan, circa 1880. Etc.

In the days immediately after 9/11 some politicians suggested going to the International Criminal Court or the UN and treat terrorism as a law enforcement problem, with warrants, etc. Whatever the disadvantages to this approach might be it had this virtue. Everyone would be mentally prepared to treat al-Qaeda as a chronic problem. We don't care that the UN is still trying to investigate the genocidaires of Rwanda. We don't care that the Congo continues to kill 1,500 per day everyday -- as it has for the last 10 years or more. We don't care because mentally we regard these problems as chronic.

Unfortunately, people don't regard the War on Terror as chronic. When al-Zarqawi is killed and then replaced, we groan "oh not another one". If we find and kill Osama bin Laden we'll find another to rise in his place. But so what? When the FBI catches an criminal or serial killer, we don't regard it as futile simply because another will emerge down the track.

We have come to think of the War on Terror as its opposite: the short war. In our minds when we think of War, we don't think "Cold War". We think World War 2. In our imaginations rise the stirring story of D-Day. The Band of Brothers. The grand finale of B-29s over Tokyo. The War on Terror is exactly the opposite sort of phenomenon. It has been described, by the Bush administration even, as the Long War, the Generational War. If it is anything like crime or even anything like garbage it might even be called the Forever War. But to us "war" will always be "World War 2".

And so we regard the fact that there have been no attacks since 9/11 as futile, or worse, evidence that this was what the enemy had planned to begin with. Nonesense. The enemy doesn't have the kind of command and control needed to enforce such a universal strategy. They zig and they zag. Anyone who has followed the captured correspondence of Zarqawi knows that the present strategy of attacking the Shi'ites, of creating mayhem was itself a reaction to earlier setbacks. It is not only dangerous to regard the enemy as being ten feet tall, it is not true that he is ten feet tall. Al-Masri, if he is dead, did not plan on being dead.

Did you wonder how the French were beaten in 1940? They were beaten in their minds when they came to believe the Germans could do no wrong. We make fun of the French, but how close are we to being French ourselves. If one calmly lists out the things that have been achieved; what people are on our side; what local forces we have raised; what resources we have denied the enemy the question arises: do we give it all back to him? And when we have finished, do we expect it all to stop?

5/01/2007 01:58:00 PM  
Blogger Ticker said...

The Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) denies that al-Qaeda chief al-Masri has been killed according to the Memri translation agency.

5/01/2007 02:34:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...


I went through the time consuming exercise of accounting not because I think it important but because people daily rant about the $500 billion or $999 quintillion the various wars against Islamists have cost. To my mind, saving America and hopefully in the process Western civilization is of incalculable worth, just as I think the value of my own life is priceless.

People would be well advised to consider some numbers quoted by Andrew Bostom recently: 65.2% of Muslims support an international Islamic caliphate and 65.5% support strict Shari’a law in every Muslim country (which is essentially everywhere).
Mainstream Caliphate Confessions

5/01/2007 02:37:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

What is the cost of the percentage of innocent civilians killed by illegals that are killed by Narcoterrorists that have found easy passage in the millions allowed in courtesy of el Presidente's welcoming illegals policies?
Aren't Narcoterrorists and occasional Al Queda and Hezzie Agents in the USA part of the Struggle against violent extremism?
(perish the thot of using the "I" word:
What would Karen Hughes and her minders at CAIR think about that?)

What will be the cost of cleaning up the terror and gang networks that have flourished and metastasized in GWB's Springtime for illegals? (if it ever gets done)
If it is shameful to discount the loss of the lives of our soldiers, is it not also shameful to ignore innocent lives lost to GWB's immoral and illegal neglect of our Border and the criminals that benefit from it?
Wouldn't honest accounting tally the cost of housing the hundreds of thousands in our prisons, prior to releasing them to rob, maim, rape, and murder our citizens again?
Maybe better to keep more detailed and extensive records like Hitler and Saddam, where the categories are scrupulously kept segregated to conform to the mental compartments of the accountants of this gratuitous slaughter, Allen?
Some animals ARE more equal than others, of course.
And some things are best left unsaid, no matter how lame the excuses.

5/01/2007 03:09:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Not to imply that anyone might have a callous attitude about the 40k slaughtered on W's Watch, of course, or the security liabilities inherent in the policies.
And unlike Haditha, we may be assured that justice was done by jailing and bankrupting the agents and their families to the benefit of the "star witness," a professional drug runner.

5/01/2007 03:12:00 PM  
Blogger Ticker said...

Everyone of the arguments advanced against taking the fight to the enemy is based on the premise that they'll get angrier if we fight them. That's at least partially true.

What caused 9/11? Desert Storm. Al-Qaeda issued its fatwa (against Clinton and Perry) because infidel troops were in the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia. After Desert Storm came the long quarantine which kept troops on Arab soil, which was more cause for resentment. Watch the emotional dua of a prominent Saudi Arabian sheik extolling those who attacked America right after 9/11. As Lawrence Wright pointed out in the Looming Tower, the roots of radical Islamism are to be found even in the 1950s; in the prison cells of our friends the Saudis, Egyptians and Jordians. To be found there even when they were our enemies, because even as the progenitors of what is now al-Qaeda were being tortured by East German-trained secret agents of Nasser, they had focused on America as the number one enemy.

Anything America does is a provocation. By definition. Was there ever a more "understanding" President than Jimmy Carter? Did they hate him the less for it? They hated Jimmy with a passion. Hated him even after he convinced Begin to return the Sinai. Hated Sadat and killed him even, for shaking hands with the Jew, even to get back the Sinai. America fought Desert Storm to save Saudi Arabia. That only brought 9/11. America tried to protect the food convoys to feed Muslims in Mogadishu. Black Hawk Down. And so it goes.

The problem of course, is that the solution has less to do with capturing territory than countermobilizing the Islamic world. That is impossible through diplomacy; impossible to achieve by going through our "friends" in Amman, Riyadh or Cairo. It has to be people to people. The appeal must be direct. The US operation in Afghanistan, if you want to debate the meaning of failure has occupied territory while leaving the enemy force intact on the other side of the border in Pakistan, which it is destabilizing. Now it axiomatic that victory is won by defeating the enemy force, not capturing dirt. As long as the enemy force remains intact it remains in being. And right across the border from NATO are Waziristan and an enormous force generation engine: 30,000 madrassas with an enrolment of 1.5 million students in Pakistan.

Iraq represented an attempt to countermobilize the Arab world. To build an alternative model to the despotism of the Sauds and the Caliphate of Osama Bin Laden. That vision was momentarily forgotten. It is said that both Abizaid and Casey believed that America was "viral" and the less of it was seen the better. That is why they decided to pen up US forces in mega combat bases, and the insurgency took advantage of the vacuum to start up internecine violence. We left it to Maliki to carry the torch to spread the message. To be, in the Islamic usage, Our Messenger. We might as well have used Western Union, if it still existed. Petraeus, it is said, has rejected now this scheme and has put Americans side by side with Iraqis because he believes that countermobilizing the the Iraqi man on the street, beginning with the man in uniform is the only way to engage al-Qaeda. If we cannot follow the enemy around the Islamic world, invading country after country pursuit, then we must create a model in one place, in one secure place at least, and from that city on a hill send out disciples to counteract theirs.

Well we are about to demonstrate unequivocally, that anyone who believes in this American claptrap, who takes the risk, who enters this city on a hill is going to be left to twist in the wind. Left to die a hideous death. I sometimes hope that the Harry Reid and Barack Obama really have a secret plan to retain the gains we've achieved in a more cost-effective way. To keep the project which demonstrates that there's a third way between despotism and Islamism available to the Muslims. I guess that was the hope for South Vietnam too. But look how that turned out. Different from South Korea. But then, US troops are still there sixty years on.

The history of Turkey shows what it costs to face down Islamism. Never was a state born in more blood, Armenian and otherwise. And even today Turkey must confront the Islamist ghost with draconian measures we would hardly countenance. Say what you will about Kemal Ataturk. He was no George W. Bush.

The recent special on BBC showed how radical mosques in the UK, preaching long before 9/11 were the source of a multitude of attacks on the West, including perhaps, 9/11 itself. And it ends with the very suspect at the center of the plots freely plying his trade at an Islamic exposition in the heart of London evading the questions of the BBC. If the West loses, and why will it not, because from all that I've heard resistance is futile, then it will have richly deserved it.

5/01/2007 03:17:00 PM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...

As Islam must be confronted on every turn and opposed on every accommodation, no matter how slight, so must the Democrats and the Left be confronted on every fabrication or we will lose our culture.

Their playbooks are available if anybody wants to look. I am still spinning over the non-coverage of the Kennedy/Carter conspiracy to do in Ronald Reagan. If this is not treason then what is? Is Nancy Pelosi's trip and different?

5/01/2007 03:59:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Allen, your whole financial balance sheet is duplicituous from the start. The 500-1 trillion and the 105 or whatever billion greedy New Yorkers claimed was "lost" was just the temporary downturn in the "float" of stock market value that erased when the illusion of safety was erased.

Real terms? About 3 billion in structure over 16 acres was destroyed in NYC, plus 100 million for Pentagon reconstruction. Add the "Greatest Victim-Heroes of all time" netting a ridiculously large victimhood payout from taxpayers of 5 billion, and the billion-dollar delay and search for "closure artifacts". You are not even talking of 10 billion in actual damages. You are talking "market confidence", consumer spending index anticipation, and other ephemeral measures that matter long-term as much as two Japs arguing in the 1980s if a square foot of space in the Ginza district was worth 3800 dollars or 11,040 a square foot before everything was the same as before in Japan in terms of industries and jobs but the market said 1,900 a square foot was reasonable after easy money from banks dried up...

The 500 billion already spent in Iraq is truly lost wealth. The 750 if you factor in the long-term disability payments or paying back Dubya's Saudi, Chinese, Japanese lenders with interest.

The 400 billion in Homeland Security since 2002 that Bush borrowed from the Chinese mostly as pork to his benefactors has to be added to the "Keep Us All Safe Quest" against the 10,000 ragheads out to kill us..900 billion to 1.25 trillion spent because a small number of ragheads from the least advanced places on the planet want to harm several thousand in the West. With no effort by Dubya to get allies other than his dear old Israel or to use any tool other than military.
Most of that money completely squandered.. that money foregone from other urgent tasks like the 80 billion it would have taken to cut medicare costs 30% so we didn't have to rely on China to lend us "temporary getting by medicare money until we are solvent again"...

Disgraceful. I didn't think it was possible to be a worse leader than Jimmy Carter until recently.

Wretchard - it may be a long war. Our side sees enriching Bush donors, building playgrounds in Fallujah that are destroyed the next day, and our noble Iraqi friends learning to be just like us when they stop hating us as the solution. The other side sees their struggle as a few tens of thousands of truly committed followers winning over and committing all persons and sectors of Islam to spreading across Open Borders, defeating the infidel by bleeding them white with 100s of billions in pissed away wealth every year until it is unsustainable.
(All the Jihadi Fatwas talk of not killing off the infidels or militarily defeating them but force them to spend so much treasure they eventually can't sustain it any longer and lose their Will.)

Which side is now winning that Long War?


5/01/2007 04:05:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...


Over many, many, many hours, on another blog, have I discussed with you and others the issues you raise and the innumerable faults of the Bush administration. It was often entertaining and occasionally enlightening. However, when you and your friends questioned the integrity of the United States Marine Corps and the Navy of the United States, essentially claiming that men and women known to me would send the Haditha Marines to the gallows and/or prison for the sake of political expediency; agreed amongst yourselves that American troops were “mercenaries”; and remained impervious to any countervailing reason; you lost me.

To the extent that your neuroses will help me make the case for pursuing a militant course against Islam, I will engage you. This is not one of those moments. The questions you hurl about with hysterical abandon are unworthy of the consideration of honorable men because you pose them dishonorably. And yes, Doug, that comes from me sitting astride my high horse, which if only 2mm high would still tower above you and your ilk.

Semper Fidelis! Death before Dishonor! Bite Me!

5/01/2007 04:09:00 PM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...



5/01/2007 04:47:00 PM  
Blogger Ticker said...

From the UK Times on al-Masri. The Times apparently thinks al-Masri is truly dead. Who knows? But here's what the Times says:

The network has lost support in its traditional stronghold of the Sunni Triangle in western Iraq, where tribes angered at their bloodthirsty tactics have turned against them. They have been forced into Diyala province to the northeast of Baghdad, where al-Qaeda has tried to carve out a Taleban-style caliphate with other Sunni groups.

The group made a tactical error in targeting prominent Sunni sheikhs who refused to collaborate with them in the western desert of the Sunni Triangle. Many Sunni tribal leaders want to focus their attacks solely on the US Army. The Abu Risha, the largest tribe in the western Anbar region, have killed al-Qaeda operatives even as they fight the Americans, and have set up their own clan-based militia to protect their areas from “Arab fighters”.

While welcoming al-Qaeda’s solidarity in fighting the Americans, Sunni insurgensts often resented the outsiders having so much control.

The fighting that appears to have cost al-Masri his life occurred in Tajji on the northern fringes of Baghdad, an area long dominated by al-Qaeda. “The clashes took place among themselves,” Brigadier Khalaf said. “There were clashes within the groups of al-Qaeda. He was liquidated by them. Our forces had nothing to do with it.”

Does this mean the Coalition, by politico military means, actually drove the AQI out of the north? At least in part? That they withdrew?

One thing about al-Qaeda is that they never give up. Whenever they are confronted heavily, they retreat. But they always come back. For them there is never a moment of defeat. Never a time when they concede defeat.

Some time ago I was thinking that if the UN Rwandan peacekeeping team had been led by a man as committed as Zarqawi, the genocide would never have happened. The West is weak, not in its sinews, but in its heart. Al-Qaeda hopes to win by sheer force of will. By the looks of it, they'll succeed.

5/01/2007 04:47:00 PM  
Blogger Ticker said...

And that, come right down to it, is why some Muslims believe in the power of Allah. Allah strengthens the will of his adherents past any breaking point. They are willing to go past death itself. And they say to us: with our rifle and our belief in Allah we can defeat you with your laser guided weaponry and your belief in Harry Reid. Come to prayer. Come to Islam.

5/01/2007 04:52:00 PM  
Blogger lugh lampfhota said...

"Al-Qaeda hopes to win by sheer force of will."

It's always been about will. Alexander's empire, the Roman and British empires and getting my grandson to crap in the toilet.

Ponder the infinite will of a regiment of British infantry taking and holding a chunk of Africa or India.

My wife and daughter never could get the boy the make pooh because they dinna have the will. Grand dad stood there like a grenadier until the pooh was made.

Women lack will and the feminized West lacks will. Is there a man amongst us?

5/01/2007 05:07:00 PM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...


Poetic but overstated by a full measure.

The US Marines had no compunctions kicking down doors in Fallujah to grab Abdul by the throat - or anywhere else for that matter where Abdul had the cookies to stay and fight. The Tajiks and Ethiopeans don't seem to have much problem with Al Qaeda either.

We, the West, lack leadership capable of withstanding the blast from the multicults while delivering the message of why we fight and why we must win. GWB is more than capable on the first part but deficient on the second.

It's a long war. The right people will eventually rise to the top and this -ism will fare no better than its predecessors.

5/01/2007 05:24:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

As any Texan can attest, fire ants are pestilential. To date, despite countless millions spent on research, no means of eradicating them en masse has yet been discovered or devised. Thus, landowners are left with handling infestations the old fashioned way: colonies are killed one colony at a time, one queen at a time.

As each summer wears on, the fight seems interminable, an exercise in futility. Just as one wave of hills is reduced, another will materialize from nowhere, often after a light rain shower, heavy dew, or sprinkling.

What is a homeowner to do? Well, as anyone who has inadvertently shuffled into a concealed nest of the little devils while trimming shrubbery will confirm, fire ants are killed one colony at a time, one queen at a time.

In a good year, with persistence, weeks can pass without the sighting of a single fire ant. But hiatus can never be mistaken for finality.

5/01/2007 05:33:00 PM  
Blogger Jewish Odysseus said...

"Women lack will and the feminized West lacks will. Is there a man amongst us?"

I'm afraid our last real man was Maggie Thatcher.

"We, the West, lack leadership capable of withstanding the blast from the multicults while delivering the message of why we fight and why we must win. GWB is more than capable on the first part but deficient on the second."

Right on!

"It's a long war. The right people will eventually rise to the top and this -ism will fare no better than its predecessors. "

As Churchill said, "In the fullness of God's good time."

5/01/2007 05:39:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

jewish odysseus,

And then there was Deborah.

5/01/2007 06:10:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

“But Barak said to her (Deborah), ‘If you will go with me, I will go; if not, I will not go.’

‘Very well, I will go with you,’ she (Deborah) answered.

‘However, there will be no glory for you in the course you are taking, for then the LORD will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman.’”

Judges 4: 8&9
Tanakh. JPS.

5/01/2007 06:21:00 PM  
Blogger trangbang1968 said...

Bravo to the Jews here who still seem to have the will for the fight.Yes,most ignoble Cedarford;cynicism is cheap.Masada is heroic when your women and weak ones face the scimitars of brute beasts.As for Al Masri,another dirtbag takes a dirtnap and the world is a better place.Bring on the next skunk and the next one...

5/01/2007 08:04:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Very realistic portrayal of our Haditha Conversations, Allen, Congrats.

5/02/2007 03:22:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Yes, indeed, my complaining about the Haditha Marines being KEPT IN SHAKLES because the lawyers and higher ups were afraid of a Time reporter's and some Iraqis false stories, proves beyond doubt I am not worthy Allen.
By YOUR standards.

5/02/2007 03:36:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5/02/2007 03:59:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Bombshell Cripples Case Against Haditha Marines

In a nutshell, the case exploded when an intelligence officer dropped a bombshell on prosecutors during a pre-hearing interview when he revealed the existence of exculpatory evidence that appears to have been obtained by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and withheld from the prosecutors.

This officer, described by senior Marine Corps superiors as one of the best and most dedicated intelligence officers in the entire Marine Corps, was in possession of evidence which provided a minute-by-minute narrative of the entire day's action — material which he had amassed while monitoring the day's action in his capacity as the battalion's intelligence officer. That material, he says, was also in the hands of the NCIS.

Much of that evidence remains classified, but it includes videos of the entire day's action, including airstrikes against insurgent safe houses. Also included was all of the radio traffic describing the ongoing action between the men on the ground and battalion headquarters, and proof that the Marines were aware that the insurgents conducting the ambush of the Kilo Company troops were videotaping the action — the same video that after editing ended up in the hands of a gullible anti-war correspondent for Time magazine.

5/02/2007 04:20:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

NCIS misconduct alleged in Haditha probe

I took the side of the Marines, Allen, you defended the honor of those refered to below:
Any honorable person that checked the background of Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani and those representing him at the Thomas More Center could not fail but be impressed.
Attorneys for the highest-ranking man charged with wrongdoing arising out of the slaying of 24 Iraqi civilians in 2005 are asking Navy Secretary Donald Winter to conduct an investigation of how his agents treated Marine witnesses and suspects.

"There are disturbing reports that American servicemen were treated like POWs by their own government," said Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center, a Michigan group defending Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani. "This entire investigation has been nothing but a political witch hunt instigated by insurgent propaganda operatives, anti-war media and anti-war politicians."

5/02/2007 04:28:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

You condemn me for criticizing this:
Note that some of the people you were defending were civilian lawyers, falsely accusing and mistreating Marines!
"The way the civilian law enforcement agents conducted the probe was like "having the verdict first and the trial second," Rooney said during a telephone interview Tuesday morning.

Leaks and investigative documents throughout the Haditha probe combined with the tactics of investigators pose significant hurdles for attorneys, he added.

"The defense of any of the clients is very difficult and it doesn't help when the interrogation techniques used by NCIS are not proper," Rooney said during a telephone interview. "I was always told by NCIS that they didn't take sides but that's not what happened in this case."

Chessani's attorneys, they say that many of the witnesses said the questioning was accusatorial, confrontational and insulting.

"One officer stated that agents yelled and threw things at him during his questioning," a release from the Thomas More Law Center states. "Witnesses believed that the agents had already concluded that there was wrongdoing and were not interested in information that would tend to exonerate the Marines.

5/02/2007 04:34:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

An Interview With The Haditha Defense Team

RS: Attorneys in the case have alleged the NCIS overstepped the bounds of behavior in the case, one story states:

Some of the interview and interrogation sessions that took place in Iraq in early 2006 lasted as long as 18 hours, during which the men being questioned were not allowed anything to eat, drink or use the bathroom, according to the complaint.

The yelling, screaming, accusing, and throwing of materials was directed at the officers more so.

We know that Murtha linked his statement about the Marines committing "cold blooded murder" to the briefing he had with Commandant of the Marine Corps Michael Hagee.

It seems that Hagee succumbed to a craven act of moral cowardice and political expediency.

The alacrity with which the leaks appear in the press and the quality of the information in the leaks, for instance, the Bargewell investigation appeared in the Washington Post and AP nearly concurrent with the defense receiving their copy, together with the actions of Hagee leads one to the conclusion that in a singular instance Jack Murtha was speaking the truth and that the commandant's office, if not the commandant, is the source of much of the information appearing in the press.)

5/02/2007 04:38:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Allegations of NCIS Misconduct in Haditha Case: Investigation Demanded

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center today announced that it will request the Secretary of Navy to investigate allegations of improper and unconstitutional interrogation methods employed by Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) agents against Marine witnesses. Law Center attorneys obtained the information during interviews of several key Haditha witnesses.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, “There are disturbing reports that American servicemen were treated like POWs by their own government. In fact, more concern has been shown toward the treatment of Iraqi prisoners than towards our Marines. An investigation of these allegations is in order.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

5/02/2007 04:45:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Marine Commander Faces Politically Charged “Haditha” Prosecution
“Lieutenant Colonel Chessani never retained an attorney during the year-long investigation leading up to these criminal charges and voluntarily answered all questions posed by investigators. He knew he had done nothing wrong and trusted he would be cleared.
Despite the charges against him, he still believes in that last line of the military Code of Conduct—‘I will trust in God and in the United States of America.’”

Chessani is described by fellow officers as a focused, hands-on commander, a strict follower of the Law of War, and sympathetic to the plight of innocent Iraqi civilians. He is a committed Christian with a wife and five children. He has honorably served his nation for over nineteen years with tours of duty that included Panama, the first Persian Gulf War, and three combat tours in Iraq.

The decision to launch a criminal investigation of the November 19 incident was made three months after its occurrence and as a result of a grossly erroneous and inflammatory Time Magazine news lead, which military commanders in the field suspected was instigated by terrorist propaganda.

The suspicious nature of the process was reinforced when months before the investigation was completed, Congressman John Murtha, an outspoken anti-war critic and chairman of the House military appropriations subcommittee, publicly accused the four Marines of being “cold-blooded murderers” and high ranking officers of “covering it up.” Murtha is the same person caught on tape negotiating bribes with Arab Sheiks during the FBI’s 1980 Abscam investigation—he was an un-indicted coconspirator in that case.

“The astounding and unprecedented public accusations of ‘murder’ and ‘cover-up’ by Congressman Murtha, which he claimed were based on his conversation with senior military officials, taints the entire process,”
stated Thompson. Although pressed by reporters, Congressman Murtha has thus far refused to provide the basis for his public accusations or reveal the names of the senior military officials from whom he claimed he received his information.
Odd you would argue the side of the hysterical Murtha, and Time Mag's anti-war reporter, and then call me hysterical.
Chill Out!

5/02/2007 04:59:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...


re: Haditha

No matter how many reams of agitprop you cut and paste, it is still that.

I do not know what happened at Haditha. Neither you nor your soul mate John Murtha knows what happened at Haditha. And you are both trash mouths for the same reason: you would dishonor the Corps for the personal gratification derived from taking cheap shots at the administration.

What I do know, doug, is that the situations Haditha Marines will be judged by honorable men and women, whose contempt for poseurs like you and Murtha will not influence their assessment of facts. Ultimately, despite the disgraceful conduct of grandstanders, justice will be done and truth will out.

To believe what you and your “sources” espouse is to believe that scores (if not hundreds) of Marine and Naval officers and NCOs are willfully conspiring to pervert the course of justice in order to placate indignant Iraqi, Muslim, and American politicians. You are nuts!

And, yes, Doug, those accused by the government of mass murder are almost always transported in shackles. The same would have been true for Cho, had he come to justice; and you, sir, would have cried like a spanked child had it been otherwise.

5/02/2007 05:29:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

At the EB, to which you refer, I asserted the Marines were being mistreated and scapegoated, and were victimized by a politically-motivated Witch Hunt.
You took offense at that.
Turns out I was right.
(Barring bizarre new disclosures that I do not expect)

5/02/2007 05:33:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

So the Thomas More Center dispenses agitprop?

And you defend the NCIS witch hunt of US Marines?

I believe truth will out also, as does the Ltc, that does not negate the fact that to this point they have been ill-treated.

5/02/2007 05:39:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Your hyperbole does not serve you well, btw.

5/02/2007 05:41:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

LtCol Chessani

Chessani is described by fellow officers as a focused, hands-on commander, a strict follower of the Law of War, and sympathetic to the plight of innocent Iraqi civilians.
He is a committed Christian with a wife and five children.

He has honorably served his nation for over nineteen years with tours of duty that included Panama, the first Persian Gulf War, and three combat tours in Iraq.
But HE was accused of a coverup!
...and Bargewell has determined there was NO Coverup.

5/02/2007 05:46:00 AM  
Blogger j willie said...

I witnessed the EB Haditha conversation. My take was, is and will remain exactly the same as Allen has described above. It's not the exact words that matter, its the tone and attitude, the character, that underly them. Doug, I don't know you, but I can say that your character as expressed in words strikes me as seriously deficient in honor.

Your attempts to recast that conversation here only add to that impression.

That Haditha conversation, along with the grating sound of that mockingbird that so relishes its own always unoriginal squawk, brought my days at the EB to an end.

5/02/2007 04:20:00 PM  
Blogger j willie said...

Wretchard, please excuse my OT comment. Will not make a habit out of it.

5/02/2007 04:22:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Good to know, J. Willie:
Facts don't matter, it's tone and attitude.
Go for it.
Truth is, you dislike and disagree with me.
Ok by me.
The slurs, well I consider the source.

5/02/2007 05:22:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Yeah, J Willie, twist this thread aroundv like Allen has attempted to do, (and still is doing) and lump me w/Murtha, when *I* took the side of the Marines v the civilian lawyers and assorted cowards up the chain.

Looks like 'Rat's defending them here too.
Spin Away!

5/02/2007 06:10:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

No cold Beer?
Crap, I'd leave too!
Here's another one of me defending the Marines.
Allen proceeds in a later thread to lump Hugh Hewitt in with Me and Murtha for taking the Ltc's side.
neat guy, that Allen.
Glad you appreciate that sort of thing, Willie.

Ltc is one with spotless 19 year career, above.

5/02/2007 06:44:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Sorry about the beer comment, that was a boo boo.

5/02/2007 06:45:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

j willie,


"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
___Sir Winston Churchill

5/02/2007 06:53:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Show me a single instance where I posted something that is out of line Allen, re: Haditha, that is.

Far be it from you to present facts, just slurs.
Says a lot.

5/02/2007 07:15:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

"Haditha Bombshell - Intel Evidence"
M. Simon at
Power and Control

5/02/2007 07:20:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

The Haditha Hoax

haditha “massacre” a hoax?

Haditha Bombshell - Intel Evidence

5/02/2007 08:43:00 PM  
Blogger M. Simon said...

C4 5/01/2007 11:34:00 AM,

And of course as we keep killing each new leader the quality of leadership and the leadership's trust in subordinates increases until they become infinitely more effective.

Well it could happen.

5/02/2007 11:09:00 PM  
Blogger M. Simon said...

wretchard 5/01/2007 04:52:00 PM said...

And that, come right down to it, is why some Muslims believe in the power of Allah. Allah strengthens the will of his adherents past any breaking point. They are willing to go past death itself. And they say to us: with our rifle and our belief in Allah we can defeat you with your laser guided weaponry and your belief in Harry Reid. Come to prayer. Come to Islam.

We have a secret weapon. Come to Brittany. This is a weapon more fearsome than any 20 divisions of soldiers backed up by 10 CBGs.

The munitions are delivered at the speed of light. The targeting precice and once a target is located follow on rounds are almost automatic.

5/02/2007 11:32:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

m simon,

On one of your blogs, you have declared me “insane” in reference to the Haditha matter. Come, let us reason together.

___In polling of the American public, the military of the United States scores about an 85% approval rating.

___In polling of the American public, the President, the Congress, and the Supreme Court score about a 20% approval rating.

We might, from this data, conclude that, while the American public feels its executive, legislative, and judicial branches suck (as it were), the public Loves, Loves, Loves its military.

Indeed, from the polling, the United States military is the single, sole, and only institutional or professional entity in which the American public vests its unwavering confidence.

Therefore, the vociferous argument made by you and others, claiming that the Haditha Marines are being “set-up” or “sacrificed” by the military for political purposes, undermines confidence in the single institution in which the public places its trust.

The outrageous claims made by you and others, based on hearsay, innuendo, and blog and media opinion pieces, are NOT helping the Haditha Marines or (more importantly) the United States.

At this writing, not one Article 32 investigation (hearing) has taken place. That being the case, not one of the Haditha Marines has been RECOMMENDED for Court-Martial. Because no recommendations have yet been made, no Courts-Martial have been held. And because no Court-Martial has yet to reach a verdict, no sentences have been levied.

For your benefit, allow me to direct you to some links that might go far to dispel any misapprehension you might hold concerning the UCMJ.

Oh, while you have probably never considered the possibility, any Article 32 hearing officer can recommend dismissal.

Article 32 Investigations

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 32 Investigation

Greg McCormack. Article 32 Investigations. McCormack and Associates – Military Litigation Law Firm

5/03/2007 04:53:00 PM  
Blogger M. Simon said...


The trust in the military is earned.

It is earned by the military correcting errors.

To think that the military does not respond to political pressure is to live in a fantasy world. If we can have a Nifong in North Carolina we can have one in the Marines.

Your argument reminds me of the Dreyfuss case where it was often argued that guilt or innocence was irrelevant. The honor of the army was at stake.

I don't buy it.

5/03/2007 06:22:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

m simon,

You really can do better.

Nothing I have written suggests a naive faith in human infallibility. It is the universality of human frailty that gives rise to such countervailing systems as the Constitution and the UCMJ.

Of course, guilt and innocence matter; when have I written otherwise? But mob rule will not establish facts nor will it prove guilt or innocence. Military justice will.

Your insinuating that a single person could be responsible for bringing about the Haditha matter confirms for me both your ignorance of military justice and your contempt for those who serve. For Haditha to reach its present proportions, literally hundreds of officers and NCOs had to give approval for the case to pass muster and move forward. Had any of those responsible for processing the cases suspected foul play or discovered wrong doing, all Hell would have broken loose. Unlike much of the public, the military is not peopled by sheeple.

Ironically, my personal sympathies lie entirely with the accused; this administration has placed unconscionable burdens of service on our military. But because a capital offense has been claimed, the interests of the United States and its Marine Corps require justice. Even more importantly, so do the accused.

Under other circumstances, I would like to believe that your integrity would place you on my side of the equation.

5/03/2007 06:59:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Anyone who disagrees with Allen has no integrity, Simon, deal with it.

5/03/2007 09:07:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger