Reuters | Latest Financial News / Full News Coverage

The End of the Beginning:

From Bloomberg:

About 20 armed men and women wearing explosive belts seized a school in southern Russia and are holding at least 300 hostages, including children, the country's fourth terrorist attack in the past eight days. As many as 10 people died.

Three people were killed when the school was taken, and between 300 and 400 hostages are being held, said Alexander Osiptsov, a spokesman at North Ossetia's presidential administration. Seven people died in hospital, Itar-Tass news service said, citing the local hospital that treated them....

NTV television said a blast was heard inside the school, without giving further details. Rossiya television showed troops surrounding the school and a girl running from the area. Shooting was audible on the broadcast.

``The terrorists aren't willing to negotiate so far,'' Osiptsov said. ``This is why it's absolutely unclear where exactly in the school the explosion took place'' and whether more people were killed.

The terrorists threatened to detonate their explosive belts if rescuers attempt to storm the building and said 50 children would be executed if any of the hostage-takers is killed, Itar-Tass said, citing Kazbek Dzantiyev, the head of Northern Ossetia's Interior Ministry....

The gunmen seized the school during a ceremony to begin the Russian school year. Festivities are usually held in schools across Russia on Sept. 1, with children coming to school in their finest clothes and carrying flowers for the teachers, parents coming to meet staff and songs being played over the public address system.

From the Village Voice, 2 July 2002:

An e-mail recently making the rounds of military and law enforcement circles describes a captured Al Qaeda training tape said to reveal the group's expertise in small arms and close commando situations in urban settings like New York, Washington, and Chicago.... For bigger raids, terrorists carry concealed weapons into a building, say a school or a financial institution, then in a swift show of violence take over the room, marching people up to the roof. TV reporters and photojournalists are allowed in. The kidnappers then begin to execute prisoners one by one in front of the cameras. The tape suggests planning several simultaneous raids to gain maximum exposure. The key point is that absolutely no one is left alive—men, women, children, all are killed.

In advice to law enforcement, one analyst of this training tape urges cops to begin shooting as soon as they recognize what's going on, and not to wait for any SWAT team or other support. Complying at any point is useless, since everyone will be ritually executed on the roof.

I remember these captured videos from Afghanistan from two years ago. I've been expecting an attack of this type ever since then, and wondering when it would come.

The terrorists' only salvation is that they are doing this in Russia, and not the United States. Even so, when they start executing the children for the news cameras, the world will change again.

USNews.com: Michael Barone: A culture war truce? (9/6/04)

No Truce:

US News & World Report runs with a quite insightful article called "No Truce in the Culture War." It looks at the relative unimportance of abortion and gun control in the current national debate, explains it, and then posits similar resolutions arising with the remaining "hot button" domestic issues.

What the author is not able to explain -- probably because it is too obvious for an analyst to see it -- is why the fury exists in the current campaign, given the relative peace on the traditional "hot buttons." As to that, the Belmont Club explains it:

Three stories -- all related to the war in some fashion -- are at the heart of the news. Topping the bill is the dispute between John Kerry and the Swiftvets over the legacy of Vietnam. In second place are the continued developments in Iraq...

The original accusations by the Swiftvets group against John Kerry's Vietnam service claims have set off a chain reaction, which is at one level about the past, by restarting an unfinished civil war in which neither side won a decisive victory, but settled for an indefinite armistice. That truce may now be broken. Tensions began to rise in the political demilitarized zone between the two halves of America with the War on Terror, but when first Kerry and then the Swiftvets crossed the lines the battle may once again be in full swing. The story the Mainstream Media refused to acknowledge is threatening to push every other headline below the fold, a blasting cap dismissed as insignificant before everyone realized it was connected to the main charge.

I think this is correct. At this point, even Iraq has taken a backseat to Vietnam. Iraq is about stopping a terrorist threat from forming down the road. Vietnam is about who we are now: anti-warriors, and warriors, and which side will command our destiny.

The war on terror began to reawaken the old wounds of Vietnam, and the Iraq war inflamed the sinister Left (that is, literally, the "left Left"), whose current ideology was formed in the Vietnam period. The country has grown used to seeing large-scale protests in its cities again, as these teams of anarchists and other professional protestors show up at every event, supplemented by whoever they can sucker into buying their line for a time. This time, however, there is a large section of the dormant Left aroused to join them. Allah today links to a story about a group of elderly protestors, who would have been the 50-somethings in the Vietnam era, and who have come back to rage against war--not just this war, but any war, at any time. War cannot be banished as they wish; but rather than recognize this, they simply choose to put anti-war sentiment in a category with all unfixable social ills. Rather than admit that war can't be banished, they would rather pretend that all evil can be, and protest that it has not.

But we have seen an angry Left before; constantly during Reagan's terms, which were generally peaceful and easy times. If the Iraq war were all there was, though the Left would still be up in arms the majority of the nation would be calm. What turned this into the most bitter of campaigns was the awakening of the military right. The fault for that belongs to John Kerry's incessent, insistent invocation of Vietnam, added to his explosive personal role in the slanders of the antiwar movement. It has aroused fury in the majority of military men (65% registered Republicans in 2000) that so prominent a slanderer of the military should be nominated as Commander in Chief, at a time when they are being called upon to serve under conditions properly called "stretched." At a time when they are sacrificing for the good, the Democratic Party appointed as its candidate for their new commander this man:

Why is Vietnam a ''wound'' and why won't it heal? The answer: not because it was a military or strategic defeat but because it was a national trauma. And whose fault is that?

Well, you can't pin it all on one person, but, if you had to, Lt. John F. Kerry would stand a better shot at taking the solo trophy than almost anyone. The ''wounds'' McCain complains of aren't from losing Vietnam, but from the manner in which it was lost. Today Sen. Kerry says he's proud of his anti-war activism, but that's not what it was. Every war has pacifists and conscientious objectors and even disenchanted veterans, but there's simply no precedent for what John Kerry did: a man who put his combat credentials to the service of smearing his country's entire armed forces as rapists, decapitators and baby killers.

This has enraged even more that majority of Vietnam Veterans who have always considered Kerry the owner of a personal affront. Both communities are dispersed throughout America, although somewhat concentrated in the South. Their wrath -- expressed in Unfit for Command, in Stolen Honor, in the Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry, in bumper stickers ("Hanoi John! American TRAITOR!" read one I saw today on a car with an Armed Forces Veteran license plate), letters to the editor, and private conversations -- their wrath has raised the temperature to boiling.

As not in a generation, what BlackFive calls "America's Warrior Caste" is involved and angry. The sinister Left, meanwhile, is convinced that Iraq is not merely 'another Vietnam' -- they believe that it is Vietnam, that Iraq was an excuse for the vipers who nest in illegal secrets, CIA evils, and a military best exemplified by Abu Ghraib -- extended to include all American prison camps, and indeed all American prisons. "Free Mumia!" say signs along side those that say "No War!"

It would be difficult to further inflame the electorate. Even a terrorist attack would probably be calming, as it would likely cause us to set aside differences for a time and remember that we have crueler enemies than each other.

And the thing few seem to remember is that there is a darker future out there awaiting us. Terrorism takes advantage of the freedoms of the West, and there are still unguarded freedoms it can use to hurt us. We have only begun to be tested, and there is, finally, no hope of retreat or negotiation. Whoever wins, and whatever harm their victory does to our society, worse things wait for us. All roads darken, and the sea rises higher.

Yahoo! Mail - grimbeornr@yahoo.com

A Tribute:

They say it's just an electronic yellow ribbon, but this flash program treats soldiers well.

Mudville Gazette

Honor:

The Mudville Gazette has an interesting story today about an elected-official who is also a soldier:

State Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Tamayo, a National Guard soldier who volunteered for service in Iraq after she had filed for re-election, said yesterday she will not campaign for a second term.

'After thorough research, it is clear that Department of Defense rules will prohibit me from performing my legislative responsibilities while on active military duty in Iraq,' she said at a press conference yesterday at the state Capitol....

Because Department of Defense regulations limit campaign activities, Tamayo, D-42nd (Waipahu, Honouliuli, 'Ewa), said she felt prohibited from disclosing much about her political intentions. She said she had stopped all political activities after being placed on active duty two weeks ago.

During the press conference, Tamayo called the possibility of being elected and being unable to perform her duties 'unacceptable.'

'My goal is to actually be of service, not just to hold onto my position,' she said.

That shows exactly the honor and commitment to duty that I expect from a serving soldier, and wish were more common among politicians. I salute this lady, who -- I say without looking up, or caring about, the specifics of her politics -- is one of America's best.

Perry on Politics � 2004 Timothy Perry

VVAW Flyer:

Somebody's dug one up:

A US Infantry Company Just Came Through Here!

If you had been Vietnamese....

We might have raped your wife and daughter.

I think Kerry was "a" leader, not "the" leader of VVAW, but it's still pretty rough stuff. It reminds me, and I suspect it will remind others, of this political stunt:

"Notice: These men are Potential rapists."

This banner headline advertising an anti-rape performance art piece appeared on campus kiosks at the University of Maryland at College Park on the evening of April 29, 1993. The following afternoon another version, "Any of these Men May Have the Potential to Be Rapists," was mounted for about two hours on a temporary wall on the campus quad. The clincher was the sea of names: some 4,500 identifiably male names culled from the student directory were presented as the local population of potential rapists.

I quote an approving review, showing that there were (and still are) some Americans who thought it was clever. The effect on early 1990s American culture was to help out the already-begun death spiral of feminist credibility. Opponents could say, quite honestly, that feminist theory 'teaches that all young men are potential rapists.' It played well with "performance art critics," but not so well with the average American father and mother.

You can imagine how happy you'd be to see your name on a list of "Potential rapists." You can imagine how happy US Infantry companies were to find themselves painted with the same brush as University of Maryland students. You can imagine how happy Kerry will be to find himself asked, "Do you still believe, as your organization stated in the 1970s, that American soldiers are potential rapists? Do you still believe the Army's effect on young men is to 'turn them into a butcher or a corpse'?"

Welcome to AJC!

Zell Miller:

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution does some actual investigative reporting. The Atlanta city limits (and parts of DeKalb county immediately adjacent) are home to liberal Democrats who shelter there from the largely-conservative rest of the state. Like the national Democratic party, which has gone hard left in recent years, they have confused the Democratic Party with the Liberal Party. They don't think that any conservatives belong in the "D" column, regardless of how traditional his views are for a Democrat. They've recently begun an effort to flood Zell's office with email demanding he leave the Democratic Party. Their reasoning lists this as the number one reason why Zell shouldn't be a Democrat:

1) The non-partisan National Journal's 2003 ratings place Zell's voting record as more conservative than 23 Republican senators and more conservative than 73% of all Senators.
National Journal, National Journal Group Inc. Friday, Feb. 27, 2004

So: conservatives have no place here! We will have ideological purity! If you're not a liberal, you can't be a Democrat! Get out!

This, from the party whose critique of President Bush is that he has driven off his natural allies with "my way or the highway" rhetoric. Bush's failure to recognize legitimate European differences of opinion, they state, is a kind of arrogance that they will not repeat.

Who is a more natural ally than a lifelong member of your own party? If you can't work with Zell, or even deal with him better than to provoke open defiance, why should we believe you'll be able to work with Turkey or France?

Well, the AJC left the Perimeter (I-285, that is) and went up into the mountains to ask around. That takes guts -- when I was at Georgia State University, downtown Atlanta, I frequently heard such liberals wonder aloud if people who went up there would ever come back. "You can sure get lost in the Loo'siana bayou," as the song goes, and the Applachians too.

Here's what they found:

So as Democrats from Washington to Atlanta step up their demands that Miller get out of the party, Georgia's retiring senior senator just shakes his head and says it one more time: He was "born a Democrat" and will die one.

"No one can understand it except those folks who live in Appalachia," Miller wrote in his latest book, "A National Party No More," a smash-mouth appraisal of a Democratic Party that Miller says abandoned him and the American mainstream by tilting too far left.

Indeed, many of those living in the swatch of Appalachia that cuts across northern Georgia, where Miller was raised and still lives, said in interviews last week that they have no problem with Miller siding with Republicans.

At Miller's regular lunch spot, Mary Ann's Country Kitchen and Grill in his hometown of Young Harris, retired truck driver Leroy Adams offered that he's no fan of Bush or his Democratic opponent, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts. But like Miller, he said, he'll back Bush.

"I know some Democrats say Zell Miller has stabbed them in the back by going with the Republicans," Adams said. "But I think some of these so-called Democrats need to be stabbed in the back."

I wonder if this violent rhetoric has anything to do with the fact that retired truck driver Leroy Adams has had to become accustomed to watching everything he believes in scoffed at by the party he's voted for and served his whole life? But let's continue:

"He don't pull no punches," said Gribble, who considers herself a political independent. "We like people who talk straight. It's how we were brought up. Up here, we were taught that a handshake is better than anything wrote on paper."

Just so.

"The Democrats are mad at him, but so what?" said Bateman, a retired Baptist minister who, like Miller, is a lifelong registered Democrat, though he votes for Republicans, too.

"Senator Miller is of the old school. He represents the people of Appalachia and Georgia, not the Democratic Party, as such," Bateman said....

"Kerry represents exactly what Zell doesn't want the Democratic Party to be," Black said. "And I think Zell represents the view of most of the people in the area he comes from. I would think most of them would not be voting for Kerry this fall."

The leftward tilt of national Democrats has angered and alienated conservative Democrats like Miller, Black said. Many already are voting Republican at the national and state level and that trend has trickled down to the local level.

"Conservative Democrats are already isolated and marginalized in the national Democratic Party," Black said. "They have utterly no influence."

Hmm... sounds like a movement of the people united behind common principles. What's the word for such a movement again? Oh, right: democratic.

A last note on Georgian sentiment about Zell:

In the last legislative session, state Republicans sought to embarrass Democrats by proposing that a statue of Miller be erected on the statehouse grounds. Democrats finally managed to quietly stall the proposal in committee, but few publicly rebuked Miller.

The AJC is no fan, and there is a lot of rhetoric here that assumes the national party is right, and all these Georgia Democrats are wrong. The article sides against them, but tries to explain to the reasonable Atlanta reader why these "hard headed mountain folk" are insisting on being wrong.

That statue can't be stalled in committee forever. There is an irony, of a sort, that a man who as Governor worked to try to remove a divisive image from the statehouse grounds -- the Confederate Battle Flag portion of the Georgia State Flag -- may become just such an image himself. The statue is appropriate. It is of a type with the others already there, governors and Generals and Senators and one English Knight, Sir James Edward Oglethorpe. All were controversial in their day, far more than Zell. Each one put his stamp on Georgia; and, like Zell, nearly all were Democrats, though only one, Jimmy Carter, would today be welcome in the national party.

Sic transit Georgia's last Democratic senator. With him goes the South; and with the South, the Democratic Party's hope of regaining control of the Senate, the Supreme Court, or the future of the nation.

deuddersun says...

USMC CAX cuts:

A story from Deuddersun states that the USMC is having to cut combined arms exercises in half. The article says that the need for new Marines is so high that the Corps isn't being given the traditional training periods.

Well, training makes the man, and especially the Marine. This is cause for concern.

Fallujah

Why Iraq Insurgents Are Destined To Lose:

Remember this picture?

This picture is a Camel Spider, which has been "adjusted" to look giant through the creative tricks of a camera lens.

Here is how Americans responded, via Snopes:

According to most spider experts, these claims are all false. Camel spiders (so named because, like camels, they can be found in sandy desert regions) grow to be moderately large (about a 5" leg span), but nowhere near as large as dinner plates[.]

And here is the response from Iraqi Insurgents:

Some people describe the image as merely two camel spiders joined together. But many Fallujans say the picture shows a giant spider sent by God to attack US troops in the battle for their town in April.

"The soldier says that it runs fast - about 40 kilometres per hour. It is poisonous and it makes a screaming sound," said a poster in the mosque, entitled "Miracle of God in Fallujah"....

Although no Fallujans interviewed by IWPR claimed to have seen the beasts, many had heard tales about them.

"A spider emerged from the railway tracks near the Golan neighbourhood," said Abid Bin Allawi Ubeid, 32, a public servant in Fallujah's electricity department. "It killed 60 Marines."

Sovay's response, when I mentioned it to her:

"Gozira! Gozira!"

bloodletting.blog-city.com

Frith:

Doc Russia has an example, with some thoughts:

We hold our ground,
We stick to our guns,
and we stand by our friends.

That's pretty much it exactly.

Kerry citation a 'total mystery' to ex-Navy chief

Plot Thickens, II:

By now most of you will have seen this. Thoughts tomorrow, as Grim is taking a day off: "Kerry citation a 'total mystery' to ex-Navy chief."

UPDATE: Now that I've had some time to think about it, I really only have one line of questions. I would like to know just when this third citation was composed, and by whom (since it was not the Secretary), and at whose request the Office of the Secretary of the Navy approved it.

Essentially, I'm curious if the thing was composed in order to bolster his Senate run in 1984, or if it was done later. Was it to clean up his record so that he could run on it, at a time when Reagan and the Cold War were highly popular and a left-liberal would benefit from a strong medal citation? Or was it something he had done later, as a sitting Senator, just because he'd always wished the citation said this or that thing it didn't?

Did he write his own medal citation, or was it composed by someone in the Secretary's office?

Perhaps he'd like to say... and to release that third citation, the one he originally had replaced. I mean, it's a Silver Star citation. How bad can it be? Why not release it, like he did the two others?

Sky Pirates

Sky Captain:

"Did you know there's a plane parked on main street?" my faithful and pistol-wearing wife asked.

"No," said I, having not been down to the center of the small town all day. We live in the little burg of Warrenton, about half a mile from the main street. Like many folks who work for the DoD, we move around a lot; I promised the wife she could pick the house this time. She chose this one, closer into town than I would like, but what can you do? It's a nice town.

She suggested I go have a look at the thing, which was -- so I was told -- parked near Molly's Pub, very much the highlight of life in Warrenton. Since it's only half a mile, I tied on my boots, propped my hat on my head, and went down to have a gander.

Here's what I saw:

Looks like Nathan Zachary has dropped in for a Guinness (one of which I had myself, along with a corned beef sandwich, since I was there). Or possibly it was Sky Captain. Well, if this is what "the world of Tomorrow!" is like, count me in. It sounds good to me. 'Every boy of any account should rather be a sky pirate, than a Member of Parliament!'

UPDATE: Apparently Molly's hosts sky pirates on a regular basis. It's not quite as cheerful as the online menu would lead you to believe: the price of everything is not actually "$0.00" Alas!

Plot thickens after checking records

Jug Burkett:

B. G. "Jug" Burkett is a fellow who has made a second career for himself investigating suspicious claims to medals. He was cited this morning in an article that got picked up by Drudge: "Plot thickens after checking records."

We'll come back to that. Because it's usual to accuse such persons of having ties to the Bush campaign, I went to see if Burkett has any such. I couldn't find any ties to the campaign itself, but he is a Texan, and he did serve on a committee on Vietnam veteran history that was chaired by George Bush. As a consequence, he can be said to have a personal tie to GWB.

On the other hand, the US military has awarded him its highest civilian decoration for his work on false medal claims. He laid these out in Stolen Valor, both a book and an ongoing project to expose people who falsely claim to be war heroes. The book also won the Colby prize for excellence, and has been positively reviewed by ABC's 20/20, and Reader's Digest.

Now that you know all that, you can evaluate Drudge's story better:

But according to a U.S. Navy spokesman, "Kerry's record is incorrect. The Navy has never issued a 'combat V' to anyone for a Silver Star."

Naval regulations do not allow for the use of a "combat V" for the Silver Star, the third-highest decoration the Navy awards. None of the other services has ever granted a Silver Star "combat V," either.

B.G. Burkett, a Vietnam veteran himself, received the highest award the Army gives to a civilian, the Distinguished Civilian Service Award, for his book Stolen Valor. Burkett pored through thousands of military service records, uncovering phony claims of awards and fake claims of military service. "I've run across several claims for Silver Stars with combat V's, but they were all in fake records," he said....

Kerry's Web site also lists two different citations for the Silver Star. One was issued by the commander in chief of the Pacific Command (CINCPAC), Adm. John Hyland. The other, issued by Secretary of the Navy John Lehman during the Reagan administration, contained some revisions and additional language.... But a third citation exists that appears to be the earliest. And it is not on the Kerry campaign Web site. It was issued by Vice Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, commander of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam....

Maj. Anthony Milavic, a retired Marine Vietnam veteran, calls the issuance of three citations for the same medal "bizarre."... Normally in the case of a lost citation, Milavec points out, the awardee simply asked for a copy to be sent to him from his service personnel records office where it remains on file. "I have never heard of multi-citations from three different people for the same medal award," he said. Nor has Burkett: "It is even stranger to have three different descriptions of the awardee's conduct in the citations for the same award."

So far, there are also two varying citations for Kerry's Bronze Star, one by Zumwalt and the other by Lehman as secretary of the Navy, both posted on johnkerry.com.

Kerry's Web site also carries a DD215 form revising his DD214, issued March 12, 2001, which adds four bronze campaign stars to his Vietnam service medal. The campaign stars are issued for participation in any of the 17 Department of Defense named campaigns that extended from 1962 to the cease-fire in 1973.

However, according to the Navy spokesman, Kerry should only have two campaign stars: one for "Counteroffensive, Phase VI," and one for "Tet69, Counteroffensive."

Reporting by the Washington Post's Michael Dobbs points out that although the Kerry campaign insists that it has released Kerry's full military records, the Post was only able to get six pages of records under its Freedom of Information Act request out of the "at least a hundred pages" a Naval Personnel Office spokesman called the "full file."...

Experts point out that even the official military records get screwed up. Milavic is trying to get mistakes in his own DD214 file corrected. In his opinion, "these entries are not prima facie evidence of lying or unethical behavior on the part of Kerry or anyone else with screwed-up DD214s."

Burkett, who has spent years working with the FBI, Department of Justice and all of the military services uncovering fraudulent files in the official records, is less charitable: "The multiple citations and variations in the official record are reason for suspicion in itself, even disregarding the current swift boat veterans' controversy."

This report raises two questions, one which tends to favor Kerry and one that tends not to do so. The first question is, could the Navy's own reports on Kerry really be this screwed up? If so, it would explain his refusal to sign the Form 180: if the records are screwed up due to the bureaucracy, releasing them might give critics unfair, because false, evidence to use against him. As the Marine says, screwups do happen -- I'll be we can all point to at least one in our own records, if we think on it. Burkett says he feels there is cause for suspicion, based on the facts and patterns he's seen in previous investigations (e.g., silver stars with combat Vs having always previously been fakes). Maybe suspicion is too strong a word -- after all, a Secretary of the Navy signed off on it -- but "interest" or "concern" might do. It is curious.

On the other hand, there's that combat "V" and multiple citation issue. That's a whole lot of mistakes for one bureaucracy to make. Both of those issues do seem to call for an explanation from Kerry or his camp.

We know that as recently as last year, Kerry was pursuing changes to his official record. This follows additional changes he pursued with the Secretary of the Navy in the 1980s. We don't know what those changes were, except that one of them was a new Silver Star citation (one of the ones mentioned above) signed by John Lehman, Sec. of the Navy under Reagan. That could be explained by either of these concerns -- because he was trying to fix errors before his run for Presidency, or to eliminate inconsistencies in his medal records.

Perhaps Kerry would like to sign the 180, but also tell us what he considers to be mistaken in his Naval record.

UPDATE: I've been thinking about this some more, and I'd like to clarify two points:

1) I'm bothered by the fact that the Kerry campaign insists that it has posted his entire record, when it demonstrably has not. It has not posted, for example, all three of the medal citations for the Silver Star, but only the two latest ones. The original citation is not there. Nor are these other "96 pages," assuming that the unnamed source is speaking accurately about the number.

Why does the Kerry campaign continue to insist this? Is it a mistake, like when his website listed him as occupying Bob Kerrey's seat on the Intel committee? Or like when he was listed by his campaign as commanding the SWIFT boat in a firefight he didn't?

I'd like to believe that, but it seems unlikely. It seems unlikely because Kerry has been directly challenged on this point. If they said he'd posted the "full" records by mistake, he should have either corrected the mistake by now, or signed the 180 -- which would have proven him right when the released records contained only what was already posted. If that were the case, the 180 couldn't hurt him at all.

2) Do I think Reagan's Sec. of the Navy is in the tank for Kerry? No. I do know, however, that the military generally submits to requests from Senators. For budgetary reasons, as well as the tremendous power the Senate exerts through its oversight duties, a request from a sitting Senator (especially one on a committee like the intelligence committee, which directly oversees some military operations) is almost always approved with all speed.

I'm not suggesting any wrongdoing in the 1980s re-writeup, but I do admit to being curious about it. It's a little odd, twelve or fifteen years later, to decide that the language on your Silver Star citation could use some touching up.

Economist.com | The Bush presidency

The Bush Presidency:

The Economist weighs in. It's a nicely balanced analysis, superior I think to anything I've seen in the American press -- they may be too involved to be objective.

Yahoo! Mail - bjarnr@yahoo.com

WMD:

While the political campaign grinds painfully onward, paralyzing the political wings of the government, the military continues to function. The Joint Doctrine for Combating Weapons of Masss Destruction is now complete, and online for the citizenry to review and consider.

ABCNEWS.com : Noted Now: ABC News' Political News Digest

OOF!

From ABC's Political News Digest. This is the Bush campaign response to Kerry's request to begin regular debates this week:

There will be a time for debates after the convention, and during the next few weeks, John Kerry should take the time to finish the debates with himself.

Man, that's cruel.

Southern Appeal

Free Speech:

Bush makes it worse. We wouldn't want any unpopular speech going on -- unpopular among politicians, anyway.

This is going to be one of the key issues for the next four years, whoever wins. If the USSC doesn't reverse itself (and why should they, aside from being wrong?), we're going to be in a long fight to force our legislators to unmake these unconstitutional restraints on speech.

One of the thing that I've heard a lot lately is that Vietnam veterans have "earned the right" to have their opinion heard on these questions. Though I sympathize with the sentiment, it's not right. Those veterans were born with the right, just like every other US citizen. It was given to them as an inheritance. It was earned by the veterans of the Revolution.

What Vietnam veterans did -- and our own servicemen continue to do -- was to safeguard the inheritance to the next generation.

We are now seeing our own politicians openly stealing what foriegn nations have shattered trying to take. There can be no compromise on this matter. Free men can say what they want about any politician. They have an absolute right to band together, pool their money, and have their voices heard. Yet here we have a sitting Senator and a US President demanding a court order to silence them. This is what they think of Freedom of Speech.

Any politician who compromises this freedom is a domestic enemy of the Constitution. Very many of us took oaths on that topic. It is time to uphold them. We should try political means first, but one way or the other, this must not stand.

The Liberal Conspiracy - Satire, Informed Commentary and 9-11 Research

In Praise of Sovay McKnight:

I wish to take a moment to praise my old friend Sovay, who has been in for a rough ride here lately.

I want first to say that I greatly appreciate the change in tone she's undertaken at her own blog. While she remains suspicious of the Swift Vets, she is no longer titling her posts "Swift Boat Liars," and is clear that she wants to be fair to them:

Just to reiterate, I'm respectfully disputing Odell's account of events, because every Navy document unearthed so far and several other eyewitnesses dispute what he is saying.

I still disagree with her conclusions, but I greatly appreciate her attempt to show courtesy to these gentlemen.

Moreover, I want to take a moment to thank her in public for her continued friendship and cheerful manner. As important as these political questions are, they are not as important as the personal ties we each have. That, in truth, is what holds the world together and makes freedom possible. In Old English, it was called Frith:

The word frith is related to the words for friend and free. Frith was to our forebears the "power that makes them ‘friends’ towards one another, and free men towards the rest of the world." In their minds, "freedom" did not mean freedom from responsibility toward others. Freedom meant being strong enough to face the evils the world threw at one and being able to overcome or survive them, and for this one depended on one’s kindred. Surrounded by a numerous kindred cognizant of the requirements of frith, the Germanic man or woman was well-armored against all the misfortunes the world could cast, whether poverty, threats of violence, legal troubles, or any other difficulties.

Emphasis added.

I had occasion to visit with Sovay yesterday down in D.C. (Indeed, while she was sitting on one of the city's fountains, I filled my Stetson to the brim with water and dumped it on her head. So, we can honestly say that she's all wet.) She came with me when I went to donate at the Red Cross, and then made sure I ate dinner and got on the train back to Virginia without passing out from the heat and blood loss.

We didn't mention or discuss any of these political questions, and that's for the best. The written word provides a certain distance and a barrier to prevent hard words from coming between old friends.

Long after the Republic is crumbled and gone, freedom will be guaranteed by the strength of bonds like this. The bonds of friends and family are what really make us free. They, more than anything else, are what we ought to preserve and strengthen in our lives.

Sharp Knife

Fair & Balanced:

Since we've been pounding on Kerry for a while here, let's do a few criticisms of Bush. He's got them coming.

Sharp Knife has composed an open letter to the President on the subject of freedom of speech, and campaign finance reform. Grim's Hall would like to be considered a signatory.

From the left, the Washington Post writes a version of the same complaint.

And finally, let me register a personal objection to the treatment received by fellow Georgian Max Cleland at Bush's ranch today. Now, in fairness to Bush, Max got just what he wanted out of the venture, which was an occasion for political theater.

Nevertheless, courtesy demands better. If I were the President, I would upon hearing that the delegation was coming have ordered a meal prepared for them, and made them welcome. I would have accepted the delivery of the letter, set it aside unopened, and promised to reply to it in due course. After the meal, naturally, when I would have time to give it the consideration it was due. Or, if I were called out of town, I would have still yet ordered the meal, and told my staff to accept the letter and show the honorable veterans complete hospitality.

Such courtesy would have disarmed the protest, and made the theater impossible to carry off. But that is only a side benefit. The real advantage to it is, it's the right thing to do when honorable guests come to your home.

Amazon.com: Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry: Explore similar items

Unfit for Command:

I managed to locate a copy of this book at a B. Dalton yesterday, in Union Station down in the District of Columbia. Barnes & Noble remains sold out, but you can order from Amazon. It is very detailed, and full of footnotes -- there is a lot more here than I'd been lead to believe, even by newspaper accounts.

For those of you on the left who want to read it for research purposes, but don't wish to give money to the Swifties, you can go ahead and buy it. Unlike donations to their organization, O'Neill has promised that all royalties from the book will be donated to the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society:

The mission of the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society is to provide, in partnership with the Navy and Marine Corps, financial, educational, and other assistance to members of the Naval Services of the United States, eligible family members, and survivors when in need[.]

So you can do your opposition research and contribute to a good cause at the same time.

If you want to contribute directly instead, go here.

BLACKFIVE: Letter to John Kerry

Veteran Uprising:

BlackFive began this post just by citing the letter to Kerry by Republican veterans, today. However, the updates are more interesting than the original post. Apparently there are three new major intiatives by Vietnam veterans who are opposed to John Kerry:

Lt.Col. Buzz Patterson has a new book, Reckless Disregard which condemns Kerry.

The New Soldier, which has published online Kerry's book of the same name.

And most importantly, Vietnam POWs have banded together and are creating a website that will oppose Kerry. It is called Stolen Honor, and should be coming online soon. Unlike the Swift Boat Vets, which accept as members only people who served with the Swifties, this organization will be composed of servicemen who suffered in the Hanoi Hilton while Kerry told fables about them to Congress.

UPDATE: Stolen Honor is up at this time.

UPDATE: And another:

We later discovered that many of those that he was quoting as witnesses to our 'crimes' had not spent one day in uniform. Others had never served in Viet Nam. None of them, not a single one, would testify under oath, even if granted immunity. Yet our 'crimes' became part of the common knowlege. Our children were given that testimony as fact in their history classes. We all knew soldiers, sailors,airmen and Marines that had died, leaving children behind, we know that those children were taught those same lies as fact. Who sat with those children as we did with ours, explaining that those were lies told for political gain?

It's bad enough that we couldn't mourn our dead then. Now we see the same man that stood over the open graves of our brothers and pissed on their bodies is back. This time he's dug up those bodies and is standing on them to give himself the stature for high office.

I am no famous war hero, just one of the two and a half million guys who wore Uncle's suit for awhile in a place where the same truck would splash red mud on your trousers and throw a cloud of dust on your face at the same time. My service was entirely undistinguished but I stood shoulder to shoulder with some genuine heros. Those heros came home in shiney aluminum caskets, they cannot speak for themselves. I hope someone more famous and more eloquent will speak for them soon. Until they do I can only say that not only is John Kerry not fit to command the young men and women that inherited the uniforms but he is not fit to speak of my comrades, much less speak for them. I shall say this as long as I have a breath left in my body.

I once worked on a documentary film dealing with the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), and in particular a camp they ran near Savannah, GA, that reconstructed a Civil War fortress as a national park. All of them enlisted in the Army when the war broke out, although afterwards they were broken up and sent to different units: one carried a machinegun across the Italian campaign; another was taken early and was a POW in Germany; another fought through the war and served in the Battle of the Bulge.

All of them said exactly that: I was no hero, just a man on a team. But I knew some heroes.

What heroes did Kerry know? To judge him by his own words, he was the hero, and all of his brothers were war criminals.

Instapundit.com

Unsecret Missions:

I've been hearing that CNN is trying to portray O'Neill as supporting Kerry's account of being in Cambodia, by pointing out that O'Neill himself was in Cambodia on a swift boat. The Sage examines the claim, and notes a problem with it: O'Neill's service included a period in which the ARVN and US forces openly invaded that region of Cambodia. No one claims to have run secret missions, however -- no one, that is, but Kerry.

Kim du Toit

Supporting the Troops:

Kim du Toit has been supporting the troops -- a particular team of Army snipers, to be specific. Some months ago, he collected donations and got them not the "built by the lowest bidder" issue scopes, but top of the line Nightforce jobs. Recently, he had another fundraiser for range finders -- one that achieved its goal so fast that by the time I read about it, they'd stopped accepting further donations because they were several hundred dollars over the top.

The next project is body armor. This is going to be expensive, so I'd like to draw everyone's attention to it. If you've donated before, think of it as "protecting your investment." If you haven't -- or if you're one of my liberal readers who didn't know about the project, but wants to support the troops on (and ahead of!) the front lines, here's your chance.

The Corner on National Review Online

Another Bad Spokesman:

A Marine lawyer writes:

Last night on a talk show…the Kerry spokesman said that the atrocities in Vietnam are well documented matters of record, and Kerry had every right to talk about them in 1972. My blood began to boil again.

As a military lawyer, I knew of the atrocities being committed by Marines in Vietnam. The atrocities were isolated incidents, and they were punished by every level of command at the time and before it became trendy for the media to sensationalize the crimes. They are matters of record because the perpetrators were court martialed, and you can read about them in the court martial reports.

Kerry's characterization of Vietnam atrocities as being widespread on a daily basis with the knowledge of all levels of command is a lie.

The Kerry machine's sending spokesmen out to attest to widespread atrocities in Vietnam multiplies the insult. Not only should Kerry apologize, but every spokesman from the nameless man I saw last night to James Carville should apologize. Until they do, I will support the Swiftvets with my money and with my voice.

Today, of course, Kerry and his campaign are making a big deal about how morally horrible they think it is verbally to attack "veterans" who served. By "veterans," they mean only "Congressmen."

Doc in the Box

Welcome Home, Son:

Doc in the Box is back from Iraq. For those of you who don't drop by his place now and again, he's a Navy corpsman, a breed of squid that enjoys a rare admiration from, and fellowship with, Marines.

Captain%27s Quarters

The Score:

Developments since Sunday include:

The Daily Show's Stewart asked Kerry directly what no media reporter to date has had the guts to ask: "Were you or were you not in Cambodia?" Kerry didn't answer. Meanwhile, the Washington Post says he never was, relying on his journals to fill out the last gap in the narrative. Hewitt, looking deeper into MACV-SOG, agrees.

Kerry's campaign has also come under fire because of his journals on the issue of the first Purple Heart. The journals note, AFTER the first PH was awarded, that he had not yet been under enemy fire. The campaign has responded by conceeding a Swiftie claim: that the wound was self-inflicted, although they still dispute the cirumstances, saying that it was a flare and not a M-79. They have admitted, however, that the "engagement" we've read about in several stories, all based on Kerry's testimony, was a fabrication.

The Purple Heart is not awarded for self-inflicted wounds, not even accidental ones:

The PURPLE HEART is awarded to members of the armed forces of the U.S. who are wounded by an instrument of war in the hands of the enemy and posthumously to the next of kin in the name of those who are killed in action or die of wounds received in action. It is specifically a combat decoration.

We remember that Kerry used the three-hearts rule to abandon the men under his command. This has been BlackFive's major complaint about the man all along. Now we find that he did so on the basis of at least one award he did not deserve.

And where did we hear about it first? The Swift Boat Vets, that's where. We heard about it from the doctor who supervised the nurse treating the wound, or says he did, and says the records would show it if Kerry would release them as he had promised to do and never has done. At first we could wonder; but it looks increasingly as if it's true.

You Decide 2004%2C cont.

Traitors All:

From Celluloid Wisdom:

Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh, speaking moments ago on "Hannity and Colmes": "George Bush betrayed his country by sending us to war on false pretenses, and George Bush betrayed his country by not fighting in Vietnam."

Yes. You read that right. "George Bush betrayed his country by not fighting in Vietnam."

"George Bush betrayed his country by not fighting in Vietnam."

Given an opportunity to correct this rather incredible statement, Ms. Marsh declined, arguing that she had nothing to correct—that it was a fact that George Bush betrayed his country by not fighting in Vietnam.

Hear that, Dad? You're a traitor, since your Army Reserve unit was never sent to Vietnam. You could have enlisted in the Regular Army instead, new wife or no. You served in uniform all through that time, having to teach young men to fight or die as a drill sergeant. Could be you saved many of their lives with patient and careful instruction; but that doesn't matter.

Mary Marsh says you betrayed your country.

Bush used his father's pull to get himself a fighter-pilot spot at Texas Air National Guard at a time when TANG was heavily engaged in Vietnam. The decision to pull it back to the US was made late in his lengthy training period. It wasn't for no reason -- the Soviet Union (you remember, that Cold War enemy with hundreds of thermonuclear warheads pointed at us) was running spy planes out of Cuba to try and suss out our air defenses and other secrets, and we needed TANG to provide air cover. It was a valuable and necessary part of our Cold War survival.

Mary Marsh says they betrayed their country.

And what about those of us who aren't now serving in Iraq? Did you get out of your unit just before the war? During the war? Not re-up when your term was ending, because you had a family now? Did you join some Reserve or Guard unit instead of a front-line combat unit? Did you in fact volunteer for a front-line combat unit, but find that you didn't get sent to Iraq? Surely if not fighting in Vietnam was treason -- Vietnam, that war all good liberals hate -- not fighting in Iraq must be treason times ten. After all, Kerry has said he'd vote to authorize it even knowing what we now know about the state of Iraqi WMD.

You're all, every last man not reading this from the sandbox, a pack of betrayers.

There are three things about this that are just astonishing. The first is that the woman could have been so tone deaf as not to realize that she needed to back off her words, that she had said something outrageous.

The second is the sudden adoption by the national Democratic party, who brought us Bill "I Loathe the Military" Clinton, of the notion that not serving in Vietnam was blameworthy. That is a stunning reversal: until yesterday, it was praiseworthy to have burned your draft card, romantic to have moved to Canada until Jimmy Carter's blanket pardon. Protesting the war instead of fighting it was supposed to have been the right side of history, until now.

The third and most astonishing is the clean misunderstanding of the nature of the Swift Boat Vet threat. The Swift Boat Vets are outraged first and foremost because John Kerry came back from Vietnam and labeled them all criminals. He cast aspersions on their service and their honor. Vietnam was a long time ago, but for them the pain is fresh and new. It is the source of their wrath.

How astonishing, then, that the Kerry campaign has found a way to help us all share that wrath. Until today, I sympathized with the Swifties, understanding how they could feel angry even after all this time. I could read their accounts with detachment, analyzing them and others, trying to find the truth behind the conflicting claims.

Now I know that truth. The Kerry campaign, in its rush to damn Bush, has called my father a traitor. They have damned the service of ten thousands just to raise their one man to higher office. This is just what the Swift Boat Veterans said in their sworn statements, their letters, and their conferences. This is just what they said he was like.

I had adequate reason to vote against Kerry before, policy reasons of a quiet and sober sort. This new reason is neither quiet nor sober, but it is far more powerful.

There has here been a line crossed. I await the apology that I am sure is forthcoming, and which is certainly due, to all the slandered servicemen -- both those slandered today, and those slandered in all these many years in the cause of raising John Kerry to higher office. Ms. Marsh has refused to apologize once, but surely her boss will require it, if he wishes this matter to lie down before it consumes him. If he does not, then he deserves all that comes after.

You've done us all a service, lass, injecting that phrase "betrayed his country" into the heart of the campaign. I'm sure Kerry will thank you for it, when he starts hearing it echoed from the mountains and to the shores of the seas.

Now we can all understand, in a personal way, this story from 1971.

Priceless

Priceless:

From a friend.

Most Syrians struggle to even read Arabic - much less have a clue about English. So, how does a group of Syrian protest leaders create the most impact with their signs by having the standard "Death To America" (etc.) slogans printed in English?

Answer: They simply hire an English-speaking civilian to translate and write their statements in English. Unfortunately, they were unaware the"civilian" insurance company employee hired for the job was a retired USArmy sergeant. Obviously, pictures of the protest rally never made their way through the Arab TV network, but the results were "Priceless."

The Unapologetic Warrior

One Better:

JarHeadDad sends: The Unapologetic Warrior

During the monthlong battle in Iraq earlier this year for the Sunni Triangle city of Fallouja, no combat unit did more fighting and bleeding than Echo Company, and during it all—from the opening assault to the final retreat ordered by the White House—Zembiec led from the front. He took on the most dangerous missions himself, was wounded by shrapnel, repeatedly dared the enemy to attack his Marines, then wrote heartfelt letters to the families of those who were killed in combat, and won the respect of his troops and his bosses.

It was the time of his life, he acknowledged later, for by his own definition Zembiec is a warrior, and a joyful one. He is neither bellicose nor apologetic: War means killing, and killing means winning. War and killing are not only necessary on occasion, they're also noble. "From day one, I've told [my troops] that killing is not wrong if it's for a purpose, if it's to keep your nation free or to protect your buddy," he said. "One of the most noble things you can do is kill the enemy."

That's the Marine Corps I knew.

The Adventures of Robin Hood by Howard Pyle

October Beer:

Speaking of Howard Pyle -- a better guide to the good life than any communist folksinger you'd like to name -- here's another quote from him appropriate to the day:

There lies the road
to the Blue Boar Inn, a can of brown October, and a merry night
with sweet companions such as thou mayst find there.

October beer was the best of the old-time brewing. Much of the beer was small beer, low-alcohol stuff brewed regularly for immediate consumption. High-quality "keeping" beers and ales were brewed in March and October both, but in October the keeping ale was made with fresh grain and grout ("grout" being the flavoring agents, other than hops), plus hops, if it were beer and not ale. By March, when it was time to brew the keeping beers again, the ingredients had been harvested and aged for six months, leaving the flavor not quite as merry.

These days we can brew with fresh ingredients year-round, if we should choose. Still, we keep to the old ways by celebrating the Oktoberfest, which honors the great October beers of old.

It seems a bit odd even in late August, but today I ran across my first batch of seasonal Oktoberfest beer, stocked in the local grocery. The tomatoes are still running ripe in the garden, and jalepenos too; and we can get Vidalia onions from down Georgia way. All the bounty of summer is still with us; and now, good October beer too.

It's a fine day, and I commend it to you all with a glass of the best.

BLACKFIVE%3A %22This War Is About Des Moines%2C Not Falluja%22

Maj. Glen Butler, USMC:

If you read nothing else this month about the war, the situation in Najaf, or America's fighting man, read this letter.

The New York Review of Books%3A The Threat from the Sea

The Ocean is a Wilderness:

Here is a review of new book on the law of the sea, which is nothing other than lex talionis, with Mother Nature herself issuing the retribution. Skip down past the environmentalist hand-wringing to get to the real meat of the review. It speaks to reflagging, the ease with which outlaws can change their names and nationalities if only they own a ship, and the perils it all poses for asymmetrical warfighting.

As dangerous as it is, I can't help but think that the freedom of the sea is positively and finally healthy. As Howard Pyle put it:

Is there even in these well-regulated times an unsubdued nature in the respectable mental household of every one of us that still kicks against the pricks of law and order? To make my meaning more clear, would not every boy, for instance -- that is, every boy of any account -- rather be a pirate captain than a Member of Parliament?

Is that not true? But we have these dangers to contend with, also. We've as much as admitted that we can't allow an outlaw space anywhere on the land, any land.

In the United States, we have long tried to resolve this question through the mechanisms of Constitutionalism and Federalism. Constitutionalism tries to put certain parts of human behavior beyond the power of government either to do or to refuse to allow. Federalism tries to allow different communities to have different rules governing the remaining matters, so that people may choose a place to live where they can have the life and the particular freedoms they desire.

Both of these mechanisms are collapsing under the stress of the federal judiciary. The law of unintended consequences is the primary culprit: a series of expansions of federal power, each intended to address a specific wrong of particular magnitude, has come to unbalance the entire American project. The 14th Amendment, which is the primary threat to Federalism, was undertaken to address great wrongs; but now it is used to address any deviation from the judiciary's single "correct" path, on any question at all. At last, we shall either unmake the 14th Amendment, or the Republic, or we shall have a single answer to every divisive question: abortion shall be either forbidden or permitted in all cases everywhere; guns shall either be kept and borne in every place, or no place; gays shall marry in every state, or no state; flags shall be burned everywhere or nowhere. This singlemindedness is finally to no one's advantage, and yet it is unavoidable because of the mechanisms of the 14th.

Constitutionalism has been under assault since the Founding, by the process which Lincoln called "the silent artillery of time." Exceptions made in each extraordinary case become precedents for future exceptions; at some point, what finally dies is the idea that the Constitution is real or binding. The recent enaction of campaign finance reform proves it: exactly the speech the founders intended to protect, the single type of speech that mattered most to them and that they most wished unfettered, is the one the Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court all agreed to limit and fence. Every amendment (including the 3rd, during the various occupations of the Civil War) in the Bill of Rights has been so often violated that the judiciary now makes only passing reference to them at all.

If we find it necessary to bring all the land and even the sea under the law, and if we find it in our power to do so, we must think carefully about how to retrench on the questions of human liberty. What the federal judiciary is doing at home, the treaty system of the UN is attempting to do abroad: impose a single system on every nation. The treaties of Kyoto and Rome are only two of the more frequently cited examples; all treaties are of this model. We see that the UN is preparing to unveil a "light arms" treaty that would, if enacted and ratified by the United States, repeal the 2nd Amendment without the bother of the Constitutional process, but by simple majority vote. The treaty, intended to provide a mechanism for resolving some of the problems of Africa and the -stans, would be imposed likewise on all people everywhere.

These are the Members of Parliament today, these courts and diplomats. I say that Pyle was right: that not only a boy of any account, but any worthy man, should rather be a pirate.

MSNBC - New Hostile Fire

"He Just Sold Them Out"

The New Swift Boat ad, "Sellout," is being carried by NEWSWEEK. There's no conflicting narrative in this one: just Kerry's own words, and some words from men who suffered Communist tortures rather than say the same thing.

UPDATE: BlackFive responds to the ad. In the comments section, there's a letter from a general officer and holder of the Medal of Honor.

The Command Post - 2004 US Presidential Election - Kerry Website Revised

More Gaps in the Narrative:

From The Command Post:

The Kerry campaign removed a 20-page batch of documents yesterday from its website after The Boston Globe quoted a Navy officer who said the documents wrongly portrayed Kerry’s service. Edward Peck had said he -- not Kerry -- was the skipper of Navy boat No. 94 at a time when the Kerry campaign website credited the senator with serving on the boat. The website had described Kerry’s boat as being hit by rockets and said a crewmate was injured in an attack. But Peck said those events happened when he was the skipper. The campaign did not respond to a request to explain why the records were removed.

Now, what would be some good questions for journalists to ask about this?

lgf%3A Protest Warrior Cracked

Crackers:

Via Allah and Charles, I see that Indymedia has decided to perpetrate some terroristic threats:

Indymedia NY

Indymedia DC

The DC site is my favorite of the two, because it includes a little quote to help you understand what's being suggested:

"The earth is not dying, it is being killed. And those that are killing it have names and addresses."
--Utah Phillips

And so here we have, on offer, names and home addresses; addresses for hotels in NY where delegates will be saying; email addresses, with sites where you can download DOS and email-bomb tools; home phone numbers; and a number of other charming ways to make people's lives miserable, for no better reason than that these folks support Bush and are trying to participate in honest politics.

Speaking of honest politics, I read somewhere that Bush has been asked to "stop" the Swift Boat Vets ads. This request follows a front-page NYTimes piece that the Swiftie funding is coming from people close to the Bush campaign.

Indymedia is funded to the tune of $376,000 by the TIDES Foundation, which is in turn funded to the tune of $4 billion by Mrs. Teresa Heinz-Kerry. I understand that she is close to the Kerry campaign.

I'm sure we'll be seeing the front page NYTimes article on this web of connections any day now.

Hopefully it will not begin, "The anarchists who beat to death several RNC delegates (naturally unarmed in accord with Manhattan's sane and responsible gun control laws) got the addresses from a site called Indymedia. Records show that the group received the bulk of its initial financing from one foundation with very close ties to the Kerry campaign and family." If it doesn't, though, it won't be Indymedia's fault. It'll be the fault of the anarchists who are too cowardly to follow through on their own rhetoric, or of the NYTimes, which treats you very differently depending on who you support.

OpinionJournal - Extra

A Question for Texans:

Is it worth it?

Atlanta police get a new motto

APD's New Clothes:

The Atlanta police have a new motto. I wish I'd known in advance; we could have had a contest.

On the other hand, I don't know if we'd have bettered the one they actually picked: "Answer the Call." Hmm...

[Director Kelly of the APD's foundation] said it didn't help matters when a person was told by a 911 operator to quit calling to report shooting because the caller rang in too much.

"This is aspirational," Kelly said. "The Police Department doesn't want this problem to be there forever. They want to solve that problem."

Aspirational.

Image Gallery Page 3

What M-79?

One of the charges against Kerry made by the Swiftees is that he injured himself with a grenade launcher -- essentially, that he fired too close and took a piece of shrapnel. In the heat of battle, could have happened to anybody, right? Indeed, according to the 35th Infantry, it was one of the "Lessons Learned" in Vietnam: " lot of men have been wounded by their own grenades, when they hit a tree limb or bush. The same is true of the M-79 grenade launcher."

So how to dispute the charge? Well, the easiest way would be simply to say it didn't happen; not many can prove otherwise, unless Kerry releases his full military records as he promised months ago he would, and still has not. The second easiest way, if in fact it didn't happen, would be to release the records.

Or you could have one of your buddies go out and claim that you had no M-79s on the SWIFT boat. That seems to be the option the Kerry camp has chosen:

But they also firmly reject the claim that Kerry somehow wounded himself by using an M-79 grenade launcher. "I am reasonably sure we didn't have an M-79," Zaladonis said. "I didn't see one. I don't remember it."

That is indeed an exceptional statement. You can see pictures here of a SWIFT boat in action, with the M-79 front-and-center. Down at the bottom, you'll see that the support craft (the Armored Troop Carrier) had an entire rack devoted to these M-79s; why shouldn't one of them have made its way to Kerry's boat?

Or you can read this account of life on a SWIFT boat, written at a time when Kerry's candidacy was not an issue:

But don't let their small size fool you -- the Swifts were heavily armed. A gun tub was placed above and behind the pilothouse and equipped with twin .50-caliber machine guns. In the afterdeck, on the fantail, there was an 81mm mortar with a single .50 caliber attached to it in piggyback fashion.

Vietnam: That's quite an impressive array of armament.

Herrera: In addition to those weapons, we had M-79 grenade launchers; fragmentation, incendiary and concussion grenades; AR-15s, shotguns, .38- and .45-caliber pistols. Also, we were equipped with radar, sea-to-shore radio and a PRC-25 field radio.

So the standard load included M-79s, as this source also agrees. There's also this history of an encounter on 12 APR 1969, very close to the time Kerry was in country:

To this end, a hasty defense perimeter was formed. Campbell, with Piper and Broderick on the fantail, maintained constant M-79 grenade fire into the north bank. Luckily, the 43 boat canted toward the river and provided some natural cover for them. Crew members, discarding the .50 caliber weapons as useless, grabbed M-16 rifles and set up firing positions covering the south bank, thereby providing the stricken unit with a 360 degree perimeter.

So, that SWIFT boat was loaded up not just with "a" M-79, but enough for three men to maintain constant fire with these break-action weapons.

So my question is: Why is it that Kerry's boat was so exceptional? The only SWIFT boat ever used for secret missions was also the only one lacking multiple M-79s.

UPDATE: Sovay mentions in the comment that there was more to the story than the quote I'd seen. Apparently this event happened at a time when they were not on their SWIFT boat, but on patrol in a skimmer. This still seems a bit odd, for reasons outlined in the comments, but it is an explanation that explains.

%27It Isn%27t War%27 %28washingtonpost.com%29

Journalism & the Military:

The Washington Post prints today an article of precisely the sort I least expect to see from them. Entitled "It isn't War," it is an account of the problems in Iraq that arise from a failure to understand the lessons of the history of war. It's too short, overly simple, looks at only one example besides Iraq (the American Civil War in the West), but it is nevertheless correct.

The link to the piece on the front page says, "Military Affairs Writer: It Isn't War." I was to say the least surprised to see that, having just finished saying that the Post seems to have no one who understands the military science at all. Does this mean I was wrong? Do they have a military affairs writer?

Well, no. At the end, I saw the tagline: "Richard Hart Sinnreich writes on military affairs for the Lawton (Okla.) Sunday Constitution."

It's rare to find a journalist who understands the business of warfighting. Apparently even one of the nation's two most important newspapers can't keep one of their own on staff, instead occasionally borrowing him from a minor paper in Oklahoma. Maybe the Washington Post ought to think about what that says about their usual quality of reporting. If they want me to take them seriously, they could do worse than to start by hiring this fellow... and a few more like him.

Digital Chosunilbo %28English Edition%29 %3A Daily News in English About Korea

More Groundlaying?

An anti-DPRK paper in South Korea has this report:

A Chinese state-run institute criticized North Korea in saying that the North has been hampering the improvement of Sino-U.S. relationships and committing political persecution domestically. China is not responsible for supporting Pyongyang on all fronts, the institute asserted.
According to Japan's Yomiuri Shimbun, the latest edition of the Chinese bimonthly diplomatic magazine “Strategy and Management” criticized North Korea’s political inheritance system and nuclear weapons development and suggested that China needs new diplomatic policies in line with its national interests. A researcher working with Tianjin Social Science Academy's Foreign Economic Research Institute wrote the article.

It is very unusual that a researcher of a Chinese state-run institute would lash out at North Korea. China sometimes indirectly conveys its stance through researchers, when it thinks that there may be diplomatic conflicts.

In connection with the recent system of North Korea, the article blasted that although the North Korean people are living in terrible conditions due to successive natural disasters, North Korean leader Kim Jong-il is committing massively political persecution and pursuing ultra-leftist politics in order to maintain dynastic political control.

Concerning relations with North Korea, it pointed out that North Korea has ignored amity in international issues and has not provided full support to China in critical situations. China does not have moral responsibility to support this kind of country on all fronts, the article stressed. In connection with Sino-U.S relations, the articles said that due to irresponsible behavior by North Korea, Sino-U.S relations have not improved.

Confer.

The Village Voice%3A Features%3A When John Kerry%27s Courage Went M.I.A. by Sydney H. Schanberg

A Statement Against Interests:

From The Village Voice, on Vietnam POWs and John Kerry:

Here are details of a few of the specific steps Kerry took to hide evidence about these P.O.W.'s.

* He gave orders to his committee staff to shred crucial intelligence documents. The shredding stopped only when some intelligence staffers staged a protest. Some wrote internal memos calling for a criminal investigation. One such memo—from John F. McCreary, a lawyer and staff intelligence analyst—reported that the committee's chief counsel, J. William Codinha, a longtime Kerry friend, "ridiculed the staff members" and said, "Who's the injured party?" When staffers cited "the 2,494 families of the unaccounted-for U.S. servicemen, among others," the McCreary memo continued, Codinha said: "Who's going to tell them? It's classified."

Kerry defended the shredding by saying the documents weren't originals, only copies—but the staff's fear was that with the destruction of the copies, the information would never get into the public domain, which it didn't. Kerry had promised the staff that all documents acquired and prepared by the committee would be turned over to the National Archives at the committee's expiration. This didn't happen. Both the staff and independent researchers reported that many critical documents were withheld.

* Another protest memo from the staff reported: "An internal Department of Defense Memorandum identifies Frances Zwenig [Kerry's staff director] as the conduit to the Department of Defense for the acquisition of sensitive and restricted information from this Committee . . . lines of investigation have been seriously compromised by leaks" to the Pentagon and "other agencies of the executive branch." It also said the Zwenig leaks were "endangering the lives and livelihood of two witnesses."

* A number of staffers became increasingly upset about Kerry's close relationship with the Department of Defense, which was supposed to be under examination. (Dick Cheney was then defense secretary.) It had become clear that Kerry, Zwenig, and others close to the chairman, such as Senator John McCain of Arizona, a dominant committee member, had gotten cozy with the officials and agencies supposedly being probed for obscuring P.O.W. information over the years. Committee hearings, for example, were being orchestrated to suit the examinees, who were receiving lists of potential questions in advance. Another internal memo from the period, by a staffer who requested anonymity, said: "Speaking for the other investigators, I can say we are sick and tired of this investigation being controlled by those we are supposedly investigating."

* The Kerry investigative technique was equally soft in many other critical ways. He rejected all suggestions that the committee require former presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush to testify. All were in the Oval Office during the Vietnam era and its aftermath. They had information critical to the committee, for each president was carefully and regularly briefed by his national security adviser and others about P.O.W. developments. It was a huge issue at that time.

* Kerry also refused to subpoena the Nixon office tapes (yes, the Watergate tapes) from the early months of 1973 when the P.O.W.'s were an intense subject because of the peace talks and the prisoner return that followed. (Nixon had rejected committee requests to provide the tapes voluntarily.) Information had seeped out for years that during the Paris talks and afterward, Nixon had been briefed in detail by then national security advisor Brent Scowcroft and others about the existence of P.O.W.'s whom Hanoi was not admitting to. Nixon, distracted by Watergate, apparently decided it was crucial to get out of the Vietnam mess immediately, even if it cost those lives. Maybe he thought there would be other chances down the road to bring these men back. So he approved the peace treaty and on March 29, 1973, the day the last of the 591 acknowledged prisoners were released in Hanoi, Nixon announced on national television: "All of our American P.O.W.'s are on their way home."

The Kerry committee's final report, issued in January 1993, delivered the ultimate insult to history. The 1,223-page document said there was "no compelling evidence that proves" there is anyone still in captivity. As for the primary investigative question —what happened to the men left behind in 1973—the report conceded only that there is "evidence . . . that indicates the possibility of survival, at least for a small number" of prisoners 31 years ago, after Hanoi released the 591 P.O.W.'s it had admitted to.

With these word games, the committee report buried the issue—and the men.

Would you wish to serve under a Commander in Chief such as this? Would you send your son?

Blogs for Bush%3A Kerry%2FMoveOn.Org 2004

B4B:

Scotsman.com News - Health - Prozac seeping into water supplies

Medicating the Masses:

Prozac in the water supply.

Grim%27s Hall

Swifties, II:

Something came to me while I was responding to Eric in the comments below. It's important enough that I thought I'd post it to the big board. He had pointed out that Sovay begins one post by saying that the matter is over her head. I replied:

Well, it's over almost everyone's head. Almost no one [that really should read, "relatively few"... there are some of us who do have, but a minority of Americans] has the background in military science to evaluate these claims, and thereby to recognize the trouble with some of Kerry's statements. The class of people who don't understand why his statements are probably false includes not just Sovay, but most American citizens, and very nearly all American journalists (NYTimes, call your office).

Bloggers who are trying to evaluate these claims tend to forget that. It's not just that these people are carrying water for Kerry--although many of the journalists seem to be--or that they just want to believe that Kerry is clean, and the SBVs are making "outrageous" claims. They don't have the faintest idea how to evaluate the claims themselves, so they fall back on what they do know -- which is why the NYTimes piece focuses on friendships and connections between certain SVBs and Republicans, or tracking the financing of the SBVFT. That's all they know how to do.

Because there is almost literally NO military expertise in journalism today, the whole field of investigative reporting is closed to them. The single most productive field for inquiry is unavailable, because even if they dug up the information, they wouldn't know what to make of it.

I think this says a lot about the reasons why we aren't getting more traction with this story in the mainstream press. They honestly lack the background to evaluate the claims. All they can do is what they usually do: look for conflicts of interest, and pretend that human cynicism explains everything.

BLACKFIVE%3A This Is Not My Bear...

Bear Stories:

Grim's Hall always has time for bear stories. Today's is from BlackFive: "Bear Guzzles 36 Beers, Passes Out At Campground."

Patterico%27s Pontifications%3A %3Ci%3ENew York Times%3C%2Fi%3E Hit Piece on the Swift Vets Finally Comes Out

Swifties:

Well, the New York Times has now weighed in. Hat tip Sovay, who noticed the piece and finds it completely convincing, so much so that she titles her piece "Swift Boat Liars."

Patterico wasn't quite so pleased with it:

...The piece makes one telling point. It provides quotes praising Kerry from three of the Vets who currently condemn him -- A Roy F. Hoffmann, Adrian L. Lonsdale, and George Elliott. I think this is fair commentary -- the only fair commentary in the piece. If three Vets praised Kerry in previous years, that's a fair point. They should explain why they are saying something different now.

That makes three of over 250 veterans who are in the group.

What is both amazing and utterly predictable is that the "Christmas in Cambodia" story is saved for the very end. This is the one accusation made by the Vets where the facts are clear -- and the facts show that Kerry was not truthful, as even the Kerry campaign has had to admit. How does the New York Times characterize the "Christmas in Cambodia" story?

Take a deep breath. It says that the story is "the one allegation in the book that Mr. Kerry's campaign has not been able to put to rest." Not "the allegation that has forced Mr. Kerry's campaign to explain that Mr. Kerry has not been telling the truth." Just the one allegation that they haven't yet "put to rest...."

Simply unbelievable. Nothing about the magic hat. Nothing about his gun-running missions. Nothing about the memories being "seared -- seared" into Kerry's head.

The longer this goes on, the more troubling I find it. There are, as the gentleman points out, 250 sailors represented by SBVFT. They are speaking out against just one sailor, John Kerry. Kerry's defenders say they want to make sure that Kerry's service is not slandered, which is a fine and noble goal. They ought to take care not to slander 250 men in their rush to defend their own, one, man.

Some of these questions -- I put all the Bronze Star issues into this category -- can probably be resolved by recognizing that people's memories of combat are often vastly different, one to another, as with any high-stress event. Some of them may simply be mistakes or misunderstandings. I expect Kerry to be exonerated on many of these charges, including the Bronze Star, which is enough to say that I think he was for at least that one moment a real war hero.

But some of these charges aren't going to be resolved without shame coming hard on someone's head. It's going to be Kerry's, or it's going to be 250 other fighting men.

The Christmas In Cambodia story has already been admitted to be false. Navy SEALs have written to say that no swift boats were used for Cambodian insertions; the Navy's entire chain of command for the region has said so. All of Kerry's boat companions have written to say that they don't recall ever being in Cambodia. MACV-SOG had its own boat service, which used PTF "Nasty" boats rather than SWIFT boats, and therefore had no need of taking on an inexperienced LTjg to do what they had experienced operators to do, or using a SWIFT boat for a mission that a PTF could do better. The CIA likewise had its own budget for these matters.

This leaves two remaining possibilities consistent with Kerry telling the truth:

1) He was performing missions that were illegal in the real sense, having not been approved by anyone in the chain of command. This is not entirely implausible; our SEAL noted that they sometimes did things without asking because they didn't trust the chain of command. If they thought young Kerry was a sucker, some operators might have convinced him to do something that would have gotten him into a lot of trouble if it had been discovered. It's much more likely they would have used one of their own for this mission (again, per the SEALs), but it is not completely impossible that someone decided to con the LTjg into doing it for them. Problem for Kerry: his boatmates still don't remember this mission.

2) All 250 sailors are lying, including Kerry's entire chain of command; his boatmates who do support him are also lying about the Cambodian incursions.

And none of that touches the geography issues, which are still unexplained. There is not yet enough information to evaluate these claims, except to say that Kerry's story to date is not consistent with the facts of how the rivers run. Attempts to find another river nearby that does comply with Kerry's story are underway, and that's fine. It may be that this is going to prove to be another area in which it is only the vagaries of memory that are in dispute.

The Cambodia story remains a serious problem, however. Defenders of Kerry should take care not to slander 250 servicemen to protect the principle of not slandering servicemen. Until there are answers, we can't say for certain which group is telling the falsehood: the one career politician, or the 250 men from all walks of life.

Blogs for Bush%3A It Was Actually John Kerry Before It Was Bob Kerrey

B4B:

Grim's Hall has joined the Blogs for Bush, as some of you may have noticed. I have recently explained what I think is a sufficient cause to vote against Kerry in the upcoming election, regardless of all other factors. Grim's Hall, while recognizing Bush's flaws, will nevertheless fight for him as the best man on the field.

We have a fair number of liberal readers here, however, although most of them don't comment much in the comments section. (You know who you are.) I don't wish to drive them off, as many are friends and some are family. I will therefore be gathering "Blogs for Bush" material under the heading B4B, and those of you who are already rock-solid certain to vote for Kerry or Nader can skip the entries. Those of you who are almost certain are encouraged to keep an open mind, although I doubt these articles will convince you, as they appear to be preaching to the choir.

This week, B4B has three articles they'd like mentioned:

It Was Actually John Kerry Before It Was Bob Kerrey

Does Kerry Really Condemn MoveOn?

51% of Democrats Blame America for 9/11

I must admit to a certain disdain for the politics: on the first question, I object to kicking a man while he's down (Ed: and it's hard to get lower down than Kerry, these days... Quiet, you!); on the second, I'm not sure why it matters; but on the third, I can see the point. There are a certain number of Democrats, myself included, who are voting for Bush this year largely because they don't wish to support the party of blaming America, and especially wish to avoid voting into power candidates who blame America. The policies that result from that position are bad ones, as they leave our foreign policy timid, our military constrained, and our enemies therefore bolder and freer -- to say nothing of leaving them alive, which I already consider a major concession, to be offered only in exchange for great service.

Sharp Knife

Sharp Knife:

Thanks to Noel, who provided me with some ammo in a debate earlier today (re: antisemitism), and then came up with this Steyn quote, appropriate to the redeployment of our 70,000 troops:

This will undoubtedly be welcome news to the likes of Goran Persson, the Swedish prime minister, who famously declared that the purpose of the European Union is that "it's one of the few institutions we can develop as a balance to US world domination". It must surely be awfully embarrassing to be the first superpower in history to be permanently garrisoned by your principal rival superpower.

I laughed for quite a while after reading that.

Mudville Gazette

Greyhawk:

The Mudville Gazette has been particularly active lately.

CrimLaw

From Southern Appeal:

A new, and successful, tactic in criminal law: "The Damn Yankee Defense."

Froggy Ruminations%3A SEALs %26 Swift boats

A SEAL Speaks:

Now here is someone who will know the answer to Hugh's question: were swift boats used for insertion operations? This fellow is a former SEAL, and the son of a SEAL to boot. He says no; the SF used swift boats, but not the SEALs; and swifties were definitely not for cross-border insertions.

I've met a couple of SEALs in my time. Very impressive lads. Not so much their physical prowess, although that is extremely high; still, I've met their equals from other services (although not their betters). What is really impressive to me is the combination of that physical prowess with the technical expertise. The SEALs I've known have always been highly technical: in addition to SCUBA gear, and being trained paratroopers, they were also competent with at least one other piece of machinery that would normally be an operational specialty on its own. One of the guys I knew was an electronic weapons officer for a Naval fighter; the other trained dolphins and knew how to use several kinds of underwater equipment.

SF are impressive too, don't get me wrong. Their language skills are something I've always aspired to myself, although I've lacked both the training and the chance to travel as widely. Everyone's heard of how physically difficult the Q-course is, but the real trick is the DLAB (Defense Language Aptitude Battery). I took it once and scored an 82, but you have to have scored at least an 85 to pass. It's an artificial language test, very tricky but a lot of fun. I did very well on the written portion, but my hearing isn't great and the listening portion wrecked my score. Alas, misspent youth, gunfire without adequate hearing protection, etc.

Anyway, you can go and read what this hero and son of a hero has to say. His father was there; he asked him too.

The New York Times > Magazine > Questions for Ray C. Fair: Bush Landslide (in Theory)!

I Love Game Theory:

Not just because it is a fantastic model for understanding the world, but also because it creates exchanges like this:

Are you a Republican?

I can't credibly answer that question. Using game theory in economics, you are not going to believe me when I tell you my political affiliation because I know that you know that I could be behaving strategically. If I tell you I am a Kerry supporter, how do you know that I am not lying or behaving strategically to try to put more weight on the predictions and help the Republicans?

I don't want to do game theory. I just want to know if you are a Kerry supporter.

Backing away from game theory, which is kind of cute, I am a Kerry supporter.

I believe you entirely, although I'm a little surprised, because your predictions implicitly lend support to Bush.

I am not attempting to be an advocate for one party or another. I am attempting to be a social scientist trying to explain voting behavior.

Leaving aside my irritation at the term "social science," I have to say that I love it. Hat tip: Southern Appeal.

Byron York on John Kerry, David Alston & Vietnam on National Review Online

Retrenchment:

Kerry's campaign explains that Captain Ed is wrong to say that he hadn't served with Alston. However, the retrenched explanation once again creates new inconsistencies with the established storyline: once again, you have to shift all the dates Kerry has used in the past to account for the new story. It really is time to sign that Form 180, and just let people see the records.

UPDATE:

Hugh Hewitt is apparently spending a lot of time and energy on research into these allegations. I'm familiar with the SOG, but it was before my time. I'm afraid I have nothing to add on the question of whether or not they used swift boats.

BOROWITZ report.com

Olympic Jitters:

"Olympic security officials in Athens, Greece conceded today that they had failed to notice a giant wooden horse that had been wheeled to within meters of the Olympic stadium sometime late last week."

USATODAY.com - Reservists say war makes them lose jobs

The "War To See Soldiers Treated Decently"

A report from the frontlines of this war, oddly enough being waged by the Labor Department. There's good news and bad news. Complaints are up, but not as much as expected; most of the time employers are obeying the law. However, there are some "grey areas" in which our soldiers are not being treated as well as we'd like, particularly for law enforcment officers who are also Reservists:

The county required that they exhaust their leave before receiving a county salary supplement that bridged the gap between military and civilian pay. This meant some employees had to count some of their time in a war zone as vacation days or forfeit the extra pay.

"Our members were not able to decompress," said Percy Alston, president of the Fraternal Order of Police lodge representing the county's police officers. His members have challenged the policy through labor grievance procedures and expect an arbitrator will decide the matter.

I'm generally opposed to public-sector unions, but somebody needs to fight for these guys. It's to nobody's benefit to bring a soldier back from a war zone, and then stick him out policing our streets with no time to readjust to the United States. Saving a few bucks on his salary is going to seem like a false economy the first time something bad happens that could have been avoided with a proper readjustment.