French perfidy:

The Polish government is pressuring its military to keep quiet about those missiles, while issuing a statement through its civilian leadership that their military officers were mistaken. Well, that's a relief. Who would believe the French would sell top weapons to our enemies?

The Federation of American Scientists believes it. FAS was founded by scientists who had worked on the Manhattan project, and wanted to make sure their work was not misused or allowed to proliferate wildly. Here's what they have to say on the subject of the Syrian biological weapons program:

France has played the key role in building up Syria's very well developed pharmaceuticals industry. With the active encouragement of the French embassy in Damascus and French government export credits, the biggest names in the French pharmaceuticals industry flocked to Damascus in the 1980s. Many of them opened branch offices and built production facilities in Syria, to make French pharmaceuticals under license. As a result, the French increased their share from 13.11% of Syria's pharmaceuticals imports in 1982 to 23% by 1986. This was all the more unusual since Syria was expanding its domestic production and therefore importing less during this same period.

The French government screens exports to determine whether goods proposed for sale to Syria, Iran, Libya (and other countries) merit review because of proliferation concerns. While France has been applying the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime for several years, she only began applying controls on production equipment that could go into a chemical weapons plant in early 1992. "Only in the past six months has there been a universal will to impose this type of controls," a senior French foreign ministry official said in May 1992. "Before then, CW production equipment was freely available."

Like Britain and Italy, France has been unwilling to impose unilateral export controls on CW production equipment without an internationally-accepted control regime, so French companies could not accuse the government of putting them at a disadvantage on lucrative Third World markets. The Australia Group, which oversees the control of CW precursors, only finalized a list of production equipment that should also be subjected to international controls in late 1991. It was only adopted (after stiff opposition from France and Great Britain) in June 1992.

"Every day I sign off on export licenses," another senior French licensing official present at the same forum said, "and I wonder whether I have not just signed my resignation. In the area of chemical weapons manufacturing equipment, it is totally impossible to distinguish between civilian and military end-use," he admitted. "The equipment is strictly identical."

How about the Egyptian ballistic missile program?

Egypt is believed to have produced the Scud-B indigenously - perhaps modifying them to extend their range - with some North Korean assistance. An enhanced Scud-C (called "Project T"), with range/payload of 450 km/985 kg, is reported to have been developed and may be in service. In cooperation with the French Soci�t� Nationale des Poudres et Explosifs (SNPE), Egypt has developed, produced, and deployed the Sakr-80 rocket as a replacement for the aging Frog missiles. The Sakr factory is responsible for producing the warheads, launchers and fire control systems for the Sakr-80.

Perhaps you'd like to know who helped to design China's premier attack helicopter?

The new WZ-9 helicopter gunship, the WZ-9 [export model code-named Z-9G] is a gunship converted from the French-designed Z-9 helicopter produced under license in China.

The Chinese military considers its mission the ability to defeat the U.S. military. That implies that they are at least a potential enemy, and certainly there have been high tensions over Taiwan. If the U.S. Navy has to fight for Taiwan, it will do so in the face of a few goodies China bought from France:

China has used French helicopters to reinforce its weak antisubmarine
warfare capabilities. According to open sources, China has imported or built under license between 65 and 105 modern French turbine-powered helicopters, including about 40 after 1989.

According to experts, China's only effective ship-to-air missile is the French Crotale missile system. China has deployed the Crotale on four ships, including its two most modern destroyers. Also, China has reverse-engineered the Crotale--reducing China's dependence on foreign suppliers.

Other French equipment on the Luhu destroyers includes the Sea Tiger naval surveillance radar, the Dauphin-2 (Z-9) helicopter (described later), and the TAVITAC combat data system (which is used to integrate the Luhus' various onboard systems).

Those Chinese helicopters, by the way, were delivered to China after a 1990 embargo on giving the Chinese such technology; and of course the Syrian program is playing fast and loose with import/export controls on biochemical weapons.

National Ammo Day:

This sounds like a great idea, from Mr. Du Toit: National Ammo Day. The folk of Grim's Hall will certainly participate.

Rule of Law:

There are those among you, my old friends, who are wondering where I of all people get off defending the Rule of Law. It's a fair complaint.

I am an outlaw at heart, and all of you know it. I believe that a free man has, by right, a final appeal:

An appeal to arms, and to the God of hosts!

But we are not talking about the rights of men. We are talking here about two governments--ours (breaking its own laws, in the Plame case) and the French (breaking international laws, about which I normally care nothing, but of which France is the prime exponent).

A government ought to be bound by its laws, even if men may at the last extremity set them aside. By the same token, men who choose to bind themselves to the service of the state, whether from patriotism or for power, have an extra duty to the rule of law that lies not upon the rest.

This is the proper understanding of liberty. Governments are not people. They are our creatures. Men have freedoms, but governments are created by the yielding up of certain enumerated freedoms. Those liberties--those powers--are all that the government has. We have others, which we reserve.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Because the Government's freedom is a freedom we lay down, freedom for Government from the law can only come by stealing liberties that we did not gladly give. If freedom for men is to be preserved, Law must bind the state.

The French Reply:

Well, we have a French response, now:

France strongly denied having sold any such missiles to Iraq for nearly two decades, and said it was impossible that its newest missiles should turn up in Iraq.

There we are. It's impossible. Case closed. :)

It'll be fun to track these, eh? By the way, take a look at the stats on the Roland. This isn't a shoulder-fired job--it's part of a full scale antiaircraft battery. It's NATO standard issue--as good as anything in the French or German arsenal, and probably roughly on the same order as the British Rapier or the American Avenger system.

Moving into the Negative Range:

Since my last ounce of sympathy for Novak died yesterday, The Agonist's report of today pushes us into the negative range of sympathy:

ed: i was teetering on the fence about novak before this article. note the following sentences, and note them good.

The name of the CIA front company was broadcast yesterday by Novak, the syndicated journalist who originally identified Plame. Novak, highlighting Wilson's ties to Democrats, said on CNN that Wilson's "wife, the CIA employee, gave $1,000 to Gore and she listed herself as an employee of Brewster-Jennings & Associates. There is no such firm, I'm convinced," he continued. "CIA people are not supposed to list themselves with fictitious firms if they're under a deep cover -- they're supposed to be real firms, or so I'm told. Sort of adds to the little mystery."

Another mystery: why aren't you in court, Bob?

French Weapons:

Polish troops have found brand-new French antiaircraft missiles in Iraq. Year of manufacture: 2003.

UPDATE: Could these weapons have been bought elsewhere and then shipped to Iraq in violation of end-user license? It's possible, but these weapons are pretty new to have made much of a turnaround--they will have had to have been manufactured not earlier than January 1st to have a 2003 date, and of course the war was over by April. Still, I'm sure there will be a good explanation.

There had better be, as the sale of weapons to Iraq is illegal and prosecuted as a war crime under UNSC resolutions.

...and, of course, as several EU countries sent aircraft and pilots to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Their complaint against France, should a good explanation not be forthcoming, will be far angrier than ours. France to the US is a separate power with whom we're theoretically allied; but to EU nations, this would be a stab in the back from a sworn brother.

Still, as I said, I'm sure an excellent explanation is forthcoming.

Hmm.

The last, tiny bit of sympathy I have had for Novak just evaporated. Get him in court today, please? It's time to put an end to the slander that's being tossed at everyone in the White House, and time to put an end to the career of the guilty.

Burnt Njal said of a worse case:

"That is no breach of settlement," says Njal, "that any man should take the law against another; for with law shall our land be built up and settled, and with lawlessness wasted and spoiled."

I have been considering this case this morning, and I fear it is another example of the failure of law--that is, of lawlessness--in our country. This has been brewing for a long time. The Constitution is no longer routinely considered when writing a law; in addition to the example Del gives, we have "Campaign Finance Reform," which was approved in spite of the fact that the parties to it admitted it was unconstitutional. Nor were these lawless men merely the usual suspects:

�President Bush acknowledged the measure had �flaws� when he signed the bill into law,� said Sekulow. �He admitted that certain provisions �present serious constitutional concerns� and we are committed to ensuring that those provisions never see the light of day.�

We remember that the 2nd Amendment is ignored by every branch of government, state, Federal, and local. The 4th Amendment is suffering not much better a fate, with government "property seizure" laws that require you to prove you are not a criminal to recover your property--the burden of proof, usually on the accuser, is reversed because your right to your things is not as great as your right to freedom. You are guilty until you can prove yourself innocent.

We remember, but will not bother to rehearse, the dealings of the Janet Reno DOJ, and the Clinton administration. We remember the O.J. Simpson trial, which is but emblematic of a thousand such cases, when the rich and the powerful are excepted from the law.

We remember that the courts have allowed themselves to become havens for lawsuits designed to prevent people from executing their rights. There are lawsuits designed to punish people for selling you something in good faith. There are laws designed for an express purpose intentionally misused by public officials in pursuit of other goals.

It is time for a broad retrenchment. Here is the address to reach the DOJ. Here you can find a link to your Senators' web pages. Here is one for your representatives in the House. Your state representatives I leave to you. I propose the following as a joint plan of action:

1) For the DOJ: that Novak be brought before a magistrate immediately and forced to testify.

2) For Legislators: That they form a committee in every lawmaking body whose sole purpose shall be to seek out and revoke unconstitutional legislation. There is no reason to leave this to the courts: it is the responsibility of everyone in government, and every citizen, to see that the Constitution is respected.

3) That certain acts--RICO, Patriot, and so forth--which have been passed to address a particular evil (organized crime, terrorism) be amended to require that the government prove it is addressing that particular evil in order to use the powers thereby granted.

4) That tort reform becomes a priority of all legislators.

What say you?

New Links:

I've added two new halls to the links section, CommieWatch, and Anticipatory Retaliation. You might enjoy either or both.

More on Plame:

Cold Fury's Light of Reason has some thoughts on the Plame business, and more here. As a couple of days have passed, a few people have become willing to stand up and put their names on the line. When we were dealing with unnamed accusers and secret sources, I was willing to write this off as an unknowable business that was obviously being played by both sides.

Now, though, we have a few people brave enough to stand up and say what they know. OK--it's time to start taking depositions. Volokh speaks to why the DOJ hasn't done what I'd like them to do, which is send a US Deputy Marshal to haul Novak into court. Internal guidelines, indeed. We could know the truth about this business tomorrow if they would set these things aside and require Novak, under oath, to testify.

Meanwhile, the push seems to be for an independent "special prosecutor." No doubt as to why certain people want that--it would take time to hire one, and time to hire his staff, apportion money for his investigation, get papers in order, and start. By then, election season would be on us... how convenient.

What is needed is not an independent counsel. What is needed is a US Attorney to do his job. Send the Marshals. Let's find out who did what today, not in six or nine months, and get whoever it was safely behind bars.

It would be satisfying, would it not, to see the law enforced on the powerful for a change? Whoever they are?

The Scottish Enlightenment:

Southern Appeal has a roundup of recent stories and commentary on this most important of times.

More Letters to a Communist:

The Debate continues, afresh, for those interested. It makes an interesting counterpoint to the new Whittle essay, I think.

Eject!

There's a new essay on B. Whittle's blog. Don't miss POWER.

UGA:

Glory to old Georgia! I happened today across the University of Georgia: Points of Pride webpage. Oddly, it leaves out what I considered to be two of the key points of pride: the alumni status of Little Alec Stevens, and Doc Holliday.

Woot!

More damned unnamed sources, but this time there's something important at stake. The Kuwaiti press is reporting the seizure of biological and chemical weapons being smuggled from Iraq.

The Bush League:

So the first installment of the much awaited Bush League is up. I can't help but notice that a certain Dr. Rice is portrayed as reacting to scandal by hiding under her desk "again." Would that be because she's black, Sovay, or because she's a woman? Looks like the rest of your, ah, heroes are able to deal with the stress.

CIA Unmasked:

Who, besides Bob Novak, would be so evil as to reveal the name of an undercover CIA officer? How about liberal stalwart The New Republic? They didn't just blow the cover of someone they'd been told was an "analyst," living in D.C.--they blew the cover of a COS for the DO.

Again:

Gina wasn't satisfied with the first take, so after re-positioning the camera slightly -


Gina Wilkinson: Mr Saadi, could you ask them to do that one more time for me?
- (trans): This time in reverse?
- (trans): No no no.

Gina Wilkinson: Excellent.

I am not a vicious man, least of all toward women: but I am a father. After reading this through a second time, I can only say:

Let this woman hang.

UPDATE: "In Christian morals, in short, it is wicked to call a man "damned": but it is strictly religious and philosophic to call him damnable." So held Chesterton. I will hold with him, for he is braver than I am. It is hard not to think this woman cursed by all creation, but I will think so.

No Mercy:

Here, brothers and sisters, is a journalist urging children to climb on a missile in order to get a good shot of it for the TV News. There is no excuse, and no adequate punishment.

Via InstaPundit.

The Times Finally Turns Up:

Today's NY Times has a piece on the tribal nature of Iraqi families, which they say will complicate the reconstruction tremendously.

My readers, of course, dealt with this fully two weeks ago, and came to a far more positive conclusion. If you're curious, see "The Black Mail."

Link to the NYT via Arts & Letters Daily.

Wilson, II:

The social factor appears to be real in the Wilson case, reports Clifford May in the National Review. He reports from first hand experience, having been told informally himself that Wilson was an undercover officer:

On July 14, Robert Novak wrote a column in the Post and other newspapers naming Mr. Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA operative.

That wasn't news to me. I had been told that � but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhanded manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of.

Meanwhile, Atrios is finding that the "senior" official may have been something rather different. Damn journalistic ethics, eh, lad? He chides the press:

Look, words mean things. While "administration aide" might be technically true, it doesn't mean the same thing as "senior administration official."

"Words mean things." Now where have I heard that before? Oh, yes, I remember now.

Wilson:

OK, I'm going to comment on this a little bit after all.

First, here is today's story from the Washington Post. Here is the Novak column. And here is a roundup from when this story broke in July.

You can see that, even in July, people went for the jugular. 'Maybe the VP himself.' Huge 'felony'. 'Almost a confession.' And yet, the story died. Why is that?

I wrote the story off because it was based entirely on unnamed sources. Journalistic ethics haven't been especially impressive lately, but that's not what I'm talking about. Let's say Novak was fully ethical--I don't know the fellow, so it's only fair to give him the benefit of those charges we can't evaluate (it was obviously unethical by my standards to print the story outing a CIA agent--which is why we learn today that 5 of 6 journalists didn't print it). Nevertheless, let's say Novak was 100% ethical in all other points.

As a journalist, he knew that printing that story would bring questions about his sources. He also knew that, if he ever gave up his sources, he would never work again. And, further, as a journalist he is protected by the First Amendment--he can't be forced to yield his sources. So, the reader of the July piece can reasonably expect that the claims Novak makes will have to be evaluated on faith alone. You can't really judge whether you ought to take the word of an anonymous person.

Of course, Watergate was broken open by an anonymous. So, the sensible person does what we all did--we shrug, and wait to see if anything comes of it that can be evaluated.

Today, we have a new story--which is also based entirely on anonymous sources. A "Senior Administration official," two unnamed "Top White House officials," this is of no use whatever. We are left scrabbling after what "Top" and "Senior" normally mean in this context, and pulling feathers and thin reeds out of the air. Yet there is still not a name to hold onto.

But already we're having a field day of calls for impeaching Bush. "Rule of Law!" yells Atrios, citing two laws that he asserts must have been broken by the President. Well, sure--if the President is guilty, let's have the rule of law. Impeachment followed by a trial in the Senate is fine, an actual trial by jury to proceed once he's out of office.

But first let's be clear on one or two things:

1) There is no evidence at all that an actual pair of "top officials" existed as such. We don't know what Novak was calling a top official because we don't know--and will never know from Novak--who the sources were. These "top" officials could have been deputy undersecretaries for agriculture. Just because "top" normally means something in journalism doesn't mean it always means that thing. The fact that Novak expected his sources to remain secret means that we can't evaluate these sorts of charges with the surgical precision some seem to feel is possible. I've seen lists of suspects with as few as eight people on them. Get a grip.

2) There is no information at all on what GWB may or may not have done about this internally. The fact that Town Hall runs a column citing an unnamed source claiming that someone in your office committed a crime is not evidence that a crime has been committed of the sort that compels you to report it to a judge. If GWB actually knew that the charge was true--well, that's another story, of course. But if he simply had it mentioned at his news briefing, there's nothing de jure that requires him to respond to an anonymous allegation with, "Quick! Call a judge!" An informal internal inquiry--which might well have netted nothing if the two jokers had realized how much trouble they were in and clammed up--would be sufficient. Hell, doing nothing would suffice as far as the law was concerned.

3) Again from Atrios, we have an excellent overview of internal security policies that are designed to prevent intelligence leaks. The conclusions drawn are out of line, however. The simple fact is that the biggest danger to a CIA officer's cover is not from professional matters, but social matters.

There is simply no telling who knew that this woman was an undercover officer. We don't know who she told, for example--certainly her husband, maybe a friend. There are other ways that this kind of information gets around besides code-word communications. "So and so is a secret agent" is gossip of the most irresistible sort--anyone who dealt with her on an everyday basis probably knew, at least informally, that it was the case. If they knew informally, they hadn't signed the tons of nondisclosure agreements. It is still illegal, but having not signed the papers, they probably didn't think much about sharing a secret. Gossip is, I have found since moving to D.C., a Washingtonian favorite passtime.

So: these "Top" officials, even if they were in fact Top Officials, may not be associated with national security at all. That's just something to keep in mind.

Ultimately, I think all we can do is let the inquiry sort things out. I'm sure the CIA will take this quite seriously, and should have no trouble persuading the other involved agencies to do so as well. Still, I honestly don't expect major bloodshed over this. That's not to say the guilty parties aren't deserving of justice under the law. It is only to say that they may prove quite difficult to find. When you consider in the social factor, it becomes very difficult to draw lines around who might have known that she was an officer, and who might have wanted to share it.

As for that impeachment--it may have to wait a bit. I can't see anything here that would have required the president, or anyone especially close to him, to have been involved. Even if all the charges in the Post piece are perfectly true, these Top officials may prove to be far smaller fish than expected; and getting the kind of proof required by a court of law, when most of those in the know are going to invoke Journalistic immunity, may be difficult indeed.

Of course, it may prove that it really was Dick Cheney, based on information he read right out of a codeworded report. I wouldn't give odds on it if I were you.

Bloggerfun:

Blogger's having an issue today where it's transmitting blogs as-they-publish onto random (all?) addresses. If you're seeing this and you didn't expect to, hit refresh--that should fix the problem.

Of course, you're welcome to stick around, too. If you're not into Southern issues, skip down about two days, as I've been on that this weekend. The more regular issues are below.

Heroes & Volunteers:

This was not the first man from Tennessee to fight and fall for freedom. Sergeant First Class William Bennett, U.S. Special Forces, is one in a tradition of Volunteers as long as it is proud.

De oppresso liber.

CIA:

I often treat intelligence matters here, but I am not going to speak to the Wilson affair at this time. However, since others are apparently annoyed that it isn't getting more attention, I'll certainly post a couple of links for interested parties. My own thoughts largely echo those of that other Bear: namely, that it's early yet, and that the legal processes appear to be working on it.

I read about the rumors of this back when J. M. Marshall had it early. My thoughts at that time were that it was probably true, but likely some amateur functionary who didn't know it was illegal--the Bush administration has employed a number of folks who haven't worked previously in national government. That's good on the whole, as it brings a fresh perspective; but the price is that you get people who don't really understand the law or what the limits of their office are. The new claim makes it sound like it was multiple people at work, though, so it may not have been as simple as a mistake.

Of course, it's possible that it's not true; or that it's true, and that it touches the highest levels in a sorry conspiracy to destroy their political opposition. Neither extreme seems terribly likely to me, but who knows? It's early.

Ah, my people:

I feel a certain instant kinship with this fellow. Given his prolific nature, who knows but what we might even be related?

Psalms sat on Papa Pilgrim's right knee and Lamb perched on his left. Thirteen more of his children -- all of them with names from the Bible, several of them packing pistols -- crowded around. . . .

The Lord, Pilgrim said, told him that clearing a derelict mining road through the park was a loving thing to do.

"In order for me to love my children, I have to be a provider," Pilgrim said. "With great reluctance, I took the bulldozer and used the road. I had no idea what was in store."

Pilgrim's passage on the Caterpillar D4 has resulted in an edgy standoff between his well-armed family and the federal government. The National Park Service has shut down the bulldozed road to his property, dispatched armed rangers to assess park damage and is pursuing criminal and civil cases against him and members of his family.

The brouhaha over the bulldozer -- a drama still unfolding inside the largest U.S. park -- has made the Pilgrims actors in a national dispute over private access to federal land. National environmental groups are demanding that the Park Service prosecute the Pilgrims to the fullest extent of the law, while land-rights activists have embraced them as heroic victims of overzealous federal bureaucrats.

Overzealous federal bureaucrats, you say? Well, let's see what the bureaucrats in question have to say for themselves:

Park Service rangers admit that they are fed up with the Pilgrims, especially with the boys who carry revolvers and rifles.

"What they tend to do is surround you," said Hunter Sharp, chief ranger in the park. "When they do that, cops get nervous. We have had it. We are not going to back off. We represent the people of the United States."

So you do, although this person of the United States would warn you to leave well-armed backcountry people alone if you know what's good for you. They certainly aren't bothering me. What were you doing bringing riflemen out onto their land anyway?

Besides, what they are doing is legal:

In a sense, Pilgrim drove the bulldozer through a bureaucratic gap opened by the Bush administration. Over objections from environmentalists, the Interior Department published a rule in January that opened federal land to motorized access in places where roads once existed.

The rule -- a reassertion of an obscure 1866 mining law known as RS-2477 -- has since inspired right-of-way claims on old roads across federal land in the red rock country of southern Utah and across the Mojave National Preserve in California.

So let's see--during the Alaska winter, a fellow with 15 children decided to make legal use of an abandoned road in order to feed his family. This is of course exactly the kind of thing the Federal government is meant to prevent.

By act of Congress, national parks in Alaska are supposed to be different from those in the Lower 48. The 1980 law that created 104 million acres of parks and refuges in the state guaranteed that in-holders, meaning people who own property in the parks, could pursue traditional livelihoods while having "reasonable and feasible" access to their land.

For most of the past 23 years, however, a group of highly vocal Alaskan in-holders has complained that the Park Service has been flouting the will of Congress and trying to squeeze them off their land. They see a conspiracy of city people from the Lower 48, environmental zealots and narrow-minded federal bureaucrats who are trying to strip Alaska of its rural culture and replace it with a depopulated wilderness.

It's certainly true that people love trees. But if a tree stands in a forest and nobody can get close enough to enjoy it, what good is a park?

There Must Be Some Mistake:

CSPAN-3 is currently holding a conference called "Southern Writers on the Confederate Flag." Yet, somehow, my invitation seems not to have arrived.

It must be here somewhere...

[rustle rustle]

Hm.

Pity it didn't come on time. This is a rather sad display of a 'panel' with a uniform opinion. Sample quote: "Even though these young men didn't like being compared to Nazis, they did learn..."

I've only actually heard two people mention the Confederate Flag, and for one of them it was a quick aside ("When you're from Alabama, you take a lot of abuse... but I would like to point out [to the audience in S. Carolina] that we took the flag down three years ago.")

There has been much said about Southern history, diversity, and the experience of being Southern. I am not sure that any of these good people have, however, given any thought at all to the flag. Certainly they have not investigated the question of why it remains an enduring symbol, beloved by so many. The closest we get here is, "'Heritage not hate' is the cry of the thoughtful flag waver. I've always thought the walls were paper thin for them. How about 'Heritage and Hate!'"

Pity, really. There is a lot that probably should be said, if there were thoughtful writers to address it. I have spoken to Southern issues on occasion, and to Southern honor at length. I am, however, a poor writer whose attention only turns now and then to my blessed homeland, being occupied with other matters most of the time. There are surely others who are better qualified to speak to this matter, who might have been invited.

Yet if there truly be none, I would stand. I've tried to explain the Confederate flag to the crowd on Atrios' blog, after all--surely the folks at this conference couldn't have been more hostile than that.

Thanks, Gweilo!

Thanks to the Gweilo Diaries, I found this story from the Economist:

They found that a large adult head size was beneficial in preventing cognitive decline, in particular memory. At the other end of the spectrum, though, the news was grim. Those with the smallest heads had up to a fivefold greater risk of cognitive decline over this time than those with the largest.

I feel far more cheerful now than a few minutes ago. I'll just go get my size 62 hat, and whistle all the way to the train station.

A Photo Essay:

Hat tip to Oscar Jr. This is Sgt. Hook giving us some photographs of Iraq that you probably haven't seen elsewhere.

Australia:

From today's Sydney Morning Herald:

In the US's seven wars of the past century (not counting numerous and sometimes bloody military actions in Panama, Grenada, Somalia, Bosnia, Guatemala and elsewhere) - World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Afghanistan war, and the Iraq war - only Australia fought in all seven wars, and every one of them was fought far from Australia's shores.

In World War I, when the population was only 5 million, 300,000 men enlisted for duty and the majority, 216,000 of them, were either killed, wounded or captured. To put this in perspective, it was the equivalent of today's US (with 290 million people) suffering 12 million military casualties.

Minus what?

A review from Hollywood.com suggests that the new movie starring pro-wrestler 'The Rock' "is reminiscent of the Indiana Jones films-minus the xenophobic, imperialist, and misogynistic elements."

Xenophobic? My interest in learning multiple languages and studying Eastern history was spawned in part from watching those movies as a kid. Indiana Jones was xenophilic, if anyone was. The comic scenes in which he eats things like chilled monkey brains with aplomb were meant to emphasize that fact--the hero is not put off by differing customs. He speaks the language, he eats the food, he befriends the locals and attempts to understand them.

Imperialist? What can this possibly mean? Indiana Jones didn't seem to have a political agenda at all. He was an archaeologist who robbed tombs to fill a friendly museum and his pockets. He had no political affiliations, or really any notable political feelings, except that he hated Nazis.

Misogynist? The female lead of Raiders of the Lost Ark is introduced in a drinking contest, wherein she knocks down enough hard liquor to put a giant to sleep. Later, when Indiana Jones refuses to rescue her in order to keep the Ark expedition quiet, she nearly manages to escape by getting her captor drunk and pulling a knife on him. This is a misogynist's portrayal of women?

We've got to hold people to the correct use of language. Not one of these insults applies in fact, but the author applies them all brazenly and without apology or explanation.

Aaron the Slayer:

Aaron the Liberal Slayer has added me to his "Hail! Hail! Rant and Roll!" blogroll. In keeping with Grim's Hall's policy of reciprocal hospitality, his hall is now on our list.

No Evidence:

I keep being told by a certain young lady who knows who she is that there is no evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda were linked. Here's a small rebuttal to that position from TCS.

A Model:

This is the proper model for how we should protect our children from terrorists:

Bill Murphy said the Sept. 17 attack happened after he surprised a grizzly cub and its mother on a trail about 50 miles northeast of Anchorage where he was hunting for moose and sheep.
�I didn�t even have time to jump,� Murphy said.
Murphy grabbed his rifle but before he could raise it, the mother bear pinned him face-down.
It then clamped her jaws around his right shoulder and started shaking him like a rag. He said he felt teeth pressing against his skin, then a pop as they sliced through.
At some point, the bear let go, then stood over Murphy, panting and drooling onto his head. All he could think about was a bear attack over the summer near the Russian River where a man was bitten on the face and blinded.
�I just lay perfectly still and said, �God, don�t bite my head,�� Murphy said.
Finally, the bear moved away. Murphy said he got up, planning to shoot the bear, but it had broken his rifle.

Let us all be as our brother, our sister, the Great Bear.

Terrorists Aim at Schools:

Today's New York Post has an article on the threat al Qaeda poses to American schoolchildren. Pay close attention to this: there is no reason these attacks would have to happen in New York. They are more likely to happen elsewhere:

The NYPD has created a special unit to thwart terrorists who are tempted to target city schools, it was revealed yesterday.
Law-enforcement officials insisted they have gotten no specific threat against any school, and maintained that setting up the unit is part of an overall strategy to prevent another terror attack.

"Better safe than sorry," said one police source.

Earlier this year, The Post reported that al Qaeda thugs practiced storming a school, shooting children and taking hostages. The videotaped exercise took place in an abandoned school in Afghanistan.

As I recall, the videotaped exercise ends with shooting the hostages once television cameras are there to see it done, followed by a suicide-charge against police lines. It's worth remembering that these people were training to kill our kids, before the US Special Forces showed up at their campsites.

That may not be enough to stop them. The fact is that a large number of states--it may even be all of them, now--have passed special legislation making it a crime to carry weapons of any sort on school property, even if you are not a student but a teacher or staff member, and even if you are licensed to carry elsewhere. The effect of these laws has been to create "Terrorist Safe-Zones" where no one will have any tools with which to resist.

We need to rethink that. We don't want our kids carrying guns and knives to school, fine. We ought to want, though, those teachers who are willing and able to protect our children to have the training and tools with which to do it.

I have heard that in Israel, no field trip can be undertaken without at least one armed adult. It would be wise to have a few trained and armed adults in our schools, too. We ought to remember that evil men have chosen our children as targets. Up the militia.

Mongols in Baghdad:

I've been waiting for this story for quite a while. Ever since I heard that Outer Mongolia was sending Mongolian soldiers to Iraq, I've been waiting to see what kind of press they'd get.

The Iraqi and Arab press doesn't seem to have noticed them, which isn't surprising since only about 200 men are involved. Nevertheless, I was expecting something negative--I'm given to understand that the memory of the Mongol invasion is still very much alive in Mesopotamia.

Though the coverage seems to be coming from the New York Times, the story is still worth noting. It is a mark of the strangeness of the age we live in, when Mongols led by Americans join together to rebuild Iraq.

The Good Guys:

Internet Haganah fights the holy warriors on the electron frontier.

'Extraordinary Honors':

As only the navy knows how. This really touches the divide between those whose hearts are rooted in the warrior spirit, and those who aren't. For the rest of you, this probably just looks like silly grandstanding. For us, it swells the heart. The German Navy is on my short list of people who understand honor, along with the Queen of England and Her Majesty's Armed Forces:

The unexpected gesture touched the US sailors, Vice Admiral Timothy LaFleur described in an unclassified email: �From their main mast they flew our flag and they held their covers over their hearts. Needless to say, the whole crew was choked up and a few tears formed in our eyes. Both ships stayed next to each other in silence for about 5 minutes. These are the days that remind me why I joined the Navy.�

The FGS Niedersachsen and the USS Doyle are both part of NATO�s Standing Naval Force Atlantic (STANAVFORLANT), a permanent peacetime multinational naval squadron composed of destroyers, cruisers and frigates from the navies of various NATO nations.

Colonel Crockett:

The Honorable Davy Crockett speaks to socialism avant la lettre. Where did he get his keen understanding? From a backwoods Tennessee philosopher named Horatio Bruce.

Bruce is a name we've seen before in the history of our kind of government. The last time it was King Robert the Bruce, author of the Declaration of Arbroath. The Bruces of Tennessee are, of course, proud relations.

Economics:

Today at FreeSpeech there is a link to a stunning pice that suggesets that income inequality is less severe in the US than in socialist Western Europe. This remarkable claim is based on a formal study of the issue of income inequalities worldwide, The New Geography of Global Income Inequality by Glenn Firebaugh.

If this is true, the truth of which we won't know for a while, it removes the last leg of socialism. It is bad enough that socialism has hampered Europe and elsewhere so strongly that the US alone accounts for 60% of world GDP growth. If the evidence finally shows that socialism can provide neither for the general security nor the general prosperity, but in fact increases both internal violence (see below) and income inequality, we may at last see an end to that sinkhole of human energy and freedom.

Up the Militia:

Stern gun control laws fail in Britian. The comments below the post are worth reading.

Law and Afghanistan:

Parapundit has an interesting account of the problems of property law in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan:

Afgha.com looks like a good source for Afghan news. They are just collecting stories, rather than reporting--but they've got almost everything important I've seen out of Afghanistan this week, all collected on one page.

Declass'd Docs:

The Asia Times has a story on some newly declassified US documents. They relate to the Taliban and al Qaeda. The Times' story is by Mr. B. Raman, former head of RAW. RAW stands for "Research and Analysis Wing," which is a lightweight description of a heavyweight player. RAW is India's most aggressive intelligence service.

Most likely to my mind, then, this piece in the Times is Indian propaganda, designed to drive a wedge between the US and Pakistan. Nevertheless, it makes interesting reading.

Rangel on Clark:

Charles "Chuck" Rangel speaks to the Clark candidacy

"He can save this goddam nation from self-destruction," declares New York Congressman Charles Rangel, who is arranging a meeting for Clark with the Congressional Black Caucus, possibly as early as this week.

I'm going to guess that this is some of that "colorful" New York speech I've encountered on occasion. Let me just be the first to say, though, that I'll thank the Honorable Rangel to speak more kindly of my country.

Al-Qaeda/Iraq:

So what's the connection? Last week Cheney said there was a 9/11 link, and Bush said there wasn't; Cheney, of course, has been going to the CIA briefings every day for ten years, but Bush is the President. On the other hand, Bush also said that al Qaeda links to Iraq were absolutely certain, so the picture gets confused.

The Bleat has this:

I mean, there�s this:

Finally, what if any new evidence has emerged that bolsters the Bush administration's prewar case?

The answer to that last question is simple: lots. The CIA has confirmed, in interviews with detainees and informants it finds highly credible, that al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, met with Iraqi intelligence in Baghdad in 1992 and 1998. More disturbing, according to an administration official familiar with briefings the CIA has given President Bush, the Agency has "irrefutable evidence" that the Iraqi regime paid Zawahiri $300,000 in 1998, around the time his Islamic Jihad was merging with al Qaeda. "It's a lock," says this source. Other administration officials are a bit more circumspect, noting that the intelligence may have come from a single source. Still, four sources spread across the national security hierarchy have confirmed the payment.

The entire article is here, and it�s worth reading. It�s a summation of what the Administration alleged, what they didn�t use, and what they�ve learned since the war. Here�s another taste:

Farouk Hijazi, former Iraqi ambassador to Turkey and Saddam's longtime outreach agent to Islamic fundamentalists, has been captured. In his initial interrogations, Hijazi admitted meeting with senior al Qaeda leaders at Saddam's behest in 1994. According to administration officials familiar with his questioning, he has subsequently admitted additional contacts, including a meeting in late 1997. Hijazi continues to deny that he met with bin Laden on December 21, 1998, to offer the al Qaeda leader safe haven in Iraq. U.S. officials don't believe his denial.

For one thing, the meeting was reported in the press at the time. It also fits a pattern of contacts surrounding Operation Desert Fox, the series of missile strikes the Clinton administration launched at Iraq beginning December 16, 1998. The bombing ended 70 hours later, on December 19, 1998. Administration officials now believe Hijazi left for Afghanistan as the bombing ended and met with bin Laden two days later.

If you think it�s another steaming slice of facts from the Great Pie of Minced Prevarications, fine. But it�s a plausible piece, and if you�ve read it the lied-died meme seems particularly loathsome.

I don't see any way that there could not have been links, given all we've seen. Certainly the Abu Nidal Organization ran out of Iraq all through the last ten years, and they're linked to al Qaeda. There have been persistent rumors of Qaeda/Saddam links around the Ansar al-Islam area. No evidence has emerged to the press of such links since the war--but then, the Ansar campaign was handled by USSOCOM combined with the CIA Special Operations Group, which means absolutely everything that they encountered was instantly classified. No embedded reporters got to see what they found.

Assassination foiled by militia action:

Akila Hashemi was shot today in Iraq. A member of the Iraqi Governing Council, she was ambushed in her Land Rover by gunmen.

She may yet die from her wounds. If she does not, though, she has these men to thank:

The Land Cruiser then careered down the street for about 150 yards, followed by the pickup trucks, before crashing into the front gate of a house, witnesses said. As the pickup approached, its driver and passengers shooting in the direction of the house, Hashemi's brother removed an AK-47 rifle from the Land Cruiser and began shooting at the truck. He was joined by a security guard stationed at a neighboring high school.

"If we didn't shoot back, they would have come here to kill her or kidnap her," said the guard, Feras Deen.

Coalition forces, like policemen, can't be everywhere. A handy AK-47 goes a long way to evening the score, even against a well-planned and -manned ambuscade.

FreeSpeech:

A reply to an article on terrorism at FreeSpeech:

For what it's worth, I don't agree with the assessment. I agree that they can't be deterred, exactly. I also agree they can't be appeased.

But they can be stopped. When was the last time an airliner was hijacked successfully? September 11, 2001. It has never happened again, and it never will. That old classic of terrorism is a dead letter.

Truck bombings are a serious threat. Been to the Lincoln Memorial lately? What used to be parking is now an empty zone, protected by concrete barriers. You can't get a truck of any sort close enough to bomb the thing. Important buildings can be sealed off similarly--the extra walk is good for you anyway.

What about kidnappings? Al Qaeda tapes recovered in Afghanistan show them practicing at taking over grade-school style buildings. In their practice runs, they bargain just long enough to get the TV cameras on site, then slaughter all the children for the cameras. Won't happen more than once, I guarantee you. After that, every teacher in the school will not only be permitted but required to pack heat.

The same can be said for every other terrorist endeavour. In the United States and England, citizens have the full authority that policemen have to arrest criminals and bring them before the law. In the USA, we still have a statuatory right to arms, which even the District of Columbia respects under limitations--I recently ordered a Rex Applegate combat knife that is perfectly legal under D.C. precedent and law. Without a single change to the law of any state, but only a change in the minds of the people, we're a nation of armed and honest terror-hunters. No need for "Patriot Act" police powers--just patriots.

Think all of this is going to wear us down? Just the opposite is true. Israelis are happier than Americans according to a new study. At the least, this demonstrates that exposure to terrorism doesn't diminish happiness.

I frankly suspect it increases it. Aristotle wrote that happiness is an activity, and the particular activity it is consists in the exercise of your vital functions in pursuit of arete, which translates either as "excellence" or "virtue." The first of the arete he mentions is Courage. Terrorism gives us a chance to exercise that virtue, and we are the happier and the stronger because of it.

That is what we're looking at. Armageddon? Bring it on. Ragnarock? The same. Both legendary conflicts bring on better worlds in their aftermath--check the legends, lads. There may be bloody days ahead. Steel yourself for them, learn your rights and how to exercise them in defiance of tyranny--but do not fear what is to come. Courage will stand you.

We are going to win, if only we dare.

Wow.

I owe a great debt to this post by Kim du Toit. Somehow I had missed Bill Whittle. It was my loss.

These essays are, I say without exaggeration, the best thing I've read to be composed in our new century. I urge you all to set some time aside to read them.

Start here:

Trinity part one
Trinity, part two

If your ears aren't ringing by the end of the essay, read it again. If they are, wait until your heart settles down again, and then read another one of the ones under the "High Altitude" banner. They are magnificient.

The Homecoming:

Reader S.D. describes this as "a must read", and I am inclined to agree.

On another topic, Izzy was fairly gentle out this way. Truthfully, after battening down the hatches, I slept through pretty much the whole thing.

Izzy:

Isabel is coming our way. We'll see you when she passes, Deus volente, or inshallah as you prefer.

Home:

Alas and damn it.

IDF:

The Israeli Defense force doesn't mess around. Less than an hour ago, they moved on a house in Gaza owned by a Hamas member. A gunbattle erupted straightaway--I saw the first news alert about that posted two minutes after the one about the IDF's arrival.

Now, just half an hour after that, Reuters is reporting that the Hamas activist, Jihad Abu Swerah of the Izz-el-deen al-Qassam wing, has been killed. IDF troops were backed by helicopter gunships.

9/11:

I just today saw Caerdroia's tribute to 9/11. It's worth a look, and is elegant in its way.

I MEF:

A new book is out on the performance of the First Marine Expeditionary Force in Iraq.

Oratory:

National Review is trying to sell a book on Bush as a grand orator. I've always been of the opinion that Bush was indeed grand, when he was reading a prepared speech--but not when he was ad-libbing.

Jay Nordlinger makes an argument that Bush is one of the great speechmakers. It sounded like a stretch to me until I read it through. Now--well, I've listened to a lot of Bush's speeches, prepared and off the cuff. It's hard to say that Bush is great at the latter. And yet, Nordlinger makes a good case. You might take a moment to consider it.

Cold Poetry:

I raise a glass to this, which is reproduced on Mark Steyn's website.

1945 - 1985: Poem for the Anniversary
Sometimes,
walking for hours through the woods,
I don't know what I'm looking for,
maybe for something
shy and beautiful to come
frisking out of the undergrowth.
Once a fawn did just that.
My dog didn't know
what dogs usually do.
And the fawn didn't know.
As for the doe, she was probably
down in Round Pond, swizzling up
the sweet marsh grass and dreaming
that everything was fine.
***
The way I'd like to go on living in this world
wouldn't hurt anything, I'd just go on
walking uphill and downhill, looking around,
and so what if half the time I don't know
what for --
so what if it doesn't come
to a hill of beans --
so what if I vote liberal,
and am Jewish,
or Lutheran --
or a game warden --
or a bingo addict --
and smoke a pipe?
***
In the films of Dachau and Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen
the dead rise from the earth
and are piled in front of us, the starved
stare across forty years,
and lush, green, musical Germany
shows again its iron claw, which won't
ever be forgotten, which won't
ever be understood, but which did,
slowly, for years, scrape across Europe
***
while the rest of the world
did nothing.
***
Oh, you never saw
such a good leafy place, and
everything was fine, my dog and the fawn
did a little dance,
they didn't get serious.
Then the fawn clambered away through the leaves
and my gentle dog followed me away.
***
Oh, you never saw such a garden!
A hundred kinds of flowers in bloom!
A waterfall, for pleasure and nothing else!
The garden furniture is white,
tables and chairs in the cool shade.
A man sits there, the long afternoon before him.
He is finishing lunch, some kind
of fruit, chicken, and a salad.
A bottle of wine with a thin and beaded neck.

He fills a glass.
You can tell it is real crystal.
He lifts it to his mouth and drinks peacefully.

It is the face of Mengele.

***

Later
the doe came wandering back in the twilight.
She stepped through the leaves. She hesitated,
sniffing the air.

Then she knew everything.

***

The forest grew dark.

She nuzzled her child wildly.


Mary Oliver

Down in the West Texas Town of El Paso...

Maybe we should all move to Texas.

SMI:

I've been making fun of people who have been wringing their hands over a movement whose members they've decided to call "neo-Confederates." Just what might one be? Well, usually they're citing the Daughters of the Confederacy, which they astonishingly describe as "white supremicist." As far as I know from having grown up in Georgia, the DAC mostly holds tea parties and fancy-dress balls. I've never been to one, so maybe they discuss vicious things over their tea--but it's real hard to imagine them instituting a revolution.

So today I read about the Southern Military Institute on Southern Appeal. I can't help but notice two things right away: first, that their flag contains one of the Confederate National flags; and second, that the motto of SMI will be Deo Vindice. That motto, which means "God is our Defender," has been used once before, on the Great Seal of the Confederate States of America.

Now, I don't think the DAC or the Sons of Confederate Veterans actually advocate a new (that is, neo) Confederacy. SMI doesn't either, as far as I can tell. Interestingly, though, it says it will be training officers for "the National Guard of the Southern States, to help prepare young men to assume roles as officers in the Army and Air National Guard. Not the USMC? If not, why not, unless it is because your first loyalty is not to the Federal government? But then, why should your first loyalty be to the Feds? Jefferson's wasn't. I have to admit I have a love and affection for Georgia that I can't say I feel for anyplace else. Yet I also enlisted in the USMC straight out of high school, precisely out of patriotism and love of America, not just Georgia. I find it very odd that SMI isn't going to be preparing men to fight in the Marines, or even the US Army.

SMI is definitely pro-Confederacy:

SMI will sponsor programs that advance the knowledge and awareness of Southern history and culture including the honouring of Confederate Memorial Day and New Market Day, which celebrates the valor of the VMI cadets at the Battle of New Market, Virginia on the 15th of May, 1864.

I have a sense that a lot of this is a reaction to the political correctness of recent years. The Confederate flag-waving, the repeated invocation of "Judeo-Christian values," and so forth are plainly a ceremonial giving of the finger to the PC line that the Confederacy has to be viewed as an unmitigated evil; that descendants of Confederates should be ashamed of their heritage; that programs that are too physically tough for women to participate in them fully must be banned; that Christian faith must be practiced out of sight. We're hearing from SMI the voice of plain outrage over all of these challenges to the things that their founders hold dear, and to the destruction of two Southern institutions: VMI, and the Citadel.

Outrage is never pretty. I hope they get over it fast. It sounds like they will otherwise have an excellent program, one that will be both traditional and also, now, unique in America:

The concept of the American citizen soldier is as old as our nation itself. Likewise, an education in a military setting is a time proven approach to educating young men for positions of great responsibility. SMI fully supports these concepts. For those who desire an association with a formal military organization, SMI will work closely with the National Guard of the Southern states to help prepare young men to assume roles as officers in the Army and Air National Guard.

Southern traditions that have been tarnished and almost lost will live again at SMI. The concept of an officer and a Southern gentleman will be the standard, not the exception. Honesty, integrity, courtesy, and respect for all men and women regardless of race, position, or economic standing will be taught and required.

Well, hell, on those points these lads and I are positive allies. Too, I understand their outrage on the way the South is treated by the rest of the country. When a substantial percentage of the population considers the Confederates to have been "traitors," we can say that there has been a total failure of education in America as to the evolution of the Constitution and the history of our country.

But this is where I dissent with SMI. America is our country too. However improperly we've been treated, the fact is that the Yankees have been good for us. That's hard to admit to yourself, I know, but it's true. Slavery was evil. It had to go. Yes, Reconstruction was brutal and unconstitutional, yes the South was beggared for four generations, yes the South was treated as a colony of the North for seventy years. In spite of that, we are better off today because of our continuing relationship with the Yankee. We are better off simply because we are morally clean now: both Slavery and Jim Crow have been broken, and brotherhood between all Southerners is now possible and, increasingly, a fact of life. We must admit that we lacked the internal will to effect those changes.

It is also true that we have been good for the Yankees. The fact that America is not mired in European Union socialism is almost entirely due to the fact that the Solid South has kept us from being dragged into the abyss. The fact that our country has a military that is ready and able to defend her in her hour of need is disproportionately due to Southerners. America needs us. We are what keeps her true to her founding principles, as much as she remains true to them. If America is going to lead the world to freedom, she needs us to remind her what Freedom was supposed to mean.

It has never been a comfortable relationship, Southerner to Yankee. It has, however, been good for both of us. It's past time to recognize that.

Black Mail:

Reader S.D. sends this story from the Washington Post.

These authorities now understand much better the system of rewards and punishments that the Baathist regime used to keep these tribes loyal. For one thing, the tribes were given regular payments if the pipelines in their territories encountered no problems. Sabotage or other security problems in a tribe's area brought an immediate cutoff of those payments from Baghdad.

The protection funds ceased with the invasion -- and sabotage suddenly erupted. Now payments to the tribes are being restored by CPA officials, who are silently testing the theory that Sunni sheiks looking for a renewal of their customary meal ticket may have been negligent about, if not responsible for, damage to the national pipeline system. Paid town councils are also being established in Sunni areas and warned that salaries will stop if there are security problems in their jurisdictions.

I envision a critique of this policy among some of my left-wing friends. "But that's paying protection money!"

So it is. Works, though, doesn't it?

"Not in the long term. You can't expect to build a stable democracy while allowing this kind of large-scale criminality. The power of these tribal war-lords will work against both stability and democracy."

Well, as to that, do you know the origin of the word "blackmail"?

There is paid in blackmail or watch-money, openly and privately, �5,000; and there is a yearly loss by understocking the grounds, by reason of theifts, of at least �15,000; which is, altogether, a loss to landlords and farmers in the Highlands of �37,000 sterling a year. . . . The person chosen to command this watch, as it is called, is commonly one deeply concerned in the theifts himself, or at least that have been in correspondence with the thieves, and frequently who have occasioned thefts, in order to make this watch, by which he gains considerably, necessary. The people employed travell through the country armed, night and day, under pretence of enquiring after stolen cattle, and by this means know the situation and circumstances of the whole country. And as the people thus employed are the very rogues that do these mischiefs, so one-half of them are continued in their former bussiness of stealling that the busieness of the other half may be necessary in recovering.

"That kind of analogy to history is improper here. Scotland was, you yourself have argued, the font of our democracy. The most you can prove with this is that these robberies are not incompatible with the development of democracy, not that they ought to be allowed."

Fair enough. Let's skip down a bit in the same article:

The chief, even against the laws, is bound to protect his followers, as they are sometimes called, be they never so criminal. He is their leader in clan quarrels, must free the necessitous from their arrears of rent, and maintain such who, by accidents, are fallen into decay. If, by increase of the tribe, any small farms are wanting, for the support of such addition he splits others into lesser portions, because all must be somehow provided for[.]

So we're looking at a functioning social system that provides for the common welfare, albiet through actions that are not convenient for others in the state. Well, it's not especially convenient for me to pay the extortionist rate of taxes demanded by the IRS; and I am at scarcely less peril, should I try to refuse, than anyone from the day. If I will not pay, will not the IRS attempt to seize my wages? And if I hide my wages, will they not try to take my property? And if I defend my property, will they not send armed men to try to arrest me and throw me in prison? And if I defend myself from this, will they not shoot me in the street?

"It's just not the same thing at all. This is done democratically. What you're talking about is totally undemocratic. There's no legitimacy."

But I remind you that exactly this system was the root of democracy as we know it today. You would like to skip ahead two hundred years at a breath and turn tribesmen into a nation of tax-payers, and chiefs into tax-collectors and redistributionists. It can't be done, any more than Lenin could turn a nation of serfs into a post-Capitalist proletariat.

The reason that it can't be done is that these men have a fully developed understanding of what constitutes a legitimate authority. Your proposed substitute fails on all counts. You are, in other words, in just the position of the soldiers of the crown trying to effect their declarations of forfeiture on Highland chiefs:

Theoretically, in the eye of the law, the tenure and distribution of land in the Highlands was on the same footing as in the rest of the kingdom the chiefs, like the lowland barons, were supposed to hold their lands from the monarch, the nominal proprietor of all landed property, and these again in the same way distributed portions of this territory among their followers, who thus bore the same relation to the chief as the latter did to his superior, the king. In the eye of the law, we say, this was the case, and so those of the chiefs who were engaged in the rebellion of 1715--45 were subjected to forfeiture in the same way as any lowland rebel.

But, practically, the great body of the Highlanders knew nothing of such a tenure, and even if it had been possible to make them understand it, they would probably have repudiated it with contempt. The great principle which seems to have ruled all the relations that subsisted between the chief and his clan, including the mode of distributing and holding land, was, previous to 1746, that of the family. The land was regarded not so much as belonging absolutely to the chief, but as the property of the clan of which the chief was head and representative. Not only was the clan bound to render obedience and reverence to their head, to whom each member supposed himself related, and whose name was the common name of all his people; he also was regarded as bound to maintain and protect his people, and distribute among them a fair share of the lands which he held as their representative.

That's just where we are today. We have to respect that this is what people believe, and more to the point, what they want. A system that unmakes the old tribes can not, therefore, be democratic. If the state is to be really democratic, and truly Iraqi, it will have to make room for the tribes--or the tribes will make room for themselves, as did the Highlanders, by sword and fire.

The good news, such as it is, is that the answer to these concerns is organic. As capitalism becomes established in Iraq, the tribal ties will not be able to hold any more than they have held anywhere else in the world. The Highland clans ceased to exist not because they were beaten in battle or subjugated, but because it became more profitable for chiefs to have open land for grazing than large bodies of retainers. The chiefs themselves broke up the clans and drove their people off the lands and into the cities for work.

Many of the Highland proprietors, in their haste to get rich, or at least to get money to spend in the fashionable world, either mercilessly, and without warning, cleared their estates of the tenants, or most unreasonably oppressed them in the matter of rent.

So--patience. Alas, you'll get your way soon enough. In the meanwhile, this is the practical way to see that the pipelines are not disturbed. It serves that practical purpose, and also the humanitarian purpose of seeing that the people of the tribes are provided with their basic needs. It's the system the Iraqi tribesmen recognize as legitimate and proper, and is therefore a true expression of Iraqi democracy to make room for these tribes.

And, finally, it will end quite on its own. Prosperity will unmake it. By then, there will be jobs in the cities for them which do not now exist--it will be the same expansion of the economy that creates those jobs that will make the old social support system unsustainable.

Pay the black mail. It's all to the good, in the end.

I MEF:

Hail and praise, brothers-in-arms! Here follows an evaluation of the heroic First Marine Expeditionary Force. Of special note to the militia debate are these comments by Marine Corps Lt. Gen. James T. Conway, commander I MEF:

We found in the people of southern Iraq an industrious, intelligent society, very knowledgeable in the state of current affairs and very interested in what was to be the future of their country. I used to think Americans were the most impatient people on Earth. I now believe that distinction belongs to the Iraqis.

We should encourage that characteristic, however, especially as it relates to their security. We must continue to mature the Iraqi police, resource the Iraqi militia and oversee the revitalization of the new Iraqi army, so that the next time there is a transfer of authority in an historic place, like the amphitheater at Babylon, it will be between a multinational division and the people of Iraq.

Now this is just what I mean:

The Sage of Knoxville links to a story that outlines the success of the general militia, operating independently. Here it is.

Meanwhile, over at Freespeech I have a piece up on the need for an Iraqi militia. Up the Republic! Up the Militia!

Frenchmen pay Frenchmen for Libyan bombing:

Via the Rottie. I would say something about this, but I'm laughing to hard to think.

Thank God I'm a Democrat:

Who knew? I'm guessing we Southern Democrats fall on the low end of the scale, but still...

Schumpeter:

Joseph Schumpeter has always been my favorite economist. Reason magazine has a piece today that shows why his theories are important to understanding globalization.

Hat tip to Arts & Letters Daily.

Tort Reform:

One of the most important domestic issues in these United States is binding the busy hands of trial lawyers. Southern Appeal has some notes on a Texan effort.

How do we compete with this?

The Communist Party, USA, comes out in favor of whoever can beat Bush. What, I ask as a Southern Democrat, are we going to do to compete with this? There can be few better endorsements than the hatred of the Communists.

The only answer is to run on a pro-war agenda. But can any of the Democratic Party candidates do that? Ah, Zell Miller, why have you forsaken us? This ought to be your hour. Your party and your country need you.

GitMo:

Oh, to be in GitMo in the autumn. Or at least, anyplace else but Bangladesh:

Madan was a sergeant major in the terrorist organization PLA. He was trained in Bangladesh. Mani was a lance corporal in another outfit KYKL and was trained in guerrilla warfare in Myanmar It's literally a dog�s life for the 85 surrendered militants from various insurgent organisations. They were promised a good life. Instead, they have been living in the accommodation meant for police dogs for the last three years.

Insurgency tale: From hideouts to kennels�

Don't hurry home, Cynthia:

According to Best of the Web, there's a wee conference going on in Berlin. The Keynote speaker is Georgia's own Cynthia McKinney:

The several hundred people who were present believe the American government is to blame for the attack on the World Trade Center, which it either carried out itself, or else allowed others to carry out, in order to have an excuse to invade Iraq and establish world domination. . . .

One speaker described at length how the airliners had been controlled by propeller-driven aircraft that appeared in the sky near them. A British student from East Anglia University, who had started to find out about these conspiracy theories on the Internet and had helped to put up posters for the conference, said in tones in which one might describe a religious conversion, "This stuff is the truth, the real world." Nobody found my suggestion that the Americans were taken by surprise on 9/11 the slightest bit convincing.

Well, the web site has this to say about their keynote speaker:

Among the first to pose questions about what the U.S. government may have known in advance of 9/11, and when, was the Hon. Cynthia McKinney, congresswoman from the 6th District of Georgia for ten years (1992 to 2002). For raising that and other issues, she was vilified, attacked, and finally driven out of office by a flood of Republican money from outside her district.

That's not quite how I remember it. What I remember was that there was a large crossover of Republican voters inside her district. In Georgia, voters can choose to vote in either the Republican or Democratic primary, regardless of their party affiliation. Republicans in her district, so outraged by her attacks on the President just after 9/11, forwent the chance to select their own party's statewide and national candidates in order to vote against McKinney in the primary. McKinney didn't even survive to the general election, having been replaced in the primary by (now the Honorable) Denise Majette.

Not that Cynthia took it lying down. No, indeed. She staged a heavy counterattack against the "J-E-W-S," to quote her father. Her campaign swerved into inveighing heavily against Israel on the grounds that it was Zionist money trying to drive her out of office. A mysterious last minute phone campaign began calling voters across the district to warn them (falsely) that voting in the Democratic primary if you were a Republican was a felony, and that the police would be watching.

It didn't take: McKinney lost in a landslide. Now she's in Berlin, badmouthing her country and lending such prestige as she has to the cause of those who claim that the US slew its own citizens and servicemen as part of a plan to take over the world--a remarkable claim, given how visibly lacking these latter-day Moriartys were with plans for the takeover of Iraq.

Don't hurry home, Cyn. Georgia doesn't miss you.

Where are our foes?

Pro-Qaeda website Jihad Unspun has an answer: they're on videotape.

Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahari have released a brand new video tape on the eve of the anniversary of 911 which appears to be specifically timed to coincide with the memorial date.

But there is an interesting twist, Reuters reports:

A leading French terrorism expert cautioned Thursday against taking the latest Osama bin Laden video at face value, saying it was largely an edited collection of old footage and sound tracks that have already been aired. . . . Roland Jacquard, head of the Paris-based International Observatory on Terrorism, told French radio that the tape was above all a show of defiance on the eve of the September 11 anniversary by al Qaeda number two al-Zawahri.

"We have to be extremely prudent about this message," Jacquard told Europe 1 radio.

"Given that Osama bin Laden has not appeared on a video cassette for many months it's pretty incomprehensible that in the only video cassette where he appears beside Ayman al-Zawahri he doesn't speak, he just allows the latter to speak.

"The voice of bin Laden we hear in the background, thanking the World Trade Center plane hijackers, is exactly the same message that was broadcast in a video cassette by Al Jazeera on 26 December 2001," he said.

Al-Zawahri's message was also old and had been broadcast by Dubai's Al Arabiya network on August 3, Jacquard said.

September 12:

So where are our foemen? September 11 has passed and gone. Do you think they would not have struck us if they could? IF THEY COULD, AT ALL? But where are they, and their promised force of arms? Where are they?

Even in Iraq, they could muster no more than a wound. This is a lesson we learned long ago. Hiding in secret, they could lash out against our strong places and great towers: but when the President spoke to a joint session of Congress, not a month later; when all the powerful and the great men of our country were gathered in one place, where then were their jet planes, their power, their force? Where?

We have nothing to fear, and victory but to seek. We will scour the world of our foes. I defy them, and so should you. Defy them in their teeth. Dare them to seek you out, and see what comes when free men stand to fight.

September 11:

I am going to have only one post today. This is a poem I wrote two years ago today, when I could no longer stand to watch the replayed news on television. I shut off the thing, and went out into the forest, down to the creek that ran through the woods. I crossed it halfway onto an island, and sat among the stones and wrote this. It may be one of the oldest 9/11 poems, as I wrote it around three in the afternoon on the very day. It draws, of course, on Tennyson, but it is not blank verse. Rather, it is in the old alliterative style of the Beowulf.

Enid & Geraint

Once strong, from solid
Camelot he came
Glory with him, Geraint,
Whose sword tamed the wild.
Fabled the fortune he won,
Fame, and a wife.

The beasts he battled
With horn and lance;
Stood farms where fens lay.
When bandits returned
To old beast-holds
Geraint gave them the same.

And then long peace,
Purchased by the manful blade.
Light delights filled it,
Tournaments softened, tempered
By ladies; in peace lingers
the dream of safety.

They dreamed together. Darkness
Gathered on the old wood,
Wild things troubled the edges,
Then crept closer.
The whispers of weakness
Are echoed with evil.

At last even Enid
Whose eyes are as dusk
Looked on her Lord
And weighed him wanting.
Her gaze gored him:
He dressed in red-rust mail.

And put her on palfrey
To ride before or beside
And they went to the wilds,
Which were no longer
So far. Ill-used,
His sword hung beside.

By the long wood, where
Once he laid pastures,
The knight halted, horsed,
Gazing on the grim trees.
He opened his helm
Beholding a bandit realm.

Enid cried at the charge
Of a criminal clad in mail!
The Lord turned his horse,
Set his untended shield:
There lacked time, there
Lacked thought for more.

Villanous lance licked the
Ancient shield. It split,
Broke, that badge of the knight!
The spearhead searched
Old, rust-red mail.
Geraint awoke.

Master and black mount
Rediscovered their rich love,
And armor, though old
Though red with thick rust,
Broke the felon blade.
The spear to-brast, shattered.

And now Enid sees
In Geraint's cold eyes
What shivers her to the spine.
And now his hand
Draws the ill-used sword:
Ill-used, but well-forged.

And the shock from the spear-break
Rang from bandit-towers
Rattled the wood, and the world!
Men dwelt there in wonder.
Who had heard that tone?
They did not remember that sound.

His best spear broken
On old, rusted mail,
The felon sought his forest.
Enid's dusk eyes sense
The strength of old steel:
Geraint grips his reins.

And he winds his old horn,
And he spurs his proud horse,
And the wood to his wrath trembles.
And every bird
From the wild forest flies,
But the Ravens.

Even the French...

...can get behind us in hating the Communists this time. The Militant of New York reports:

French capitalism kills 12,000
during heat wave,
Paris blames �mother nature�

My. At this rate--assuming the Communists will quit killing people entirely--Capitalism could catch up to Communism in only slightly more than eight thousand years. (That is roughly one hundred million divided by twelve thousand, or 8,333 years and four months).

FreeSpeech.com:

I've been invited to join the crew at FreeSpeech, which I've agreed to do. Most of my blogging will continue here, but now and then I'll run something by there if it seems to be on the topics interesting to their readership. Keep an eye out.

A Modest Proposal:

From the Gweilo diaries. Sounds about right to me--if you can be sure. OK, pretty sure.

Not for my Lady readers:

This must be one of those neo-Confederate things I've been reading about.

Rumsfeld Today:

Today the SECDEF said some things widely being considered an outrage:

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Monday opposition to the U.S. President was encouraging Washington's enemies and hindering his 'war against terrorism'. . . .

He said if Washington's enemies believed Bush might waver or his opponents prevail, that could increase support for their activities.

"They take heart in that and that leads to more money going into these activities or that leads to more recruits or that leads to more encouragement or that leads to more staying power," he told reporters traveling with him on his plane.

"Obviously that does make our task more difficult."

There are exactly two things to be said about this:

1) He is, of course, correct on the facts. Public opposition to the war does hearten the enemy. Those who merely disagree on how the war should be fought do not, but those who believe we should really be seeking peace and avoiding war, withdrawing from the fights we are in and refusing to be drawn into more, are in fact advocating the US position that al Qaeda most desires. To the degree that these critics are loud or appear likely to succeed, the war becomes more difficult and, consequently, more dangerous to the warfighter.

2) That's just too bad. In a free society, we accept these costs. The costs are real: an emboldened al Qaeda may engage in attacks it would have avoided otherwise, and may thereby kill soldiers and Marines who might else have lived. Their lives are paid willingly, though, precisely to maintain the freedoms that--in this case--endanger them.

There are other parts of a free society that make it hard to fight war, too. Perhaps the two most prominent are: first, the fact that a large section of Federal authority is invested in the Congress, which is empty of understanding and given to political grandstanding even in a time of war; and, second, that the Executive changes every four or eight years, so that we are not able to maintain a consistent foreign policy in the long term. Thus, our allies can't depend on us to act in a predictable manner, and our enemies can hope to hold out until the next election, when policies may change and key figures be replaced.

All the same, it is this system of freedom that we are fighting for. It is precisely this, in fact, that the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines exist to defend. Mr. Rumsfeld would probably understand that in a week when he hadn't just flown from Washington to Iraq to Afghanistan and now back to Washington. We'll read jet-lag into his comments, and let them pass for now with this mild chastisement.

Liars:

A young lady I know said to me today, in response to my mentioning a piece in the National Review, "Well, they are liars. It's hard to deal with people who lie." I was a bit too shocked to give a proper reply.

Really, the Highland Southern upbringing is incompatible with (but superior to) that which is offered in the rest of the country. I guess it's not a big deal to call someone a liar these days, even if what you mean is that you find their argument so removed from reality that you don't care even to begin addressing it. I had a bit different training.

I remember when I was sixteen, and my father decided to buy a car for us to use to drive to Atlanta, where he worked and I went to school. The salesman wanted to sell us a mid-sized car at a modest price, but we decided that, as it would be only the two of us, we wanted a compact instead. Oddly, that caused the price to go up. When we asked why, he made some noise about how supply and demand was making the deluxe model cost less than the stripped-down, smaller body.

Dad asked me what I thought. I said something like, "If that's the going rate, we should pay it. Just please," here addressing the salesman, "tell down on the counter a few bills of sale that show where anyone has paid that price. If you can produce three or four of them, I'd say we were getting a fair deal." The salesman sputtered, my father made some noises that sounded apologetic, and we withdrew.

Once we came into the car to ride home, I found that my father was furious at me. "You all but called that man a liar," he said. "I would not have blamed him if he'd climbed over that counter and beaten you to death. In fact, if he had, I wouldn't have stopped him."

"But he was lying," I protested.

"It doesn't matter," Dad said, and nothing else. I didn't quite understand his wrath at the time. I do now.

"[P]erhaps the worst thing one could do to challenge someone else was to accuse him of being a liar," notes an article on the Code Duello. To call a man a liar, to one of the Old Code, is to dare him to kill you if he can, and to swear that you will slay him if he dares to try. If the Old Code has faded in the light of the modern world, it hasn't faded much in the South. My father was looking at a sixteen year old kid trying to challenge a man to fight or die to prove his honor, and he was both embarrassed at my cheek and outraged at my audacity.

A kid can't fight a duel. He has no standing to offer the insult. As a man would be a bully to accept a fight with a child, for that child to call a man a liar is cowardly. It is to attack from a position of perfect security, humiliating a man who can't reply. For a girl to do it is the same.

I am born to the Old Code, and--as this story shows--I was raised in it. I don't call men liars unless I am ready to fight them, and I won't accept it from others. Is that unsophisticated? It is certainly outside the modern, common tradition. I cannot help but look down on those who resort to deadly insults with neither the intent nor the ability to back them up. Such is the old way.

Heroes & Volunteers:

I'm still snarling about Robinson's comment, and I am not given over to wrath as a general thing. Go here, Mr. Robinson. Discuss that, if you're inclined.

Really, this is too much. Robinson is even a good Scottish name, usually from the Clan Gunn, but sometimes from my own Clan! Where has the spirit of the Poet Chief fled? At least some things are constant:

Sinclair makes it clear that the young poet chief had been 'virtuous' until he went to France, where "the aristocracy of France were then notoriously profligate and corrupt in their morals". Some naughty poems from this period caused a certain stir when his valet ultimately published them after Struan's death, and various Victorians went to great lengths to dispute them or attribute them to the influence of the evil companions. Perhaps part of this recipe was Struan's belief that only under the influence of strong drink could a poet produce his finest images.

Wise was the bard who sang the sacred use
Of the delicious grape's immortal juice,
And found no water-drinker o'er could say
He shaped a verse that could survive a day...