Friday, February 18, 2005


Perhaps we won't have to invade Lebanon (in order to expel Syrian troops and the Hizb'allah neojihadist terrorists), after all. From the BBC:

Lebanon's opposition has called for an peaceful "independence uprising" and called for the government to step down. The opposition holds both the Lebanese and Syrian governments responsible for the assassination on Monday of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Hariri's death in an explosion in Beirut has sparked anti-Syrian feeling. Tourism Minister Farid al-Khazen resigned on Friday, saying the government was unable to "remedy the dangerous situation in the country". He said his decision was in line with his convictions and his "obligation to the nation". ... The opposition says it wants a representative government to be formed which would then oversee the departure of Syrian troops from Lebanon.


Welcome Le Sabot Moderne readers. And if your not one yet - YOU SHOULD BE, EVERYDAY! Start now with his LINK-FILLED post on the situation In Lebanon . For those of you unfamiliar with him, he has a great perspective on how popular democratic movements lead to real REVOLUTIONARY change: he's been living through, and been blogging on, the current ORANGE REVOLUTION in Ukraine.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.




ETYMOLOGY: mela, fruit + arancio, orange tree (alteration of Arabic naranj...


... the orange , originating in China, then being introduced to India, and traveling on to the Middle East, into Europe, and finally to the New World. ... As the fruit passed westward, so did the word, as evidenced by Persian narang and Arabic naranj. Arabs brought the first oranges to Spain, and the fruit rapidly spread throughout Europe. The important word for the development of our term is Old Italian melarancio, derived from mela, “fruit,” and arancio, “orange tree,” from Arabic naranj.
It seems as if democracy is flowing back - in reverse - along the very same route that oranges took: from the New World, to Europe, and now Arabia. CHINA: get ready... you're next!

UPDATE - 2/19 - (FOX/AP):BEIRUT, Lebanon — The Lebanese opposition stepped up its campaign against the pro-Syrian government Friday, calling for a peaceful uprising to force the resignation of Prime Minister Omar Karami (search) and the withdrawal of Syrian troops. ... the Lebanese opposition, in a statement read to reporters by Samir Franjieh, urged residents to continue gathering daily at Hariri's gravesite in Beirut's Martyrs' Square to light candles and pray near the mosque there that Hariri built. The government should resign and a transitional Cabinet should be formed "to protect the people, and to ensure an immediate and full withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon as a prelude for free and fair elections," said Franjieh, a second cousin of the interior minister. ... The grave of Hariri, a self-made billionaire businessman credited with rebuilding Lebanon after the 1975-90 civil war, has become a pilgrimage destination.



MSNBC/AP: Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday that he is convinced Iran does not intend to develop nuclear weapons and said he plans to visit Iran. Putin, at a meeting with Iranian National Security Council chief Hasan Rohani, also said Russia would continue its nuclear cooperation with Iran. Moscow has helped Iran build a nuclear reactor, a project that has been heavily criticized by the United States which fears it could be used to help Tehran develop nuclear weapons.

I have looked into Putin's eyes and seen the soul of an autocrat and an adversary who has joined the Axis of Evil. Putin is helping Iran, Styria, and North Korea. That makes him part of the problem, not part of the solution.

It is HIGH TIME we fomented an ORANGE REVOLUTION in Russia! More HERE.

UPDATE: NRO has a MUST READ on Russia by Ilan Berman. EXCERPT:

Moscow's renewed maneuvers in the Middle East have everything to do with ideology. Over the past year, Putin's increasingly authoritarian governing style has succeeded in eliminating any semblance of serious domestic opposition to the Kremlin, giving the Russian president virtual carte blanche to formulate foreign and defense policy. Worse still, this growing political mandate has been mirrored by the revival of unhealthy notions of Russian greatness and geopolitical opposition to the United States. Whether these ideas actually benefit Russian national interests in the long term remains to be seen. But for the United States, the Kremlin's counterproductive policies in the Middle East — and the corrosive ideology underpinning them — are becoming harder and harder to ignore.


More at OTB. Check it out.


Thursday, February 17, 2005


Joe Wilson. Richard Clarke. Sandy Berger. Dan Rather. Eason Jordan. Ward Churchill. Paul Krugman. Maureen Dowd. Jimmy Carter. Teddy Jo Kopechne. Howard Dean. John Kerry. Barbara Boxer. Chirac. Zapatero. Schroder. Putin. Kofi. Saddam. Assad. Arafat.
What a crew! Just saying each one's name makes me CRINGE! Thank God they're not calling the shots! I wouldn't trust a single one to cat-sit for me, let alone have ANY real influence on my nation's security.

At least Arafat is dead - a death that greatly improved the world of the living. When the others pass on from the scene, the world will improve some more.

(If you're reading this blog, then you know what immoral acts each of these awful Left-wing prevaricators, appeasers, and evil-doers have committed.)

SPHINX VERSUS LINKS: Old Media versus the blogosphere

In many ways, the conflict between Old Media and the blogosphere might be best summed up as a conflict between Old Media insiders who thrive by using the contacts they've accumulated through years of covering a beat and schmoozing with insiders - their "un-named sources" who so often speak ONLY off the record, and WITH an agenda - (what I call their SPHINX-like sources), and the bloggers who must LINK to sources which can be (and should be) readily tested by anyone and everyone.

Hence the "clever" phrase: "SPHINX vs LINKS."

In this contest - as in most others like it (in science or in law) - arguments based on testable hypotheses, which pan out, win.

Given the choice between (a) open-sourced independent bloggers - (often reporting in the area of their professional expertise, OR IN THEIR NECK OF THE WOODS), who analyze the public record and write up foot-noted essays, and (b) reporters working for editors with hidden agendas (and using unnamed sources with THEIR OWN hidden agendas), who do you think MOST people with a more than cursory interest in news will almost always prefer?

The blogosphere EVERYTIME. And the Old Media better get into it or they're goners.



U.S. Aides Cite Worry on Qaeda Infiltration From Mexico
By DOUGLAS JEHL Published: February 17, 2005
WASHINGTON, Feb. 16 - New intelligence information strongly suggests that Al Qaeda has considered infiltrating the United States through the Mexican border, top government officials told Congress on Wednesday. ... Intelligence that "strongly suggests" that Al Qaeda operatives have considered using the Mexican border as an entry point was cited in written testimony by Adm. James M. Loy, the deputy secretary of homeland security. But he wrote that there was "currently no conclusive evidence" that this had succeeded. In the past, law enforcement officials have said Al Qaeda might try to use the Mexican border, but the testimony on Wednesday [by CIA diredctor Goss] seemed to suggest increasing concern.
I blogged on this last week - on 2/12/05 - when Mexico announced it was no longer going to require visas for visitors from Algeria, (a MAJOR hot-bed of neojihadism and home of many dangerous neojihadis who have been involved in international terror). We shouldn't want an unchecked flow of unchecked Algerians to enter Mexico IF WE DON'T HAVE A SECURE BORDER WITH MEXICO; it just doesn't make sense!

In addition, non-Algerian neojihadis can pose as Algerians, get fake Algerian passports and then EASILY enter the USA from Mexico.

Therefore, if Mexico goes forward with this new policy (which, as a sovereign nation, they're entitled to do, even though it's a policy which DIRECTLY threatens our national security), we MUST take COUNTER-MEASURES: we must build a fence along the ENTIRE USA/Mexican border, and check EVERY SINGLE Mexican entering the USA against watch-lists, and record their retinas and fingerprints. Anything less is an OPEN INVITATION to a neojihadist terror attack here in the homeland.

The NYTIMES article is very good - RTWT!

UPDATE - NOTES: (a) the Israeli security fence proves that fences WORK; (b) the cost of a fence is LESS THAN the cost of an attack.

UPDATE #2 - WELCOME JAWA REPORT READERS! Please check out some other posts. And if you're not a regular JAWA REPORT reader yet - go there now and you'll become one!

Wednesday, February 16, 2005






From IAFRICA (AFP - excerpt; RTWT!):

Likely a suicide car bomb

"The security services are almost sure that it was a suicide car bomb," Interior Minister Suleiman Franjieh said, adding however that the investigation was still going on and rejecting calls for an international probe. ... A hitherto unknown Islamic group claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it was to avenge Hariri's close ties with the Saudi regime, but experts suggested it required highly sophisticated technology and know-how that only a well organised group or government might possess.
I have previously posted - and still believe - that a sucider indicates neojihadists are behind the murder, and that this implicates Iran, NOT Syria (who had the most to lose). Iran's announcement today - that they will help defend Syria in case it is attacked- maybe their attempt to "kiss and make up" with Assad, who may be furious that he's bearing the brunt of international criticism for the Hariri hit.


Hariri's killer is Palestinian linked to al-Qaida

The jihad has indeed returned to Lebanon. Hariri murder update from UPI, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

BEIRUT, Lebanon -- The suicide bomber who killed former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri is a Palestinian member of an Islamic group linked to al-Qaida. A security source, on condition of anonymity, identified the bomber as Ahmed Abu Adas, a Palestinian refugee who lived in the low-income Beirut neighborhood of Tarik Jadida. The source said the bomber's neighbors saw him leave his home a few hours before the attack that killed Hariri and eight other people.



Iran and Syria say they are to form a common front to face challenges and threats from overseas. "We are ready to help Syria on all grounds to confront threats," Iranian Vice-President Mohammad Reza Aref said after meeting Syrian PM Naji al-Otari. Both countries are under intense US pressure, with Washington accusing Tehran of seeking nuclear weapons. US tensions with Syria have soared since the apparent suicide attack that killed former Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. Many Lebanese blame Monday's car bombing in Beirut on Syria, but the Syrian government has denied it was responsible for the blast.

Maybe we shouldn't worry about which ONE had a direct hand in Hariri's assassination and just WHACK THEM BOTH! WITH A PROLONGED TARGETED CRUISE MISSILE ATTACK = al la OPERATION DESERT FOX!

Stay tuned...

MAYBE IT'S BEGUN: there are numerous reports about a blast at an Iranian nulcear plant - some claim it was an aerial attack by missile; other reports claim it was a "fuel tank drop." STAY TUNED!

Tuesday, February 15, 2005


If we discover forensic evidence - and the actual status of the group which claimed responsibility for the bombing - then this will point us in the direction of the perps:

IF the neojihadist group that claimed the hit is real, and IF it was a suicide bomber, THEN it was done by IRAN (because they are more neojihadist than Syria which is actually run by non-Muslims/Alawites).

IF the group is phony, and IF the bomb was remotely detonated, THEN the hit was done by Syria.
Sure: Syria does have some contacts with neojihadists - like Hizb'allah, BUT Syria only uses Hizb'aalah for selfish geopolitical aims (contra-Israel); whereas Iran uses Hizb'allah for international jihad.

Whoever did it should get whacked for a week with cruise missiles until their military - and any/all suspected WMD sites in their territory - are GONZO.


Putin has been acting very autocratically lately on domestic affairs, and internationally he has been VERY UNHELPFUL TO SAY THE LEAST - remember how he tried to help the thugs steal the election in Ukraine!?!

And don't forget: Putin is selling Iran most of its nuke hardware; as if that wasn't bad enough - Putin is also not doing a dang thing to help us contain North Korea; ON TOP OF ALL THAT now Putin is GOING AHEAD WITH A DESTABILIZING ARMS SALE TO ASSAD!

YUP: on the heels of the Hariri assasination - and just as Israel and the Palestinian Arabs are making some progress - Putin makes an unnecessary move that will upset the balance of power, and potentially give Hizballah - a neojihadist terrrorist organization - a very serious anti-aircraft weapon.

I think it is time that Condi - a Russia expert, by training - turned up the heat on Putin.

THE BEIRUT AND DAMASCUS NEXUS - you read it hear first

One month ago - on 1/15/05 - I posted on the relationship of Syria and Iraq, and posited that we would use Lebanon as our wedge to gain some leverage over Syria. The post was titled: THE ROAD TO DAMASCUS GOES THROUGH BEIRUT.

The Hariri assassination may be more useful to the USA's efforts at containing/taming Syria than the continued presence of Syrian troops which violates UNSCR #1559. IF the USA can prove that the Hariri murder was done by Syrian agents, then the USAwill use it to "forcibly neutralize" the Assad regime and get Syria to play ball. AND IF the neojihadist group that CLAIMED responsibility is phony, then this might be further proof that the bombing was indeed done by Syria.

BUT IF it is a real neojihadist group, and if the murder was in fact a result of a suicide bomber, then I think this indicates that Iran - and NOT SYRIA - was behind the murder -- (because, as I blogged HERE, Iran is more neojihadist than Syria; Syria merely exploits Hizballah for its own geopolitical gain; whereas Iran is truly neojihadist.

If we prove that Iran was behind it, then we should unilaterally undertake an OPERATION DESRT FOX type attack to destroy all of Iran's nuclear assets and most of the military infrastructure. (OPERATION DESERT FOX was the unilateral attack that liberal Democrat President Clinton waged against Saddam in 1998 - without UNSC approval and without even explicit Congressional approval.)


According to today's BBC, the UK will soon have only half the surgeons it will need to meet demand:

Thousands of extra surgeons are going to be needed over the next few years to meet demand, a report warns. The Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) said there would be a 2,760 shortfall by 2010 because of early retirement and new working practices. The figure amounts to 50% of the current number of surgeons and takes into account surgeons who will graduate from training in the coming years. The study said action was needed now as it takes 10 years to train a surgeon. ... However, the government missed its target of increasing consultants [medical specialists which includes surgeons] by 7,500 by 2004. A Department of Health spokeswoman said the government was looking to increase the number of surgeons. "It is something we are working towards. We know we have more work to do here.

ALSO from the BBC: The death rates for most diseases is MUCH higher in the UK than the USA; here's one example:

"There are 17,000 deaths from the cancer in Britain each year and the five year survival rate for sufferers is just 40%, compared to 60% in America."

That means your have a 50% greater chance of dying from cancer sooner/younger in the UK, than in the USA. Which is a win-win for the UK socialists: the government saves money by spending less to save your life, and they ALSO pocket the receipts from your retirement taxes since you won't be around to collect the benefit!


An authoritative study to be published later this year will demonstrate that the chances of survival after undergoing a major operation are far greater in an American hospital. The authors conclude that NHS waiting lists, the lack of specialist-led care and the fact that many patients do not go routinely to intensive care contribute largely to the difference. A team from University College London (UCL) and a team from Columbia University in New York jointly studied the medical fortunes of more than 1,000 patients at the Mount Sinai Hospital in Manhattan and compared them with nearly 1,100 patients who had undergone the same sort of major surgery at the Queen Alexandra Hospital in Portsmouth. The results, which surprised even the researchers, showed that 2.5 per cent of the American patients died in hospital after major surgery, compared with just under 10 per cent of British patients. They found that there was a sevenfold difference in mortality rates when a subgroup of patients - the most seriously ill - were compared. ... 'We looked at a number of hypotheses, but it does seem to show a difference in the systems of care, rather than a reflection of some other factor. The provision of intensive-care beds is obviously one of the differences. In America, everyone would go into a critical care bed - they go into a highly monitored environment. That doesn't happen routinely in the UK.'

And insane Lefties would rather enforce an equal outcome which is LOWER and WORSE for EVERYONE, than have a system in which outcomes may vary. Which is yet another reason why the road to socialism is ALWAYS the road to MEDIOCRITY as well as the road the poverty and servitude; IOW: the road to serfdom.

Suppose you come down with one of the big killer illnesses like cancer. Where do you want to be — London or New York? In Lincoln, Nebraska or Lincoln, Lincolnshire? Forget the money — we will come back to that — where do you have the best chance of staying alive? The answer is clear. If you are a woman with breast cancer in Britain, you have (or at least a few years ago you had, since all medical statistics are a few years old) a 46 per cent chance of dying from it. In America, your chances of dying are far lower — only 25 per cent. Britain has one of the worst survival rates in the advanced world and America has the best.

If you are a man and you are diagnosed as having cancer of the prostate in Britain, you are more likely to die of it than not. You have a 57 per cent chance of departing this life. But in America you are likely to live. Your chances of dying from the disease are only 19 per cent. Once again, Britain is at the bottom of the class and America at the top. How about colon cancer? In Britain, 40 per cent survive for five years after diagnosis. In America, 60 per cent do. With cancer of the oesophagus, survival rates are low all round the world. In Britain, a mere 7 per cent of patients live for five years after diagnosis. In America, the survival rate is still low, but much better at 12 per cent.

The more one looks at the figures for survival, the more obvious it is that if you have a medical problem your chances are dramatically better in America than in Britain. That is why those who are rich enough often go to America, leaving behind even private British healthcare. One reason is wonderfully simple. In America, you are more likely to be treated. And going back a stage further, you are more likely to get the diagnostic tests which lead to treatment.
CONCLUSION: socialized medicine sucks - if you measure the RESULTS.

Monday, February 14, 2005

WHO HIT HARIRI? My money is on....IRAN!

Hariri knew sooner or later it would come; TIME - 1993:

Hariri regards the risk of assassination philosophically; his Muslim faith clearly helps. "I believe if my life is finished, it will be finished," he says. "It is written." But the businessman in him improved the odds of survival by spending $2 million of his own money to install blast-resistant armor plating and bulletproof glass in the government palace. He employs 40 private bodyguards and drives in a convoy of six armored Mercedes with smoked-glass windows. Even the Lebanese soldiers who ride shotgun in Range Rovers interspersed with the Mercedes cars do not know which vehicle carries the Prime Minister.

... his Saudi connections have proved a source of tension in Lebanon, where foreign sponsorship of competing religious communities has often aggravated sectarian strife.
Some pro-Iranian Shi'ites view the return of the Sunni Muslim billionaire with suspicion. [emphasis added - reliapundit.]

After 27 years in the kingdom, Hariri speaks with a Saudi accent. He has encouraged other wealthy Saudis to invest in Lebanese reconstruction projects. Twice last month he met with King Fahd in Saudi Arabia, where his Palestinian-born wife Nazek and five children still live when they are not in Paris. While acknowledging his friendship with the King, Hariri denies he is "Saudi Arabia's man" in Lebanon. "King Fahd doesn't need a man in Lebanon," says Hariri. "Saudi Arabia doesn't have a policy of expansion or of trying to be influential in Lebanon. He is my friend. But I'm not here on a Saudi mission."

Neither is he Syria's man, he says. Unlike his recent predecessors, Hariri claims he does not seek approval for policy decisions from Damascus, which continues to maintain 40,000 troops in his country. But since it is virtually impossible to hold high political office in postwar Lebanon without Syria's stamp of approval, Hariri has cultivated ties there. Abdel Halim Khaddam, the Syrian Vice President responsible for his country's involvement in Lebanon, is a close friend. And Hariri's firm recently completed President Hafez Assad's hilltop palace in Damascus, a gift from Saudi Arabia. In addition, Lebanese allies of Syria retain key portfolios in Hariri's Cabinet. Though a September 1992 deadline for Syrian forces to withdraw to eastern Lebanon was not observed, Hariri says the redeployment is "not an issue" because the Lebanese army isn't yet strong enough to preserve law and order on its own. He declines to set a deadline for the Syrians' departure: "We cannot sacrifice the security of the country to satisfy some people. The Syrians don't want to stay, and we don't want them to stay. But they are needed."

Well... it looks like Hariri's wealth, contacts, his penchant for security - and his ability to broker deals with anyone and everyone who might help or hurt him - did him ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD, in the end.

Whoever wanted him dead, did to him what we could not do to Saddam. That alone suggests it was done by people with vast and safe and powerful contacts in Beirut. That means Syria or Iran.

I think it is more likely Iran and Hizb'allah: they have the most to lose if Hariri had been able to broker a deal with Assad (to get him out of Lebanon) - and it is MUCH more likely that Hariri could do a deal with Assad than with Iran - a nation with which he has had NO PERSONAL/COMMERCIALCONTACTS; (he only met with Iranians in an official capacity while PM).

Therefore, I would GUESS that the White House and the US State Department were wrong to finger Syria - or (in good ol' cop fashion) they were strategically putting the BIG pressure on the lesser thug, the thug who was most likely to break - which in this case is Syria.

If - in the comeing weeks - the neojihadist thug who appeared in the video claiming repsonsibility for the murder can be traced to Iran, then expect a MAJOR MOVE by the USA in the UN against Iran. One that would justify a US military "OPERATION DESERT FOX"-like attack that will destroy their all their nuclear assets. RATIONALE: a nation that uses assassination against adversaries inside a nation that it's supposed to be allied with is NOT to be trusted with a nuke; therefore, if Iran will not agree to invasive inspections by May, then WHAM! I'd expect that IF WE PRESENT PROOF to the UNSC that Iran was involved in the assassination of Hariri that we could get a unanimous UNSCR. One that would even have the OPEN support of many Muslim nations, including Syria and Saudi Arabia and Libya and Pakistan.

UPDATE - IHT: Iran is accusing Israel - which leads to me to have even more faith in my guess it was IRAN!

Three months after Israel was "driven out" of southern Lebanon there were elections in Lebanon, won, against the Syrian leadership's wishes, by the current prime minister, Rafiq al-Hariri, and his allies, the Druze. Hariri hopes to put an end to Hizballah activity because it threatens the prospects for reviving the Lebanese economy. Harari's message was: Lebanon cannot be both "Hong Kong" (today, Lebanon carries on its shoulders the ability of Syria to survive economically) and "Hanoi" (an adventurous revolutionary state).

Nasrallah is acutely aware of the will of the majority of Lebanese and has had to tread carefully over the past two and a half years in order not to overstay his welcome. At Syria's instructions, Lebanon has allowed Hizballah free rein in the areas from which Israel withdrew in May 2000. There is no real governmental authority and no international presence in these areas, which have become "Hizballah-land."

Nevertheless, Hizballah is acutely aware that this sufferance is tenuous. If it actually crosses a certain line and provokes a massive Israeli reaction that will disrupt and destroy everything that Hariri has been trying to build in Lebanon over the last few years, Hizballah might suffer the consequences from within the Lebanese system.

The Syrians are also a factor. There is a balance of deterrence between Israel and Syria today and for the foreseeable future. The Syrians have a very large standing army that can inflict a lot of pain. They have systematically and deliberately provided Hizballah with the ability to inflict even greater pain in some ways, since it can now hit large populated areas of Israel relatively quickly, without having to deploy the Syrian military. At the same time, conventional deterrence of Syria works. Bashar Assad is under no illusions whatsoever as to what will happen to Syria in a general conflict, and this has acted to modify and restrain Hizballah on a day-to-day basis.

During the past two and a half years there have been limited breaches of the peace, such as attacks on Israeli positions at the "Shib'ah Farms." There were some artillery duels with Hizballah in the north during Israeli operations in Jenin. There has been one major Hizballah-sponsored terrorist attack across the border near Hanita that killed five civilians and one soldier. Yet this is nowhere near the full use of Hizballah capabilities. How do we keep it this way in time of crisis?

Hizballah, and the Iranians who back them, have to some extent reduced the level of direct activity across the border because they have turned much of their energy toward the manipulation of terrorist activity within the Palestinian areas and within Israel. Essentially, the Iranian establishment is more focused on supporting terrorist organizations in the Palestinian arena, with Hizballah as backers and suppliers of arms and technology. The major conduit they use is Islamic Jihad, which is directly responsive to Iranian directives. The infusion of Iranian money, support, and technology accounts for the tremendous rise in the effectiveness of Islamic Jihad operations, as compared to a couple of years ago.

Hizballah has also infiltrated the Palestinian Authority itself. The use of mortars in Gaza was begun by PA officers working under the influence and direction of Hizballah. The bombing on Tel Aviv's Neve Sha'anan Street, which took 23 lives, was also the result of a link with Hizballah.

I think the link between Iran and Palestinian and Lebanese neojihadism is stronger than the link between Syria and the neojihadists; Syria is not ruled by Muslims (Assad is an Alawite), and they use only use Hizballah as a wedge against Israel for geopolitical reasons, not for ideological/reliigious ones. The Hariri hit was perpetrated by neojihadists - who are fanatical ideologues; furthermore, Hariri's assassination does NOT serve Assad well at this time. Therefore, I feel EVEN MORE strongly that Hariri was whacked by Iran.


The Iraqi Arab Sunni counter-revolutionaries have failed miserably - on ALL fronts: they have failed to get Bush to leave with his tail between his legs (like Clinton left Somalia, and Reagan left Beirut); and they failed to stop the election; AND - by preventing their Sunni brothers and sisters from voting - they prevented THEMSELVES from having critical "king-making" power in the new government.

YUP: the results - Shia 48%, Kurds 25% and Allawi 13% (appr.) - PROVE that IF the Sunnis had voted in good numbers, and for a ticket that represented their populace, that (1) they may have polled between 15% and 20% of the overall ballot, and therefore (2)they could have been in a powerful position to broker on all levels in the upcoming democratic processes. THEY REALLY BLEW IT, BIGTIME! THEIR VIOLENCE SERVED NOTHING AND NO ONE - NOT EVEN THEMSELVES!

Maybe, the Arab Sunni Iraqis will see this FACT and wake up to reality: democracy is here, and it'd be better for them (meaning it'd serve THEIR NARROW interests better) to play along, rather than continue to use violence (which has gained them ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - and which in fact has hurt THEM and THEIR CAUSE!).

This is a lesson that ALL neojihadists - including those in Gaza and the West Bank - should learn from.

Mexican-Algerian move MUST be countered


ALGIERS (AP): Algeria President Vicente Fox arrived in Algeria on Saturday with plans to sign a series of accords during the first visit by a Mexican leader to this North African nation in three decades. Four accords were being signed during his visit, Fox told Algerian government-controlled daily El Moudjahid, ranging from exchanges in education, art and culture to a decision to do away with visas in diplomatic and official passports

As a sovereign nation, Mexico is within its rights to allow anyone it wants into it's country - with any degree of security or checking or oversight.

But if they allow people into their country with NO CHECKS, then we MUST harden our border with Mexico, and make it IMPOSSIBLE for illegals to enter our nation from Mexico.

If Bush fails to do this, then it matters NOT how many other good and necessary security measures he takes; the neojihadists will attack us at our WEAKEST point, and right now it's our border with Mexico. And this move makes it a lot worse. In fact, it makes it intolerably dnagerous for us.

IMHO this border is as threratening to our natrional security as North Korea and Iran. If not, then more so. If we have to build a wall/fence/barrier - as the Israelis have begun, then so be it. And the time to begin hardening this border is now, if not PAST DUE! (Hat tip LGF.)

UPDATE: As direct result of this Mexican move, Muslim/Arab/North African neojihadists will have a much easier time posing as Algerians and entering Mexico legally. This will make it much easier for them to set up cells there, and to ferry in: messages; plans; money; materiel; etc. THIS IS A GRAVE RAMPING UP OF AN EXISTING THREAT!