Right Wing Nut House

POLICE IN BELARUS BEAT DANGEROUS COUNTERREVOLUTIONARIES DEMONSTRATING FOR FREEDOM. SEAN PENN MUST HAVE BEEN UNAVAILABLE THIS WEEKEND.

My goodness but don’t liberals exhibit some curious logic at times? At the drop of a hat, they’re off to some of the most exotic locales in the world, braving rotten hotel food and less than first class accommodations in order to demonstrate their solidarity with the goons, loons, and poltroons who are standing up to US “imperialism.” We saw them bravely offering themselves as human shields to that famous humanitarian and lover of kites Saddam Hussein. And they were seen doing the grip and grin with that jolly old radioactive elf in Tehran President Ahmadinejad.

Their secret, of course, is that the chances of them being in any danger are about as good as the next film they’re in making any money.

But in other, more out of the way places where there are no calls for using human shields to assist murderous thugs in “resisting” the US government, when the truncheons start to fall and the blood begins to flow, and where the people could really use some of that celebrity to keep the police from bashing their heads in (dictators being enormously shy as, like cockroaches, they scurry away from the light when it is shone on their methods of control) the Sean Penns, Susan Sarandons, and Tim Robbins, as well as their lesser known comrades are inexplicably absent.

Imagine what a bunch of film stars and washed up musicians could have done here!

They tried to demonstrate for freedom in Belarus today. They didn’t quite make it. Robert Mayer has the grim details including links to about a dozen sites that give a blow by blow (literally) description of the police actions against the grandmothers, the teenage girls and boys, the shopkeepers, and all the other usual suspects - the ordinary people of the world who are changing the face of the planet one dictatorship at a time.

They got bloodied today. They’ll be back.

In that respect, they show a helluva lot more staying power than the pampered leftists here and in Europe who weep about terrorist detainees having to listen to Christine Aguilera CD’s and wail about “oppression” whenever the government does anything to try and protect us.

The irony of course, is that these hand wringers and faux martyrs don’t have a clue what “oppression” really is. In this country, if you stand up and say “I’m oppressed” you get book deals, appear on TV where you are lovingly fawned over by unctuous, blow dried lickspittles like Matt Lauer, and end up getting invited to the best cocktail parties in Washington and New York. Your every utterance - as long as its anti-American enough - is dutifully recorded and repeated ad nauseum by an obedient and agreeing press.

Here’s what happens in Belarus if you stand up and say “I’m oppressed!”

Just a little perspective for your Sunday afternoon…

UPDATE

See also Gateway Pundit who not only has an excellent round-up but shows where our true priorities lie: “Democracy Babes Get Clubbing in Belarus.”

Why did the Bush Administration drag its heels for nearly 3 years in releasing the millions of document that fell into its hands after the fall of Saddam?

This is why:

BAGHDAD, Iraq — The Russian government had sources inside the American military command as the U.S. mounted the invasion of Iraq, and the Russians passed information to Saddam Hussein on troop movements and plans, according to Iraqi documents released as part of a Pentagon report.

The Russians relayed information to Saddam during the opening days of the 2003 war, including a crucial moment before the assault on Baghdad, according to the documents in the report Friday.

The unclassified report does not assess the value of the information or provide details beyond citing two captured Iraqi documents that say the Russians collected information from sources “inside the American Central Command” and that battlefield intelligence was provided to Saddam through the Russian ambassador in Baghdad

There are two broad hints that answer the question above. One, the investigation (and perhaps similar investigations like it) into possible espionage activity by individuals in the US military and intelligence community has now been compromised. In such investigations, it is always best that the targets don’t know they are under investigation lest they become more cautious and fail to reveal contacts and other members of their network.

The second hint is the great big headache the release of these documents has now given everyone in the national security and foreign policy establishment in the Bush Administration. Something has got to be done about Russia and this betrayal by an ally.

As long as the information was secret, the State Department could pretend that it didn’t exist (even though we can be almost certain they were aware of it) thus allowing us to work with President Putin on a variety of other issues unrelated to Russian perfidy in the lead up to the Iraq War. But Ed Morrissey is right when he writes of the consequences the release of the documents have for our diplomatic offensive against Iran:

After finding out that Putin has a habit of supplying tyrannical enemies of the Western nations with military intelligence to use against us, the last country we should trust with Iran’s nuclear program is Russia. We can also kiss off the UN; as long as Russia has its veto, that route will lead nowhere. Russia has revealed itself to be a major part of the problem in the Middle East, and we should stop pretending that they are part of the solution.

At least now we know why the CIA and John Negroponte wanted these documents to remain sealed.

In fact, these revelations have probably thrown a monkey wrench into our overall policy to contain Iranian nuclear ambitions. Any deal on sanctions with Russia that would have been in the works is now out the window which means the UN route - problematic at best with both China and Russia opposed to our sanctions policy - has been blocked. And with our “allies” in Europe kibitzing on the sidelines and waffling back and forth between talking tough and mouthing platitudes about a peaceful resolution, it appears that once again, the US will have to act unilaterally in order to safeguard the security interests of all concerned.

It is a very nice luxury that the Germans, French and other EU members have that they can benefit from American military actions while playing the anti-American card at home by denouncing US “imperialism” in order to cater to their pacifist and clueless populations.

Expect more revelations of this type, especially regarding the French who sold weapons to Saddam even while American tanks were rolling toward Baghdad.

CUBAN BORN PROTESTOR IDENTIFIED ONLY AS “ENRIQUE” HOLDS UP A SIGN THAT SAYS “DOWN WITH FIDEL” AT THE WORLD BASEBALL CLASSIC IN PUERTO RICO

And he held his crude, hand-written sign up to the cameras and the entire Cuban government trembled.

He has been identified only as Enrique, a baseball fan who attended a game being played between Puerto Rico and Cuba at the World Baseball Classic tournament in San Juan. Enrique is a non-descript sort of fellow, middle aged, bit of a paunch, smiling eyes behind wire rimmed glasses. He also has a clear sense of mission as well as a keen eye for history. He arrived 3 hours before the game with his little sign and a lot of chutzpah. Standing behind home plate near the field, he flashed part of his message to Cuban players as they warmed up:

A few moments later , Tony Castro (Castro’s son) walked by and I told him Tony , Tony , he looked around and saw directly my open sign Baseball Players YES Tyrants No , he looked down and kept walking and I shouted Eso es para tu papa (That is for your dad)…… I know he heard that…”

The whole world would hear what Enrique would be saying a little later.

During the game, Enrique and his friend Mercado left their seats behind home plate and made their way to where the sign would be visible to the TV cameras. Unfolding the other part of his sign that read “Down with Fidel” in Spanish, the image, being carried live in Cuba, flashed across TV screens and set off what in baseball is known as a “rhubarb” and in diplomacy as “an international incident.” Within seconds, the Vice President of the Cuban Sports Federation was frantically making his way toward where Enrique and Mercado were sitting with the still unfurled sign apparently intent on acting like he was on the imprisoned Isle of Cuba rather than free and democratic Puerto Rico. He was joined by another Cuban government thug who approached Enrique demanding that he stop what he was doing:

The authorities intercepted Castro’s lackeys and hustled them out of the stadium. While not under arrest, the authorities took them to a nearby police station:

Puerto Rican police quickly intervened and took the Cuban official _ Angel Iglesias, vice president of Cuba’s National Institute of Sports _ to a nearby police station where they lectured him about free speech.

“We explained to him that here the constitutional right to free expression exists and that it is not a crime,” police Col. Adalberto Mercado was quoted as saying in El Nuevo Dia, a San Juan daily.

Tell that to the Cuban government who almost immediately had their minions in the streets of Havana demonstrating against not little Enrique but the United States government and President Bush who they believe concocted this “plot” to discredit the Castro regime. The Cuban team (whose dugout resembles an armed camp with more police and security people than baseball players) protested the sign waving by not attending the post game press conference and Castro even threatened to send the team home because of a “lack of security and respect.”

Perhaps the dictator should have recalled his players anyway because they lost to Puerto Rico 12-2 the next day.

Castro is terrified of the prospect that several of his talented ballplayers will take the opportunity to defect while playing in the free countries of Central America and the United States. The hotel where the Cubans are staying in San Juan is a virtual prison:

Why are the Cuban baseball players being held as virtual prisoners?

Why aren’t they allowed to roam the hotel lobby, talk with the Puerto Rican people, drink a beer if they feel like it, dance with a Puerto Rican girl?

Why are they being held as virtual prisoners and not allowed the freedom that players from every other country are enjoying?

Why are so many security agents keeping track of the players movements all the time?

It didn’t used to be this way. There was a time when Cuban ballplayers were welcomed with open arms into the Major Leagues here in America - just as long as they were white enough.

In the cuckoo land of racist professional baseball during much of the last century, Cuban players were allowed to play for Major League teams as long as they weren’t too black. This posed some problems for those Cuban players who either were of mixed race or even if some of the darker skinned Hispanic players got too much of a tan playing in the sun. The lengths to which some teams would go to hide the racial make-up of some Cuban players was ludicrous. From changing their names, thus making them sound less Hispanic to requiring darker skinned players to play with long sleeve shirts during the entire season, the attempts to circumvent baseball’s unwritten racial purity rules would have been almost laughable in any other context.

During the 1950’s, there were dozens of Cuban players playing on Major League teams. And there was something else; protests at World Series games against the Batista regime:

More than one time in the 1950s, members of the 26th. of July movement directed by Fidel Castro, jumped into the playing field during the World Series games carrying protest signs against the Batista government. They did it because they knew that the games were being broadcasted in Cuba.

In addition to displaying their signs, the members of the 26th. of July interrupted the games by running all over the baseball field with their signs. Then, those Cubans were considered ‘heroes’ by Castro.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot and free Cubans are simply exercising their right to free speech in a free country by holding signs WHILE SITTING AT THEIR SEATS THAT THEY PAID WITH THEIR OWN MONEY, the Cuban dictator is whining and crying and threatening to pull out his slave players from the World Baseball Classic and order them to return to his island prison.

What a hypocrite this brutal dictator is!

I guess in Castro’s Cuba “What’s good for the Goose” isn’t necessarily good for the gander - especially since the Cuban people rarely see either a goose or a gander on the dinner table. The average daily intake of calories in Cuba is about 2400. Compare that to even the poorer countries in Central American whose average is 7% higher at more than 2800. More tellingly, their caloric intake from domestic animal products (348) is more than 20% less than their neighbors (460).

It will be interesting to see what Enrique’s little protest will do to the internal politics of Cuba. With Castro rumored to be in failing health, the struggle for power following his inevitable death will pit his military-security cronies against more reform minded politicians. In a struggle like that, having the people on your side will be critical. The goons may have the guns. But as long as there are people like Enrique who are willing to stand up for freedom, the forces who support liberty and democracy in Cuba will have a chance.

UPDATE

I’m surprised there isn’t more play on this story, especially from the right. There are quite a few other stories making news but this incident occurred Thursday night and we’ve had nary a peep from the blogosphere.

Dr. Sanity has a great write up on the story as does Brian Preston at Junkyard Blog who dubs Enrique “Hero of the Day.”

That, and more.

How bad is the situation in Iraq? How much worse is it likely to get?

The answer to the first question is pretty bad. With more than 130 dead in sectarian clashes throughout the country and several dozen Sunni mosques set afire in retaliation for the destruction of one the Shi’ite s holiest places, the Askariya Shrine, many are saying that Iraq is close to a sectarian civil war.

Which brings us to the second question; is a civil war possible and how likely is it?

Bill Roggio gives us some leading indicators to watch for regarding the probability of full scale conflict between Sunnis and Shi’ites:

• The Shiite United Iraqi Alliance no longer seeks to form a unity government and marginalize the Shiite political blocks.
• Sunni political parties withdraw from the political process.
• Kurds make hard push for independence/full autonomy.
• Grand Ayatollah Sistani ceases calls for calm, no longer takes a lead role in brokering peace.
• Muqtada al-Sadr becomes a leading voice in Shiite politics.
• Major political figures - Shiite and Sunni - openly call for retaliation.
• The Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party and Muslim Scholars Association openly call for the formation of Sunni militias.
• Interior Ministry ceases any investigations into torture and death squads, including the case against recently uncovered problems with the Highway Patrol.
• Defense Minister Dulaimi (a Sunni) is asked to step down from his post.
• Iraqi Security Forces begins severing ties with the Coalition, including:

o Disembeddeding the Military Transition Teams.
o Requests U.S. forces to vacate Forward Operating Bases / Battle Positions in Western and Northern Iraq.
o Alienates Coalition at training academies.

Bill lists several other signs including the Shi’ite dominated military and police standing by while the violence against Sunnis escalates, the mobilization of Shi’ite militias, and the active participation of military and police units in the violence against Sunnis.

Outside of the main Sunni political alliance withdrawing from talks to form a government (something they have done before), none of Bill’s other criteria for civil war are being met. There have been scattered reports of security forces joining in the destruction of Sunni mosques but these reports are unconfirmed and there appears to be no widespread action by the army or police against Sunnis.

No major political figures - including the man who is considered most responsible for the anti-Sunni violence Muqtada al Sadr - have called for violent retaliation. Sadr’s militia which is composed mostly of street thugs and unemployed youth have apparently taken it upon themselves to carry out retaliatory raids without the blessing of their leader.

This is to be expected at least for the moment. Sadr still wants to be a player in the government and any outward call for violence on his part would scuttle his hopes. That is, unless the violence continues in which case he and his militia could emerge (as Bill points out) as the sharp end of the stick in the kind of street fighting that would erupt in a full scale civil war. For the moment, his followers seem to know what to do without him saying a word. His position could actually be strengthened if he can reign them in after a couple of days at which point he could proclaim himself a peacemaker of sorts.

In this charged up atmosphere, both sides are seeking to blame the US. The Sunnis say our troops are standing by while their mosques are being burned and people are slaughtered. The Shi’ites complain that because we’ve restrained them in the past when Sunnis were slaughtering Shi’ites, outrages like the destruction of the shrine became more likely.

One could say as long as they are blaming us, they’re not going at each other full bore, which is cold comfort given the circumstances. That could change in a matter of hours.

Other Shi’ite leaders including the influential spiritual leader Ayatollah al-Sistani have called for “peaceful protests” and eschewed violence. And as the site Healing Iraq points out, the Sunnis have been strangely quiet:

So far, there has been no retaliation by any Sunni groups. There was news of a bombing at a small Shi’ite shrine in the Karrada district called Maqam Sayyid Edriess, but no details on that. A couple of insurgent groups with ties to Al-Qaeda in Iraq, notably the Mujahideen Council, have denied any responsibility of the Samarra attack. This leads us to wonder, if the Sunni groups have been planning to start a civil war all along, as many analysts have claimed, why are they so silent now? Where is Zarqawi? I am actually baffled by the lack of reprisals or any other response from the Sunni community. That could be the only glimmer of hope we have now. For how long, though? Friday prayers are tomorrow, and that is bad. But then again, maybe there won’t be any Friday prayers, as it looks like most of the mosques are either closed or taken over by Mahdi militiamen, at least in Shi’ite and mixed areas.

One other hopeful sign; there apparently are many mixed Sunni and Shi’ite neighborhoods where residents are working together to protect Sunni lives and property. And there are many ordinary Shi’ites who vigorously condemned the attacks on Sunnis:

Still, the neighborhood itself did not divide along sectarian lines: Shiite residents also condemned Wednesday’s assaults. Neighborhoods all over Baghdad reported similar camaraderie.

“As a Shiite, I do not accept this,” said Saadiya Salim, a 50-year-old homemaker. “These acts will lead to violence, because the Sunnis will attack” Shiite mosques.

As the afternoon dragged on and law enforcers were nowhere to be seen, neighborhoods seemed to shrink into themselves, setting up makeshift roadblocks out of the trunks of palm trees and, pieces of castaway metal stoves.

It was behind such a barricade that a frightened group of Sunni men took refuge, blocking off the entrance to their mosque, Malik bin Anas, in Al Moalimin district. Men with machine guns stood on the roof, their faces wrapped in scarves.

Will we look back and recall the destruction of the Shrine as Iraq’s Fort Sumter, the start of a bloody civil war? Or, will we mark it down as more of the same sectarian bloodletting that has plagued this tragic country since the overthrow of Saddam?

The US believes that the institutions of government in Iraq are strong enough to confront this crisis and overcome the violence. This may be true although other, unforseen circumstances could change that in a hurry. The point being, it is not likely that the destruction of the Shrine presages an all out civil war.

A more apt analogy than Fort Sumter where the first shots of the American Civil War were fired would be what became known as “Bleeding Kansas.”

Following the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854 that divided an unorganized territory into two potential states, settlers poured in because of a rider to the Act that allowed for “popular sovereignty” to decide the slavery question. Northern abolitionists sponsored settlers opposed to slavery while southern groups sent their supporters into the territories in order to vote for slavery. What started as a land rush became a bloody mess as Missouri “border ruffians” clashed with free state “Jayhawkers” all over the Kansas territory. When the pro-slavery groups sacked and burned the town of Lawrence, Kansas in 1856, retaliation came in the form of a wild-eyed Ohioan named John Brown who dragged 7 men and boys out of their houses and hacked them to death with broadswords.

The sacking of Lawrence and Brown’s retaliation was the catalyst for a bloody cycle of violence that became known as “Bleeding Kansas” which was to plague the state until the end of the Civil War and after.

The parallel to Iraq is obvious. And the danger is the same as well. Bleeding Kansas is considered one of the causes of the Civil War. And while the destruction of the Askariya Shrine will probably not be the immediate cause of a civil war in Iraq, it could nevertheless initiate a cycle of violence that once started, may be impossible to turn off.

This is the biggest test so far for the Iraqi government. It remains to be seen whether they have the strength and will to meet it.

It hasn’t been pretty these last few months watching as the Lebanese try to turn their enthusiastic participation in last springs round of parliamentary elections into the nuts and bolts of forging a consensus government. The sectarianism, factionalism, regionalism, and even the national loyalties of the main participants have all contributed to what amounts to a stalemate in efforts to create a stable government based on the popular will of the people.

That’s the bad news. The good news is that none of the principals entered into this process with their eyes closed and most - with a couple of notable exceptions - have maintained a remarkable patience with the process despite provocations from both inside and outside the country.

As it stands now, there are several hurdles to be overcome in order for a united Lebanon to move forward toward building a stable democratic state. Here are just a few of them.

SYRIA

Demonstrating a stupidity that could very well lead to his undoing, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has continued his violent meddling in the internal affairs of his next door neighbor.

Last summer, 2 high profile assassinations and one assassination attempt roiled the country as a prominent anti-Syrian journalist and the long time head of the Lebanese Communist Party were slain and an attempt was made on the life of an outspoken anti-Syrian MP. Both the French and US governments pointed the finger at Syria

Assad is in a tight spot politically. The elites in the civilian government and military are unhappy with him because of Syria’s humiliating exit from Lebanon. Not only that, he has the United Nations breathing down his neck as a special prosecutor attempts to unravel the threads of Syrian involvement in the assassination of Lebanese nationalist Rafiq Hariri. Two developments on that front do not bode well for Assad. First, the old Druze warlord Walid Jumblatt, leader of the Progressive Socialist Party, has called for an expansion of the UN probe to include the assassinations and bombings from last summer. This should put even more pressure on Syria to cooperate in the investigation, something that has been noticeably lacking from the highest levels of the government. There is probably a very good reason for this; Syrian complicity in the violence goes all the way to Assad himself.

Second, both the Egyptians and the Saudis are on board with a process that would limit Assad’s meddling in Lebanese affairs and guarantee Lebanese sovereignty. The intervention by these Arab states will probably mean that Assad will have to get serious about cutting ties to his Lebanese surrogates as well as prevent his intelligence service from interfering in Lebanon’s internal affairs. The Lebanese also want certain security guarantees to prevent a repeat of Syrian occupation that lasted a quarter of a century.

THE HARIRI TRIBUNAL

Last Monday, the new UN special prosecutor in the Hariri assassination probe Serge Brammertz who has taken over for Detlev Mehlis began the task of sifting through the voluminous evidence gathered by his predecessor that implicates high level Syrians as well as several prominent Lebanese in the assassination of the former Prime Minister. In addition, UN Undersecretary General for Legal Affairs, Nicolas Michel is in the country this week to negotiate what form the tribunal will take as well as whether or not its mandate will include more recent assassinations than the February, 2005 killing of Hariri.

There are several sticking points. Some Lebanese factions do not want the expanded mandate while others want the judges to be all Lebanese. There is also the continuing question of Syrian cooperation which has been paltry at best.

At bottom, there is fear. Because smack in the middle of all of this maneuvering are Hizballah and their allies the Amal militia.

Hizballah doesn’t want a tribunal at all or at least one that has any international representation. “The Resistance” as they are known in Lebanon (referring to their war against Israel) would just as soon have the whole issue of an international probe go away. Despite protestations to the contrary, they appear to have dual loyalties to Lebanon and their patrone in Damascus. Assad’s intelligence service supplies Hizballah with arms and funnels money from Iran to the group. That and the Syrian President’s hard line stance against Israel makes Hizballah an extraordinarily difficult group to do business with.

CABINET CRISIS

As if to prove that point, Hizballah has engineered a cabinet crisis by walking out and not participating in the last 6 meetings. While not paralyzing the government, it has made the cabinet’s decisions much more difficult and has opened the March 14th Movement (the coalition that banded together last spring to oust the Syrians) to withering criticism from the Shi’ite religious parties.

What does Hizballah want? They would like nothing better than to keep their guns. Along with the Amal militia (and a radical Palestinian faction) Hizballah is resisting pressure from the United States and others that they disarm their militia as required under United Nations Security Council resolution 1559. The impasse over the UN resolution has been exacerbated by Hizballah’s insistence that the Hariri probe be limited and that it not include any international judges.

What is Hizballah’s game? The terrorists are caught between a rock and a hard place. They would like nothing more than to participate fully in the Lebanese government. But in order to do so, they will eventually have to compromise on the issue of their militia. Heroes to many Lebanese especially in the South where Israel continues to defend itself against attacks, Hizballah sees a political trap in giving up its weapons and handing security in that vital area over to the regular Lebanese army. Essentially, the terrorists will lose their power base and be weakened. Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Hizballah’s political arm and spiritual guru has indicated compromise is still possible on the group’s weapons but not much progress has been made.

The Palestinian issue is a different matter especially now that Hamas has emerged victorious. Recently, an incident occurred where two Lebanese soldiers were shot by Palestinian hotheads. This has spurred the cabinet to action and there is a real possibility that the Palestinians will be allowed to keep their arms to patrol the refugee camps but prevented from any armed forays outside the camps. If this occurs, Israel will be mightily displeased given the proximity of the camps to Israeli territory.

Something similar may end up happening with Hizballah. It is the thorniest issue facing the cabinet and no compromise will come easily. And until the outlines of that compromise emerges, it is unlikely that the Hizballah ministers will find their way back to the table.

INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE

There are some factions in Lebanese politics that see the United Nations and especially the United States as meddling in the internal affairs of the country. Some of that is based on a fear of what shape the Lebanese government will take - more secular and less bellicose toward Israel. Others are genuinely offended at what they see as the heavy hand of Washington and Paris trying to pressure various factions to compromise.

This week, Saad Hariri, son of the late Prime Minister has very quietly come to Washington to discuss a host of issues with the American government. He met yesterday with Secretary of State Rice and will meet today with President Bush. The lack of international attention was deliberate; young Hariri has not been home to Lebanon in months because he fears for his life. If he is seen cozying up too much to Washington, it would complicate his personal political and security situation enormously.

At a leadership forum at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Hariri tried to put the best face on some faction’s split loyalty between Syria and Lebanon:

I don’t believe Hezbollah and Amal hold the interests of regional powers over those of Lebanon,” Hariri said when asked whether the two Shiite movements would rock regional stability on behalf of Iran. “There are difficult problems to be solved and discussed, but what was taboo is out in the open.” Though small, Lebanon was the only true democracy in the Arab world, and it had many values other than instability to export to its neighbors, he said.

“He who differs with the principle of putting Lebanon first will put himself at odds with the parliamentary majority,” Hariri told participants in the forum, which was titled “The Future of Democracy in Lebanon.”

Hariri also insisted that the killers of his father be brought to justice - no matter where the investigation led:

“We want the truth, not revenge. We are a people who believe that freedom is the only way of life. If they have not committed a crime, why not cooperate?” he said. “The quicker the process, the quicker this problem can be solved. I’ve always said we will accept any result from the U.N. commission. If it said people from Mars committed this crime, I will accept it. But this crime was not committed by anyone from Mars.”

“We ask for people who committed this crime to be punished,” Hariri said. “If those who did it escape with their crime, then all is lost in the region. If they are found out and punished, this sends a very strong message for the future. They will pay the price no matter who they are and how high they are.”

Hariri may indeed be a target when he returns to his home country. Just as important as his security, however, is his insistence that Lebanon solve its own problems without undue interference from the international community.

The democratic process in Lebanon has barely started. Still to come is an as yet formed council of national dialog that will deal with even thornier issues than those on the table already. Some of these include a new electoral law, the composition of the armed forces, collaborators with the Syrians during the occupation, and a host of other issues that will test both the patience and the patriotism of all the many factions in this emerging democracy.

Russian humor during the reign of communist thugs was extraordinarily funny. It seems that when people are oppressed, the quality of their jokes, not to mention the multiplication of targets, increases dramatically.

In a madhouse there was a propagandist highly praising the Soviet Authority. When he finished everyone applauded except for one man standing off to one side.

‘I’m not a lunatic, I’m the hospital attendant!’

There was a funny kind of fatalism in those old Russian jokes, a grudging acceptance of their lot in life:

What nationality were Adam and Eve?

Most certainly Russian! Only Russians can run about barefooted and bare assed, without a roof over their heads, where there is only one apple for two and nevertheless cry out that they are in paradise

Former Soviet leader Breznev was a particularly easy target.

Brezhnev called together a group of cosmonauts. ‘Comrades! The Americans have landed on the Moon. We here have consulted and have decided that you will go to the Sun!’

‘Be not afraid, comrades, the Party has thought of everything. You
will leave at night.’

But something horrible has happened to Russian humor; communism fell. In its place, the not quite democratic, mostly authoritarian Putin regime has sprung up and people are having a hard time adjusting, humor wise.

Witness this attempt at stand-up by the half-crazed leader of the Liberal and Democratic Party (Yep…that’s the name of the party) Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Vlad, to put it bluntly, is a lech. Judging by these remarks he made in reference to some rather mild criticism of the Russia-Ukraine gas deal uttered by US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, I don’t think I’d want to be a woman working in this guy’s office:

The fascistic pol attributed that “coarse anti-Russian statement” to Rice being “a single woman who has no children.”

“If she has no man by her side at her age, he will never appear,” Zhirinovsky ranted on. “Condoleezza Rice needs a company of soldiers. She needs to be taken to barracks where she would be satisfied.

“Condoleezza Rice is a very cruel, offended woman who lacks men’s attention,” he added. “Such women are very rough. … They can be happy only when they are talked and written about everywhere: ‘Oh, Condoleezza, what a remarkable woman, what a charming Afro-American lady! How well she can play the piano and speak Russian!’

One can almost see old Vlad drooling in satisfaction at the thought of Condi being passed around on a Russian army base.

Of course, the Soviet army had plenty of experience in such matters. In the immediate aftermath of their occupation of East Germany, it is estimated that upwards of 200,00 German women were brutally and systematically raped. Ostensibly, it was done in retaliation for the brutality exhibited by German soldiers during the occupation but it also bespeaks a coarseness of spirit and a lack of discipline on the part of the Red Army.

I’m sure Vladimir would have felt right at home with those fellows.

Not willing to keep his mouth shut, Comrade Zhirinovsky continued in a similar vein:

“Complex-prone women are especially dangerous. They are like malicious mothers-in-law, women that evoke hatred and irritation with everyone. Everybody tries to part with such women as soon as possible. A mother-in-law is better than a single and childless political persona, though.”

Note that at the end, Vlad throws a sop to mothers-in-law probably because, given the housing shortage in Russia, he’s living with her.

So who is this guy?

Zhirinovsky has made no secret of his insanity in the past. Besides praising Hitler and encouraging the use of nuclear weapons, he has advocated Russia’s invasion and “reacquisition” of Alaska. To eradicate bird flu, he’s suggested arming every Russian and ordering them to shoot everything with feathers.

Oh well, we’ve got Pat Robertson, they’ve got Vladimir Zhirinovsky…

The State Department says Hizballah is a terrorist group. So do the Israelis who in the past few days have responded to rocket attacks and infiltrations by the Iranian-supported militia by bombing their positions on the Blue Line. The UN - that’s right, the United Nations - has gone so far as to blame Hizballah for the border trouble, saying that the clashes “were initiated by Hezbollah from the Lebanese side, and which quickly spread along the entire Blue Line.” (HT: John Bolton).

But in Lebanon, a country struggling to build a democracy despite enormous problems, Hizballah is a power center. Holding 23 seats in the 128 seat Lebanese Parliament along with another 23 seats held by supporters of a Hizballah-Amal alliance in the southern part of the country, Hizballah is seen as a protector, a bulwark against “Israeli aggression.” They are also seen as a benevolent social services organization because of their work in building hospitals, clinics, schools, and food banks throughout the south of the country.

During the Syrian occupation, Hizballah and the Shi’ite Amal militia were the only groups allowed to carry arms. They cooperated with Syrian intelligence, acting as proxies in Syria’s low intensity conflict with the Israelis. And lately, they have emerged as a stumbling block to the formation of a government that would unify all the factions and give the “Cedar Revolution” a chance to succeed.

The reason is UN Resolution 1559 that stipulates all sectarian militias be disarmed. Hizballah has refused saying they are the “resistance” to Israeli “aggression” and have earned the right to defend Lebanon as they see fit.

This position is complicating the delicate dance going on between the various factions who came together in the spring and summer to form an unbeatable electoral block that has succeeded in kicking out the Syrians and beginning the process of reforming the constitution. The fact is, there is very little trust between the Future Movement, which is what the broad based coalition of Christians, Shi’ites, Druze, Armenians, and Maronites call themselves and the so-called “Party of God” that receives tens of millions of dollars from Iran:

Those who question Hizbullah’s loyalty to Lebanon must show their credentials first, Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said on Friday in his toughest response yet to critics who believe the resistance acts upon Syrian and Iranian orders. Nasrallah was speaking to a mass rally in Beirut’s southern suburbs, gathered for a funeral procession for the three resistance fighters killed during Monday’s clashes with Israeli troops.

“While encouraging dialog and discussion,” the cleric stressed “the resistance will not tolerate being named a traitor or an agent for foreign countries.”

Saad Hariri, son of the assassinated former Prime Minister, along with the Lebanese Premier Fouad Siniora not only don’t trust Hizballah, but worry about international support if the terrorist group refuses to lay down its arms or incorporate itself into the Lebanese regular army:

Political sources close to these complex relations said Hizbullah believes Hariri’s commitment to the resistance is shaky. A few days ago Hizbullah asked him for a straightforward clarification about his stand toward the resistance. Hariri’s assertion from Curacao Wednesday that the resistance helped free an important part of Lebanese territory and that its disarmament could be achieved only through internal dialog were primarily a response to this message, aimed at appeasing Hizbullah’s worries.

But even these words did not fully convince the resistance, which found them in contradiction with what it has been hearing from Premier Fouad Siniora, particularly his insistence Lebanon cannot confront the international community by refusing to comply with UN Security Resolution 1559.

And herein lies the big trap for America. As much as the PLO, Hizballah has integrated itself into Lebanese society. In the southern part of the country, their writ is law. The central government is tolerated only so far as they support the “resistance.”

And why not? Ordinary people in that part of Lebanon have literally been under the gun for more than a quarter of a century. Clashes between the Israelis and Hizballah (as well as the PLO and Amal) are a regular occurrence. Hizballah is welcomed as both protector and nanny since most of what passes for social programs are administered by representatives of the group. Support for Syria’s occupation was also strongest here for many of the same reasons.

Trying to “disarm” Hizballah and make them work in some kind of constitutional framework is a sticky matter indeed. All depends on the commitment of Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah to the democratic process. But is Nasrallah a free agent? Or is he simply a tool of the radicals in Tehran?

One thing is certain; Hizballah favors the destruction of the state of Israel. This, above all else, complicates both its internal relations with some Lebanese factions like the Free Patriotic Movement headed up by General Michael Aoun and some of the more secular oriented groups like Hariri’s Future Movement as well as relations with the EU and the US. The Administration has said that it would welcome a disarmed Hizballah into the Lebanese government although how this can be reconciled with their designation as a terrorist group isn’t clear.

Can any government formed with Hizballah have normal relations with Israel? And a larger question; can there be democracy in any Middle Eastern Country that doesn’t accept Israel’s right to exist?

As long as Israel is out there being portrayed as the bogeyman, demagogues will be able to use the democratic process to come to power and threaten the Jewish state. The resulting reaction by Israel to protect itself will only confirm the worst fears of people who are being led by men whose anti-Israel, anti-western bias generates such hatred. Until it becomes a political liability to use the rhetoric of hate against Israel, there will be men willing to seek power based on that hate.

Real freedom for the people of Lebanon is still an uphill struggle. Immense problems remain regarding a new constitution that would rid itself of the so-called “confessional” system that apportions seats in parliament and political offices based on religion. The problem of disarming Hizballah is almost a sideshow to the real drama being played out between the various actors who represent the parties, the religions, the clans, and the warlords who to this day have yet to figure out how to live together in peace.

Here’s hoping that both the people of Lebanon and the world exhibit patience with this process. We’re going to need it.

There is a certain amount of hyperbole practiced by bloggers that, at times, can be both annoying and a whole hell of a lot of fun. Even a cursory look at many of the articles on this site will show that I am not immune to exaggeration in the cause of either humor or political invective. Of course, our political foes make it very easy to draw them with broad brush strokes that highlight their total cluelessness or hypocrisy thus revealing aspects of both their personalities and ideology that are open to ridicule. But still, even my most rabid broadsides are (usually) based on some kind of truth be it historical in nature or on some kind of recognized, universal truth that has been ignored or trampled upon by the left.

But when it comes to reading articles about the French riots, I must confess to being a little annoyed by the casual way in which writers have connected the radical politics of al Qaeda with the thrill-seeking arsonists and troublemakers who are running wild in the streets of French cities torching cars and buildings while enjoying the media exposure of their grievances against French society. The remarkable fact that to date so few have been killed or injured is I think indicative of both the reluctance of French police to enforce the law but also an attitude on the part of rioters which reveals that whatever their beef with French society, they are not going to engage in wholesale slaughter to try and change it.

As several writers have pointed out, this apparent forbearance on the part of the rioters to restrain themselves from chopping off the heads of their tormentors may be only a temporary phenomenon. France may yet experience a wave of terrorist attacks that country has not seen since the Algerian independence movement of the late ’50’s and early 1960’s. During that period, various factions would regularly turn the streets of French cities into free fire zones. Even a group of disaffected French army officers got in on the gruesome fun as they opposed the eventual independence of Algeria and loss of French empire, going so far as attempting to kill President De Gaulle.

But that conflict was about national liberation not the killing of westerners in the name of Allah. And if al Qaeda is smart, they’ll send as much assistance as they dare to the radical imams who have jumped into the power vacuum left by France’s surrender. As Ed Morrisey points out, the eventual outcome of these riots may be more autonomy for the so-called “sink estates.” This can only mean trouble for French citizens as radical Islam spreads its message of hate and murder among the more impressionable and uneducated masses of Muslims who make up the bulk of rioters.

What can the French do about it? Not too damn much. One might be tempted to say “Where there’s a will, there’s a way” but the fact is, France has lost the will to defend itself and the western values represented by more than 1000 years of French civilization. Ever since the grandsons of Charlemagne divvied up his kingdom creating what became France and Germany, the French have been something of a self-appointed guardian of what we loosely term “western values.’ While these values have undergone enormous changes over the centuries, France has been at the forefront of redefining both human liberty and the individual’s relationship with the state.

That is, until World War I. Almost exactly a year ago on Veterans Day, I wrote about “The Day France Died:”

In Barbara Tuchman’s book The Guns of August , the author shows how all of the “Great Powers” blundered, stumbled, and through a willful disregard of logic and reason, rushed into a war that needn’t have been. Through a combination of national pride, misunderstanding, and a false sense of inevitability, the war became a gigantic destructive machine, devouring men and material at a pace never before seen in the history of human civilization.

This insanity touched France more than any other country. And it’s impossible to understand the France of today without looking at the France of nearly 100 years ago and understanding how the very idea of the French nation was destroyed in the trenches that, to this day, cut across the French countryside like some gigantic, unhealed scar; a constant reminder of innocence lost and lives destroyed.

World War I killed the idea of French nationalism. The great British poet and essayist Robert Graves in his book Goodbye to all That talked about the “Love Battles” of the war, battles so horrific that only a sublime love could explain how human beings could participate in such extraordinary bloodletting and barbarity:

One such battle was Verdun. Mention Verdun to a Frenchman today and he will relate with pride the manner in which the French army stood its ground against relentless German attacks. “They shall not pass” is as famous a phrase in France as “Remember the Alamo” is in America. Verdun was by far and away the largest battle in human history. In “A Short History of World War One” James Stokesbury points out that, at one time or another during the nearly year long battle, more than three quarters of the French Army fought at Verdun.

And therein lies the story of the death of France. The Chief of the German General Staff, General Von Falkenhayn, swore that “he would bleed France white” at Verdun. He succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. France suffered nearly 2 million casualties in defense of…what? Ten square miles of absolutely useless real estate, battered, bombed, cratered like the surface of the moon with the bodies of over 700,000 French and German soldiers pulverized by repeated and futile bombardments

In the end, the French army mutinied against the butchery. Such behavior explains the conduct of the French soldiery as Hitler’s armies swept out of the Ardennes in May of 1940. Entire armies surrendered without even firing a shot. When the French gave up less than a month later, it was estimated that nearly 75% of the men in its army had never fired their guns in anger at the Germans.

This latest challenge to the French nationalistic idea is being met with similar defeatism and timidity. And there is apparently nothing in the French soul to combat the threat. France is, after all, the birthplace of Deconstructionism, a movement that began as a new way to critique literature but ended up destroying the faith of the European left in western superiority. It should come as no surprise then, that the French are desperately seeking a way to accommodate the rioters rather than engage them on an intellectual level that would integrate them into French society.

The nation that was the home to some of the most articulate defenders of individual liberty has become a tired shadow of its former self. And for those who are saying that the riots are evidence of the death of France, I would say that it simply isn’t possible.

France has been dead for more than 80 years.

For more than 2,000 years the city of Paris has captivated people from all over the western world, beckoning lovers with a combination of mystery and romantic fantasy. Even when the city was a simple collection of mud huts plunked down in the middle of an island on the Seine river, one could imagine city boosters sending out word that their swampy little slice of paradise was a grand place to go if you were young, in love, and didn’t mind the stink.

“Fluctuat nec mergitur” is the city’s motto, Latin for “she is buffeted by the waves but she does not sink.” Judging by what’s been going on the last eight gruesome nights, Parisians are experiencing a lot of “fluctuat” and are certainly in danger of “mergitur”-ing. Rioting by “youths” as British media is calling the gangs of mini-Osamas and Arafat wannabees who are methodically cutting a path of destruction through the suburbs of the City of Lights, threatens to cause the cynical Parisians to actually raise an eyebrow in surprise. Unless something drastic is done and soon, the French may wake up one day with their smug little world of cradle-to-grave benefits and fantasies about being a world power again destroyed by their own haughty arrogance.

It’s too easy to blame the riots on poverty or living conditions, or lack economic opportunity for the unassimilated Muslim children who have discovered a way to tweak the nose of their tormentors. Ignored, shuffled off into the corners of society with little prospect to rise above their assigned place in the rigidly sterile social hierarchy of their adopted country, this generation of Muslims has apparently had enough and is in the process of demonstrating that “tolerance” and “understanding” are words empty of meaning if the word “freedom” isn’t included.

I don’t think that the rioters are out to establish Sha’ria law in France. But the term “intifada” which is being bandied about to describes their actions may be pretty close to the truth. They don’t see the French as occupiers. But they definitely see them as oppressors. What that must do to the high falutin self image of the French I can only guess. It must be hard to realize simply having good intentions and mouthing platitudinous nonsense about tolerance means jack to people who are reminded every day by every gesture and facial expression that you don’t belong. That you are different. And that there is no chance you will ever really measure up because you’re not part of the tribe.

Before those in this country are tempted to compare the plight of Muslims in France with African Americans here please don’t show your ignorance by doing so. The situation for Muslims in the last 40 years in France has remained static, basically unchanged. Only the most committed racialists in this country would say the same about the status of African Americans here.

Watching as French officials wring their hands while threatening dire consequences if the rioting continues only emboldens the rioters. I suspect that eventually, the army will have to be called in to deal with the unrest. And France will be fortunate indeed if the rioting isn’t nationwide in 72 hours. Will all of Europe explode if the riots continue and cause Muslim minorities to emulate their cousins in France? At the very least, it will cause all of Europe to pause and take stock which will probably not lead to substantive change but may start a dialog of sorts with Muslim communities.

I’m not ashamed to say that in a perverse sort of way, I am getting enormous satisfaction watching the rioters make the French out to be the hypocritical bastards they always accuse America of being. During the riots in Los Angeles following the Rodney King verdict, French pundits boasted that it could never happen in a country as tolerant and enlightened as France. I wonder what they’re saying now? After all, this is the country where in 1961, police murdered from 70-200 Algerian protesters and unceremoniously dumped their bodies in the Seine. And for all their talk of being freedom lovers, the French government suppressed that story for almost 30 years, censoring media that published anything about it.

I do sincerely hope that the authorities can get a grip and start to break the back of the intifada. For all the damage being done, the fact that they only arrested 80 people last night is a surprise. With thousands taking part in the disturbances, perhaps a firmer hand would be in order. Taking people off the streets and throwing them wholesale in jail may seem draconian but it might just break the momentum of the riots and allow the situation to sputter out.

I doubt France will wake up when this is over and place the blame where it belongs - on their own overarching hubris. They’ve been so busy looking down their Gallic noses at the rest of us that they’ve failed to see the wolf standing right in front of them. And now that wolf is through the door and is running wild in the house.

Time for the French to take a reality check before it’s too late.

Not content with redacting portions of the Mehlis report that named Syrian President Assad’s brother in law and other high ranking Syrian nationals as assassins of Lebanese nationalist Rafiq Hariri, the United Nations has also suppressed a report from the Lebanese Medical Examiner in the case that shows a “70% probability” that the driver of the Mitsubishi truck that exploded last February 14 killing Hariri and 21 others was a Palestinian:

BEIRUT: The UN team investigating the assassination of former Premier Rafik Hariri has disregarded a report by the Lebanese medical examiner Fouad Ayoub following a thorough investigation of its content.

Ayoub said a tooth was found belonging to a Palestinian whose remnants were subject to DNA analysis and is now believed to be the suicide bomber who drove the explosives laden Mitsubishi truck to the site of the explosion.

According to his report, these remnants belong to a 23rd corpse at the bomb site.

The bones of the corpse were found by a British diving team off the coast of the St. George Yacht Club, where the explosion occurred.

The remnants were matched with others found 100 meters away from the scene, on the premises of the Riviera Hotel.

Other forensic evidence that would point to a possible Palestinian connection to the assassination was also ignored:

The security sources also indicated the Swiss experts who took samples of explosives from the scene were able to determine the explosive used was C4.

C4 is commonly used in Eastern Europe, a region where the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command is known to have procured explosives in the past.

One of the names in the report not suppressed by the UN was the notorious head of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command Ahmad Jibreel. The PFLP Commander has been a thorn in the side of Israel for many years and is the author of dozens of terrorist attacks directed against the Jewish state.

Although suicide attacks in Lebanon were prevelant at one time, today they are all but unknown, the preferred method of assassination and terror being the remotely detonated bomb. The occurences of suicide bombings are rare enough that responsibility has usually been traced to factions in sympathy with the Palestinian cause; most notably Hizballah and the Amal Militia:

Modern suicide bombings was introduced by the Shi’ite terrorist organization Hizballah in 1983 in Lebanon, and it was in Lebanon that this modus operandi was refined throughout the 1980’s. During the 1990’s the attacks continued, but declined in frequency, until today, suicide attacks in Lebanon are a rare occurrence. All together, 50 suicide bombings were carried out in Lebanon, half of which were perpetrated by the Hizballah and Amal, and the remainder by secular communist and nationalist organizations, including the Lebanese Communist Party, the Socialist-Nasserist Organization, the Syrian Ba’ath Party, and the P.P.S.

The rise in the political power of Hizballah in Lebanon can be directly correlated with the drop in suicide attacks against other factions in Lebanese society. This presents an enormous problem for the US State Department in that they have named the so-called “Party of God” as a terrorist organization. The fact is that Hizballah political leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah is one of the most popular and charismatic politicians in Lebanon. And despite his call for continued attacks agains the Jewish homeland, his influence in the government currently taking shape in Lebanon cannot be ignored. Even though UN Resolution 1559 calls for the disbanding of all militias, Nasrallah has so far refused to cooperate in disarming Hizballah’s military wing which has in the past worked side by side with Syrian intelligence to control the population.

How to disarm Hizballah and mitigate Nasrallah’s influence so that Lebanon doesn’t become a base for terrorist attacks against Israel is perhaps one of the biggest under reported stories in American foreign policy. It will test our resolve in the war against terror as well as prove to the rest of the world whether or not our deeds will match our rhetoric in this war.

And complicating this picture is the UN’s Mehlis report that now brings the issue of direct Syrian interference in the affiairs of the Lebanese state into stark relief. Could the Syrians have been in cahoots with Hizballah in the assassination? Such a revelation would roil the streets of Lebanon and tax the abilities of the new government to deal with such a crisis.

One curious note also via the Daily Star: They originally reported that it was not the UN that suppressed the names of Syrian nationals in the assassination plot but rather the US State Department who asked the names be redacted. I have seen no other media reports that implicate the State Department in the cover-up and the PDF version of the dead tree Daily Star story has been taken off their website.

For the UN to ignore the report from the on-scene pathologist so that they would not have to deal with the implications of Palestinian fingerprints on the assassination of a popular, non-sectarian politician shows to what length that international body will go to in kowtowing to the murderous thugs currently in control of the Palestinian cause.

Here’s the Daily Star’s story on the missing paragraphs from the Mehlis Report.