Opposition group: Iran leaders planned capture of Britons

Big surprise here. From Iran Focus, with thanks to Mackie:

London, Mar. 31 – Iran’s main opposition movement, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), said on Saturday that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) had planned the recent capture of 15 British marines and naval personnel and are holding the group in an effort to gain concessions from the West.

A unit of the IRGC Navy’s 3rd regional command based in Khorramshahr Garrison executed the premeditated operation to capture the Britons on March 23, said Hossein Abedini, a member of the NCRI’s Foreign Affairs Committee, at a press conference in London. He said that the garrison was on a full state of alert.

“Rear Admiral Rashid Hosseini, the commander of the IRGC Navy’s third regional command, personally had command of the operation to arrest the British sailors”, he told reporters.

“A number of IRGC Navy commanders had previously been stationed in Khorramshahr. Colonel Badin was the operational commander based in Khorramshahr at the time of the arrests”.

He gave the names of three IRGC officers - Colonel Majidi, Colonel Abbas-Zadeh, and Colonel Isavi – who were involved in the seizure.

Iranian Official: Sailors May Be Tried

The provocations just keep coming. By Naser Karimi for AP, with thanks to Mackie:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's ambassador to Russia renewed a threat Iranian officials made earlier this week, saying 15 British sailors held by Iran could be tried for violating international law, Iran's state news agency IRNA reported Saturday.

Gholam-Reza Ansari told Russian television Vesti-24 on Friday that Iran had launched a legal investigation of the British sailors. "They will be tried if there is enough evidence of guilt," Ansari was quoted by IRNA as saying.

Britain's Foreign Office said it was checking the claim that the sailors were facing trial, but noted that the ambassador's comments didn't alter their view of what was needed to resolve the standoff.

"This doesn't change our position, we have made it perfectly clear that our personnel were in Iraqi waters and we continue to request immediate consular access to them and their immediate release," said a spokeswoman for Britain's Foreign Office, speaking on customary condition of anonymity in line with government rules.

"We continue to request immediate consular access to them and their immediate release." Ahmadinejad must be shaking.

Muhammad Dawood gets 9-month sentence for supporting terrorism

Muhammad Dawood (aka David Hicks) Update: a slap on the wrist. "Hicks gets nine-month sentence," from Australia's ABC News Online (thanks to JE):

A US military tribunal has sentenced confessed terrorism supporter David Hicks to seven years in jail but he will only have to serve nine months.

The tribunal judge accepted Hicks's guilty plea as part of an agreement that limited his sentence to seven years in prison, in addition to the five years he has been held at the US base at Guantanamo Bay.

The deal allowed all but nine months of the sentence to be be suspended.

Hicks will serve the sentence in Australia and the United States must send him home by May 29....

Lead prosecutor Lieutenant Colonel Kevin Chenail had told the tribunal Hicks had knowingly sought out an organisation bent on attacking the United States and acquired dangerous skills.

The prosecutor, Marine Lieutenant Colonel Kevin Chenail, says Hicks freely joined a band of killers who slaughtered innocents.

"We are face to face with the enemy," he said.

First conviction

Hicks, who has become the first war crimes convict among the hundreds of foreign captives held for years at the Guantanamo prison camp, had pleaded guilty to supporting terrorism in an agreement with US military prosecutors.

Hicks, originally from Adelaide in South Australia, acknowledged he trained with Al Qaeda, fought against US allies in Afghanistan in late 2001 for two hours and then sold his gun to raise cab fare and tried to flee by taxi to Pakistan.

1 teacher, elderly couple shot dead in Thailand's restive south

Jihad against retired teachers and elderly couples. This Associated Press (thanks to Jeffrey Imm), however, stays in passive voice as long as it can, before gingerly identifying the culprits as "suspected insurgents," who of course just happen to target Buddhists.

BANGKOK, Thailand: A retired teacher and an elderly couple were shot dead Saturday while four other civilians were wounded in a bomb explosion in Thailand's violent-ravaged south, police said.

Sawai Phrommani, a 62-year-old retired teacher, was killed in a drive-by shooting as he rode a motorcycle home in Pattani's Mayo district, said police Lt. Col. Narat Thepchalerm.

In Narathiwat, suspected insurgents posing as customers shot dead a Buddhist couple _Charin Ngaono, 70 and his 68-year-old wife Rabiep _in their grocery store in Rangae district, police said.

Four Buddhist civilians also were wounded in Yala province, when a roadside bomb exploded as their car passed over it, police said.

Pakistan: "Creeping Talibanisation is now a reality across the country"

And the creeps are creeping fast. "The creeping coup," by Zaffar Abbas in Dawn, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

ISLAMABAD, March 30: The primary theatre of battle may still be North and South Waziristan, as evidenced by the Pakistani Taliban’s recent bloody assault on the settled town of Tank that borders the tribal areas. But the events of the last few days in Islamabad are more disturbing in some ways, suggesting as they do that creeping Talibanisation is now a reality across the country. Indeed the Lal Masjid brigade, as it has come to be known, has every right to celebrate. Tuesday’s showdown with the police was its second major success of the year. First its women’s wing, comprising hundreds of burqa-clad and baton-wielding students, occupied a children’s library in the federal capital in January.

Now both the men’s and women’s wings of this emerging brand of the Pakistani Taliban have started to impose new rules of morality by forcibly shutting down video and music shops in Islamabad, and by abducting women whom they believe are engaged in ‘immoral’ activities.

Situated in an area where the prime minister’s secretariat and seat of power is on one side, and the headquarters of the country’s premier intelligence agency, the ISI, on the other, Lal Masjid and its adjacent Hafsa madressah have not only managed to enforce the Taliban-style system of ‘moral policing’ in matters of ‘vice and virtue’, to date they remain in control of the situation.

But who are these people, and why are the government and the security services finding it so hard to enforce the rule of law? Is it that the government really wants to avoid bloodshed because hundreds, if not thousands, of women are part of this violent brigade? Or is it a reflection of some kind of infighting in the establishment where one faction still has a soft corner for their former Islamist allies?

Probably both.

Imams narrow target of 'Does'

Now we learn that they're only going after the "racist" passengers. And "there is no way Mr. Mohammedi can possibly determine whether the John Does 'knowingly made false reports' against his clients 'with the intent to discriminate against them' without taking their testimony under oath, at least during pretrial discovery." That in itself will discourage passengers from reporting suspicious activity in the future. And then it's open season for jihadist hijackers in airports.

By Audrey Hudson in the Washington Times (thanks to Sr. Soph):

A group of imams suing US Airways for discrimination amended their lawsuit this week to target only the "John Doe" passengers who they say are racist and falsely accused them of behaving suspiciously.

The six imams were removed from a flight in Minneapolis in November for disruptive behavior reported by passengers and members of the flight crew.

The lawsuit filed earlier this month targeted "passengers who contacted US Airways to report the alleged 'suspicious' behavior of plaintiffs performing their prayer at the airport terminal."

The amended lawsuit identifies possible John Does as individuals who "may have made false reports against plaintiffs solely with the intent to discriminate against them on the basis of their race, religion, ethnicity and national origin."

"The only individuals against whom suit may be raised in this litigation are those who may have knowingly made false reports against the imams with the intent to discriminate against them," Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said in a letter this week to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a public interest law firm. The Becket Fund had publicly condemned CAIR for supporting the case.

"The imams will not sue any passengers who reported suspicious activity in good faith, even when the 'suspicious' behavior included the imams' constitutionally protected right to practice their religion without fear or intimidation," Mr. Nihad said. "When a person makes a false report with the intent to discriminate, he or she is not acting in good faith."

The imams are being represented by New York lawyer Omar Mohammedi in the lawsuit, which has triggered an outcry among lawyers who say they will defend the "John Does" for free.

Becket Fund Chairman Kevin Hasson criticized the amended changes in a letter to CAIR on Thursday.

"There is no way Mr. Mohammedi can possibly determine whether the John Does 'knowingly made false reports' against his clients 'with the intent to discriminate against them' without taking their testimony under oath, at least during pretrial discovery," Mr. Hasson said.

"That prospect alone, of being dragged into court proceedings, will certainly provide a great disincentive for other citizens to come forward with their own suspicions," he said.

Spencer on CSpan this morning

I just found out that CSpan Book TV will be repeating my Heritage Foundation talk about my book The Truth About Muhammad this morning at 7:30AM PST, 10:30AM EST. You can watch online here.

Seven rallies today against the global jihad

Rally Against Islamofascism Day. All rallies will be held TODAY, Saturday, March 31st. For details, see the UAC site.

West Coast:

Southern California:
In front of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)'s Southern California Office
We will be hanging an effigy of bin Laden
Location: 2180 W. Crescent Ave. Anaheim, CA 92801
Time: 1:00 PM
Contact: losangeles@unitedamericancommittee.org

Hawaii - Kona
Location: Along the Queen K Hwy, near the Mormon Temple, just south of Henry St., in Kona, Hawaii
Time: Starting at 2:00pm and until 5:00pm
Contact: for more info or to confirm attendance email americandefender@yahoo.com

Washington State:
In front of CAIR's Seattle Office
Location: 9594 1st Avenue NE, Seattle WA
Time: 1:00 PM
Contact: washington@unitedamericancommittee.org

East Coast:

New York - NYC: GROUND ZERO
MAIN RALLY AGAINST ISLAMOFASCISM DAY RALLY
Location: Ground Zero - World Trade Center
S/E corner Liberty St and Trinity Pl (Church St).
Time: 12 Noon - 2 PM
Contact: newyork@unitedamericancommittee.org

Florida - Orlando:
Location: The corner of Hwy 50(Colonial Drive) and Bumby.
Time: 1:00 PM
Contact: florida@unitedamericancommittee.org

Massachusetts - Boston:
Location: Boston Common
Tremont St. in front of the Constitution memorial and across from Lowes movie theater.
Time: 1:00 - 3:00 PM
Contact: boston@unitedamericancommittee.org

Midwest:

Missouri - Columbia:
Location: Post Office on E 500 block of Walnut Street, across the street on the sidewalk.
Time: 9:45am to 11am.
Contact: ltw03y@hotmail.com

Qaddafi: "All those believers who do not follow Islam are losers"

No word on whether he extended his right thumb and forefinger in the shape of an "L" and held it up to his forehead to drive the point home. "Gaddafi says only Islam a universal religion," by Salah Sarrar for Reuters:

AGADEZ, Niger (Reuters) - Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi said on Friday that it was a mistake to believe that Christianity was a universal faith alongside Islam.

"There are serious mistakes -- among them the one saying that Jesus came as a messenger for other people other than the sons of Israel," he told a mass prayer meeting in Niger.

"Christianity is not a faith for people in Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas. Other people who are not sons of Israel have nothing to do with that religion," he said at the prayer meeting, held to mark the birth of the prophet Mohammed.

Gaddafi, who is seeking to expand his influence in Africa, said his arguments came from the Koran. He led similar prayers last year in Mali.

"It is a mistake that another religion exists alongside Islam. There is only one religion which is Islam after Mohammed," he said in the sermon, which was broadcast live on Libyan state television.

"All those believers who do not follow Islam are losers," he added. "We are here to correct the mistakes in the light of the teachings of the Koran."

Gaddafi also said it was a mistake to believe that Jesus had been crucified and killed. "It is not correct to say that. Another man resembling Jesus was crucified in his place."

Libya grants financial aid to Islamic communities in Africa and elsewhere to build mosques, Islamic schools and facilities.

Libyan state television often shows Gaddafi meeting groups of African men or women telling him they converted to Islam.

The mass prayers, chaired by Gaddafi, came a day after Arab leaders wrapped up a summit in Saudi Arabia. Libya was the only Arab state to shun the gathering.

Shunning Arab influence in North Africa is a good start, but one can't help but suspect Qaddafi is mainly concerned with their stealing his thunder as an influence in the region.

"Libya has turned its back on the Arabs ... Libya is an African nation. As for Arabs, may God keep them happy and far away," Gaddafi has said to explain his boycott of the summit.

Forty-eight percent of Germans think the United States is more dangerous than Iran

What else would you expect, given the state of news reporting in Eurabia?

"Evil Americans, Poor Mullahs," by Claus Christian Malzahn in Spiegel Online, with thanks to all who sent this in:

Forty-eight percent of Germans think the United States is more dangerous than Iran, a new survey shows, with only 31 percent believing the opposite. Germans' fundamental hypocrisy about the US suggests that it's high time for a new bout of re-education.

The Germans have believed in many things in the course of their recent history. They've believed in colonies in Africa and in the Kaiser. They even believed in the Kaiser when he told them that there would be no more political parties, only soldiers on the front.

Not too long afterwards, they believed that Jews should be placed into ghettos and concentration camps because they were the enemies of the people. Then they believed in the autobahn and that the Third Reich would ultimately be victorious. A few years later, they believed in the Deutsche mark. They believed that the Berlin Wall would be there forever and that their pensions were safe. They believed in recycling as well as in cheap jet travel. They even believed in a German victory at the soccer World Cup.

Now they believe that the United States is a greater threat to world peace than Iran. This was the by-no-means-surprising result of a Forsa opinion poll commissioned by Stern magazine. Young Germans in particular -- 57 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds, to be precise -- said they considered the United States more dangerous than the religious regime in Iran.

Read it all.

Libertarian Live!

Andre Traversa had me on his talk show yesterday to talk about my book, "Religion of Peace," and asked me to post the link for all Jihad Watchers. I understand the first ten minutes concern Rudy Giuliani, then Phyllis Chesler comes on, then me.

Iran issues another letter purportedly from female sailor

Grammatical errors and non-standard spelling join the the odd, stilted language of the previous letters that Iran claims were composed by Faye Turney. Iran can only hope that some of its own people buy into the propaganda, as their tactics are utterly transparent to the rest of the world.

"Text of 3rd letter allegedly written by Faye Turney in Iran," from Iran Focus:

To British People

I am writing to you as a British service person who has been sent to Iraq, sacrificed due to the intervening policies of the Bush and Blair governments.

We were arrested after entering Iranian waters by the Iranian forces. For this, I am deeply sorry. I understand that this has caused even more distrust for the people of Iran and the whole area in the British (sic).

The Iranian people have treated me well and have proved themselves to be caring, compassionate, hospitable and friendly. For this I am thankful.

I believe that for our countries to move forward we need to start withdrawing our forces from Iraq and leave the people of Iraq to start re-building their lives. I have written a letter to the people of Iran apologising for our actions.

Whereas we hear and see on the news the way prisoners were treated in Abo-Ghrayb (sic) and other Iraqi jails by British and American personnel, I have received total respect and faced no harm.

It is now our time to ask our government to make a change to its oppressive behaviour towards other people.

Faye Turney, 27/03/07

New video shows British detainee 'confession'

Imagine the international upheaval if a Western country showed a detainee's face for a moment. It's simply not done. Meanwhile, in Iran...

From CNN:

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian Arabic language network Al Alam on Friday aired new video showing one of 15 British detainees apologizing to Iranians for "entering your waters without permission."

The British government responded by criticizing the treatment of the sailors and marines, with Prime Minister Tony Blair saying Iran faces "increasing isolation" for refusing to release the service personnel.

The video showed three UK personnel seated in front of a floral backdrop, with one of them later appearing on camera to read a confession to what Tehran claims was their illegal entry into Iranian territory a week ago.

"I deeply apologize for entering your waters," said the serviceman, identified as Nathan Thomas Summers of Hayle in Cornwall, southwest England.

"On the 23rd of March 2007 in Iranian waters we trespassed without permission," he said looking at someone or something off camera.

"I'd like to apologize for entering your waters without any permission. I know it happened back in 2004 and I know our government promised that it wouldn't happen again. Again I do apologize for entering your waters."

Summers added: "Since we've been arrested in Iran our treatment has been very friendly, we have not been harmed at all.

"They've looked after us really well. Basically the food they've been serving us has been good and I'm grateful no harm has come to us."

Blair, speaking to reporters a couple of hours after the video was aired, said: "All this does is enhance people's sense of disgust. Captured personnel being paraded and manipulated in this way doesn't fool anyone.

"What the Iranians have to realize is that if they continue in this way they will face continuing isolation."

Blair called for "patience" in dealing with the crisis, adding: "They most important thing is to ensure people are returned safe."

Earlier Friday, Britain's Foreign Office responded to the video, telling CNN that "using our servicemen in this way for propaganda reasons is outrageous."

Meanwhile, EU foreign ministers on Friday demanded Iran release 15 Britons, though some warned against escalating the dispute and said their diplomatic ties with Tehran would not be immediately affected, The Associated Press reported.

Friday's video was the second so-called confession by a British detainee to be aired by Al Alam this week.

U.S. says most Iraq bombers via Syria: 'It has to stop'

Absolutely, but where is the political will to hold Syria to account? The deterrent posed by having the world's strongest and most advanced military is attenuated by the fact that U.S. military assets are stretched thin under the burden of holding together Iraq, a country with no inherent unity. Absent that, the U.S. would not only regain the deterrent power of being more ready, willing, and able, to address global threats, but Syria's Alawite regime (categorized as a Shi'ite group, but well removed from the mainstream) would find itself occupied with a Sunni-Shi'ite jihad next door that would embolden its own Sunni majority population against its enemies both across and within the border, leaving Damascus much less able to threaten Israel and do the bidding of Iran.

From the World Tribune:

WASHINGTON — A U.S. State Dept. official said about 90 percent of the suicide attackers in Iraq came from Syria.

"It has to stop," said David Satterfield, the chief State Department adviser on Iraq. Officials said that despite numerous appeals, Syria has failed to stop the flow of Sunni suicide bombers to Iraq. They said the lion's share of suicide bombers were foreign Arab nationals who entered Syria and made their way to Iraq.

"They [suicide bombers] see Syria as a more accommodating country through which to transit across the border to come into Iraq to perpetrate their terror," Satterfield.

Satterfield said the U.S. intelligence community has assessed that between 85 and 90 percent of suicide bombers in Iraq entered from Syria. In an address to the Washington Institute on March 27, Satterfield said 90 percent of suicide bombers in Iraq were foreigners.

Tiny Minority of Extremists Alert:

Officials said North Africans and Yemenis comprised the largest element among the foreign suicide bombers. But they said Saudi nationals have become an increasing factor in the Sunni insurgency war in Iraq.

In his address, Satterfield again warned Syria to stop the flow of would-be suicide bombers and other insurgents to Iraq. He said Iraq and the United States have sought to stem the flow of insurgents from Syria to Iraq's Al Anbar province.

"It has to stop," Satterfield said. "It is not in Syria's long term interests to let this violence continue. We and the Iraqi security forces have done our best. It is a long, long border."

Over the last month, the Bush administration has resumed high-level contacts with the Syrian regime of President Bashar Assad. Officials said that during the March 10 meeting in Baghdad, the U.S. delegation accused Iran and Syria of interfering in Iraq. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was expected to attend the next meeting that included Syria in April.

"We would hope that the Syrian government understands as well that its rhetoric for a peaceful and stable Iraq has to be matched by actions," Satterfield said.

Pakistani Islamic Schools Are Rife With Extremism, Group Says

Stop the presses. By Ed Johnson for Bloomberg:

March 30 (Bloomberg) -- President Pervez Musharraf has failed to tackle Islamic extremism in Pakistan's religious schools, which continue to promote a holy war against the West and foment terrorism, the International Crisis Group said.

Five years after the government pledged a crackdown on the schools, known as madrassas, many still preach a violent ideology and train and dispatch fighters to Afghanistan and Indian-administered Kashmir, the Brussels-based advocacy group, which aims to resolve conflicts, said in a report yesterday.

``The Pakistani government has yet to take any of the overdue and necessary steps to control religious extremism,'' the group said. ``Musharraf's periodic declarations of tough action, given in response to international events and pressure, are invariably followed by retreat.''

[...]

The ICG said the government's ``reform program is in shambles'' and that banned extremist groups continue to operate openly in Pakistan, particularly in the port city of Karachi.

The group called on the government to introduce a law that ``bars jihadi and violent sectarian teachings'' in madrassas and close schools that fail to comply. Many madrassas remain unregistered and government attempts to introduce non-religious classes have been futile, according to the report.

A law that "bars jihadi and violent sectarian teachings" is highly unlikely, as Islamic teachings on jihad are part of the standard Pakistani curriculum, and are not at all limited to the notion of an "inner spiritual struggle."

The group recommended the government establish financial controls on the schools, to establish where they receive funding. Students should also be registered, the group said. Certificates issued by the schools shouldn't be treated as the equivalent of university degrees to encourage participation in mainstream education, it added.

Indeed.

Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi: "Civil Jihad" Won't Abrogate Military Jihad

Esposito says he's a "reformist"

"Appropriate statements must be made in the appropriate setting." Arafat was a master of that. From the MEMRI Blog (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):

At the fifth conference of the International Al-Quds Institute, held in Algeria, institute head Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi was asked whether his recent call for "civil jihad" in Palestine would influence people to give up the original jihad.

Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi answered, "We are not abolishing the military jihad with the civil jihad, but appropriate statements must be made in the appropriate setting. In another place I call for military jihad and even for martyrdom operations. In the eyes of some people, my blood is permitted because of this. But at the Al-Quds Institute, I call for civil jihad."

Ethiopia: Muslims beat Christian evangelist to death

Christian proselytizing is a capital offense under Islamic law. "Ethiopian Evangelist Beaten to Death by Militant Muslims: Militant Wahabbi Islamists Drag Christian Evangelist into Mosque and Beat Him to Death," from Christian Newswire, with thanks to Tom:

WASHINGTON, Mar. 29 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Washington-DC based human rights group, International Christian Concern (ICC) has just learned that an Ethiopian evangelist named Tedase was beaten to death by militant Muslims on Monday, March 26th, as he and two young women were on a street evangelism assignment in Jimma, Ethiopia. This marks the second time in six months that Christians residing in Southeast Ethiopia have been attacked and killed by extremist (Wahabbi) Muslims.

On Monday afternoon Tedase and two female coworkers were conducting street evangelism on Merkato Street in Jimma, Southern Ethiopia. Merkato Street runs by a Wahabbi Mosque. As the team was walking by the Mosque, a group of Muslims exited the Mosque and began to run after them to confront them. Tedase's female coworkers ran away from the mob but Tedase continued on. The Muslims caught up with Tedase, pulled him into the mosque, and savagely beat him to death. Sources from Jimma reported that Tedase was beaten with a calculated intention to kill him. This was no accident or case of mob frenzy getting out of control. His body was later taken to the hospital for an autopsy and he was buried Tuesday, March 27.

Our sources also reveal that Jimma Christians were conducting an evangelism campaign, and news of the outreach was spreading among Jimma residents as well as militant Muslim groups in the area. The Muslims that belonged to the Wahabbi sect purposefully beat Tedase to death as a message to Christians that they are ready to combat evangelism.

Fitzgerald: Blaming England

In the Iranian mythology, Great Britain -- "England" -- has a more prominent and more venerable role than those newcomers to Satanhood, the United States and Israel. The no-longer existent England of Palmerston and the Great Game, and manipulations by assorted Curzons, live on in the vivid oriental imaginations to be found both in fictional bulbuls-and-roses Gulistan, as well as in the all-too-real tanks-and-missiles Teheran of Khatami and Ahmadinejad.

That is why the Iranian mobs are so easily brought out to denounce England. Because for them, it was "England" that ruined Persia in the nineteenth century. It was England that severed the Shi'a of Persia from Karbala and Najaf. Of course, in reality it wasn't England at all. The 1847 Treaty of Erzerum was brokered by the Czar of Russia, and was made between the Ottoman Empire (that is, the Turks) and the Persian Empire. And even though it was the Soviet Union that seized a swath of northern Iran after World War II (an idea whose time may have come again), and "England" that was the ally of the Americans, and it was the Americans and the other Western powers that forced a Soviet retreat, still in the popular mind in Persia "England" was to blame. It is true that the English were partly responsible for the coup against Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, for he had threatened the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company's concessions – they responded by persuading the Americans to stage that coup.

There is a certain kind of left-wing Iranian, the kind who at first supported the overthrow of the Shah and then found that the real and only winners were the Ayatollah Khomeini and the primitives who make up the Iranian masses. (These masses are not our sort -- not the Nafisi or Bina or Tabatabai sort, the sort who have names like Cyrus and Darius rather than Mohammad, but the sort who actually make up the masses of Iranians that those upper-class secularized Iranians in exile still can't quite recognize or allow themselves to understand, because it would be too painful.) For these left-wing Iranian the entire Khomeini phenomenon can be explained by two words or, possibly, three: "Mossadegh." "Coup." "England." In other words they want to believe, and want us to believe, that Shi'a Islam is just fine, and that if only Mossadegh had survived, and thrived, and the Shah had the feathers of the Peacock Throne clipped, everything would have been all right -- because such people still can't see how the very forces of modernization brought about by oil wealth would naturally unhinge the country.

And its unhingement would in turn naturally cause Islam, the Islam of Khomeini and his ilk, to make a comeback. In this these Iranian leftists resemble the secular Shi'a in exile, who couldn't imagine what Iraq would turn out to be like, and how it would not conceivably rise to the fantastic occasion offered in by the American removal of Saddam Hussein. These "unrepresentative" Best People, in Iraq and in Iran, simply can't face up to what most of their countrymen are deeply like, and deeply like because of Islam. They are embarrassed. They are personally and civilizationally embarrassed and don't know how to face it, deal with it, talk about it.

It is, for them, much easier to mutter about the coup against Mossadegh, which supposedly made ineluctable, a quarter-century later, the takeover by the Khomeinist forces of black reaction. And behind that coup, the Eternal Enemy in the manichaenism that comes naturally to Islam with that Zoroastrian substratum: "England."

That's the kind of analysis too many otherwise seemingly sane and westernized Iranians allow themselves to indulge in. And it's the kind of thing they inveigle the shallowest reporter/writers on Islam -- such as Stephen Kinzer with his "All the Shah's Men" -- into believing, uncritically, and then repeating, as if hearing that the Mossadegh Coup in 1953 is the necessary and sufficient explanation for the rise of Khomeini, and the re-emergence of Islam that, whenever and werever possible, will rise to the surface, whether it is in Kemalist Turkey or Pahlevi Iran, or in any Muslim country that might have allowed itself to believe this particular rasputin was safely under the ice. To blame "England" through its role in getting the Americans to remove Mossadegh just will not do as an explanation, and those credulous foreigners who accept and pass on such stuff are merely holding up their side of a comical folie a deux.

What is of note is that in Iran, the generally observable Muslim penchant for conspiracy theories, and for blaming some Infidel country or people, takes the particular form of blaming "England."

That is something to think about during these days, day 2, or is it 3, or even 4, of this, the New Hostage Crisis, created under the baleful eye of a direct participant in the previous example of Persian androlepsy -- the smiling, utterly fanatical Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Iran: Britain has "incorrect attitude"

This attitude is apparently fine

Iran scolds Britain for not adopting a posture of sufficiently abject dhimmitude. "Say sorry or we won't free mum, says Iran," from the Daily Mail, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

The release of kidnapped British sailor Faye Turney is on hold after Iran accused Britain of having an "incorrect attitude".

The hostage crisis also took a sinister new turn as a hate mob in Tehran demanded that the 15 captured British Navy personnel be hanged.

Protesters waved placards demanding "15 British aggressors must be executed" outside the foreign ministry.

The announcement Turney's release is on hold by the head of Iran's supreme national security council Ali Larijani dashed hopes that the 26-year-old mother would be released "very soon".

The u-turn came a day after Iran pledged to release Mrs Turney, who was detained along with 14 male colleagues, following their capture in Iraqi waters.

But Mr Larijani said on state television today: "It was announced that a woman in the group would be freed, but (this development) was met with an incorrect attitude. Naturally, (the release) will be suspended and it will not take place."

Iran will not release female sailor if UK freezes relations or takes issue to UN Security Council

Britain has already frozen relations with Iran, and is seeking condemnation of the sailors' and marines' abduction at the United Nations.

Iran's initial "humanitarian" gesture of offering the early release of Faye Turney served to raise international hopes, which Iran can now exploit in using Turney as its main bargaining chip, as well as a propaganda trophy in defiance of the Geneva Convention. "Britain seeks U.N. condemnation of Iran," from Associated Press:

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran may delay the release of the female British sailor if Britain takes the issue to the U.N. Security Council or freezes relations, the country's top negotiator Ali Larijani said Thursday. The Foreign Office in London, meanwhile, said Britain is seeking condemnation of Iran at the United Nations.

The seizure of 15 British sailors and marines, including Faye Turney, the only woman among them, took place during operations in Iraqi waters under a U.N. Security Council mandate, said the Foreign Office official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the subject.

"There are some plans to say something on behalf of the United Nations (about the seized troops) but they have not been finalized," said the official.

Speaking on Iranian state radio, Larijani said: "British leaders have miscalculated this issue." If Britain follows through with its policies on the British sailors and marines detained by Iran last week, Larijani said "this case may face a legal path" — a clear reference to Iran's prosecuting the sailors in court.

Britain asked the Security Council to support a call for the immediate release of the detainees, saying in a statement Wednesday they were operating in Iraqi waters under a mandate from the Security Council and at the request of Iraq, according to council diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity because the text was not released.

Earlier Thursday, Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman said Britain wanted to resolve the crisis quickly and without having a "confrontation over this."

In a briefing to reporters, the spokesman said British officials had been angered by Tehran's decision to show captured the British sailors and marines on Iranian television.

"Nobody should be put in that position. It is an impossible position to be put in," he said. "It is wrong. It is wrong in terms of the usual conventions that cover this. It is wrong in terms of basic humanity."

"We are not seeking to put Iran in a corner," said the spokesman. "We are simply saying, 'Please release the personnel who should not have been seized in the first place.'"

On Wednesday, Britain announced it was freezing relations with Iran.

Western definition of "jihad" must be corrected -- Italian "expert"

Oh, Oriana, how Italy misses you.

"Western definition of "jihad" must be corrected -- Italian expert," from the Kuwait National News Agency:

KUWAIT, March 29 (KUNA) -- The definitions of "jihad" and "holy war" as presented by Western media need to be corrected if a true and undistorted image of Islam is be presented to the world, said Italian professor of Islamic culture Valeria Paicentini on Thursday. Speaking to Kuwait News Agency (KUNA), the visiting professor said, "Our media is distorting a lot Islam's aspects and features ... and this misunderstanding media has created can only be countered by looking closely at the true meanings of such terms as 'jihad' and 'holy war' in Islam." It is a common misconception that "jihad" means "military action", when in fact it translates to "effort" of which just one aspect is to do with taking action to defend oneself, she said.

The best way for Muslims to clear up this "misconception" would be for them to act upon the definition of jihad as spiritual struggle, and to take steps to counter actively the Muslims all over the world who are acting upon the "misconception" that jihad involves warfare against unbelievers.

Ironically, she said, "holy war" was a term introduced by the Vatican to "counter the Islamic wave" it feared would spread throughout Europe.

Sure. The Vatican invented those statements of Muhammad about fighting unbelievers until they convert or submit, and until Islam is dominant in the world.

Fitzgerald: What worries them

As Robert Spencer says, there is no "effective theological response to Muslims" who take their Islam seriously. That is, there is no effective Islamic theological response to Muslims who take their Islam seriously enough to want to individually participate in the Jihad. But what is most troubling to the Pakistani authorities is not the fact of Jihad.

After all, Parvez Musharraf, the other generals, and the I.S.I. have all been waging Jihad in any way that they could. These many and various ways have included surreptitious support for terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir and India for many decades. They have also helped bring up the baby of the Taliban and then, when it was ready, sent it back to Afghanistan -- not on spring break but to stay and to bring "stability" through murder and mayhem, just the way that Hitler did, or to a lesser degree, Mussolini. Stability, stability.

No, what worries the Pakistani authorities about the jihad-preaching madrasa in Islamabad are two things:

1) The open declaration of Jihad demonstrates to Infidels by the silence of the other Pakistanis that indeed, there is NO effective theological response to the jihadist version of Islam, none whatsoever. For those who are learning about jihad in this mosque are good Muslims, believing and perhaps acting on orthodox teachings of mainstream Islam. And this is embarrassing, for eventually even the stupidest or most blind of Infidel governments and reporters might begin to figure out the realities of this situation. Why, even some people in the 1930s figured Mr. Hitler out -- and told the world exactly what he was about. But few listened, until events made it impossible any longer for them to stop up their ears and minds.

Unfortunately, the progress of Islam, and of the worldwide Jihad, has at this point a great many agents in place. Those agents have the ability to confuse and bring lawsuits and distract and act aggrieved. And so many local Infidels seem to be altogether willing to act as helpmeets in this effort, out of stupidity, or cupidity (there is a whole lot of Arab money being spread around), or timidity (can you imagine rulers in the E.U., or in North America, openly identifying the menace of Islam and listing the various instruments of Jihad, or the goals of Jihad, which is a central duty imposed on all Muslims?). Some Infidels, of course, suffer on the other hand from rigidity (we can't change our policies, we can't see things afresh, we can't analyze things anew. It would take too much effort, and we're just too busy).

2) Authorities in Pakistan, as in other Muslim countries, are also worried that open jihad preaching such as what goes on in this madrasa will ultimately manifest itself as opposition to the government, whether to the illegal arrogation of power by Parvez Musharraf (who remains both President and head of the army, which violates the Pakistani Constitution), or the corruption that is such a noticeable feature of almost every Muslim country, where inshallah-fatalism prevents real economic development -- so the road to riches is to seize and retain control over the state, and then to help themselves to whatever wealth may be available.

Such wealth comes from two sources, oil and Infidel aid:

1) The oil money. Think of the Al-Saud grabbing large amounts of the oil revenues for the princes, princelings, and princelettes of one particular family, a family that even named the whole country after itself. Or on a lesser scale, think of those grandiose sheiklets of the Gulf sheikdoms.

2) The disguised Jizyah of aid given by Infidel donors. How do you think Arafat, or his henchmen including Abbas, have the apartments and villas and bank accounts they all do? Or how do you think Mubarak pays for his Family-and-Friends Plan? Who pays for Queen Noor, or Abdullah's mediagenic wife's dresses, or their stays in hotels around the globe? (Abdullah, to be fair, does not have his father's tastes, and doesn't quite run up the "hotel-or-residence" call-girl tab that, through the C.I.A., American taxpayers were paying for for decades, as they also did for Sukarno and others, all in order to please the "plucky little king" Hussein of Jordan.)

Hussein’s proclivities may have been embarrassing, but they never embarrassed Jordanian officials the way this madrasa embarrasses those in Pakistan. For Hussein’s call-girls never threatened the whole deceptive edifice. This madrasa does.

Louay Safi, "Islamophobia" and unintentional irony

Jihad Watch reader Mike has sent me a new article by Louay Safi, the Indianapolis ISNA op who is unhappy that plans are afoot for me to lead a seminar for the Joint Terrorism Task Force in that city. I have replied to his attacks before, albeit belatedly. Since he mostly rehashes what he said in his earlier piece here, and I'm tired of cherry-picking the Qur'an, I think I'll cherry-pick his article instead, and just point out a couple of things.

First, he repeats a 1997 definition of the trumped-up term "Islamophobia" that I think bears scrutiny.

In Britain, the term “Islamophobia” was not used in government policy until 1997, when the race relations think tank Runnymede Trust published the report “Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All." [1] In a section entitled The Nature of Islamophobia, the report itemizes eight features that Runnymede attributed to Islamophobia:

* Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.

The fact is that Islam is not a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change. There are innumerable variations in Muslim observance all around the world. There are innumerable variations in cultural traditions of Islamic observance. It is also true that all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence teach that it is part of the responsibility of the Islamic community to wage war against and subjugate unbelievers, and that this view is sealed by scholarly consensus (ijma) and the closing-off of new rulings on settled issues (see here about the gates of ijtihad). Jihadists are capitalizing upon these facts to make recruits among peaceful Muslims by calling them back to what they are able to represent on the basis of the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Islamic jurisprudence as "pure Islam."

So in other words, it is the jihadists who are portraying the traditional teachings on jihad warfare as incumbent upon all Muslims, and unable to be changed. But when Western non-Muslims take note of this, it's called "Islamophobia."

* Islam is seen as separate and “other”. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.

This one is silly. No one is claiming that Islam has no values in common with other cultures, or exists in a vacuum. However, it is not the values in common that are a cause for Infidel concern, it is the values that are held by non-Muslims that Islam does not teach in any of its orthodox manifestations: freedom of conscience, equality of rights of all people before the law, including women and religious minorities, and so on.

* Islam is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist.

I am not going to apologize for saying that elements of traditional Islam are barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist. When Muslim clerics protest against a rape law that calls for forensic evidence to establish guilt, rather than disqualifying the victim's testimony and establishing guilt only on the testimony of four male witnesses (cf. Qur'an 24:13), yes, that is barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist. If Louay Safi and other Muslims want non-Muslims not to have this perception, let them go to Pakistan and Iran and elsewhere and take up their conflict with these clerics. But they don't. And they won't.

* Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, and engaged in a Clash of Civilizations [an idea enunciated by Prof. Samuel P. Huntington, with the publication of his book, “The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order” Simon & Schuster; 1998].

Here again: when 49.9% of Muslims affirm that they support Osama, and when jihadists worldwide explain and justify their actions by reference to the Qur'an and Sunnah, the problem of seeing Islam as aggressive does not lie with "Islamophobes," but with Muslims.

* Islam is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.

Yet again: "Islamophobes" did not invent the idea of Islam as a political ideology. The man who recently said that "Muslims will take over the world" was not an "Islamophobe." The Muslims who decided that the Year One of the Islamic calendar would not be the year of Muhammad's birth or death, or the beginning of his prophethood, but rather the year of his becoming a political and military leader, was not an "Islamophobe."

* Criticisms made of 'the West' by Islam are rejected out of hand.

What is this monolithic "Islam" that Safi envisions criticizing the West? But anyway, yes, they are dismissed, and should be, because while the West has many problems, Westerners would be deceiving themselves with D'Souza-like abandon if they imagined that addressing any of the Muslim grievances against the West would end the jihad. The jihad proceeds from Islam's supremacist imperative, which does not depend on anything non-Muslims do, but simply on the fact that they are non-Muslims. Qur'an 9:29 tells Muslims to fight the People of the Book, not just the evil or immoral People of the Book.

* Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society. * Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal.

Hogwash. Jihad actions and other Islamic supremacist activity calls for defensive action by non-Muslims. That's all.

Anyway, here's the unintended irony. Safi says about me:

Out of the hundreds of the Qur’anic verses left out of Spencer’s discussion are those that direct Muslims to initiate fighting only to repel aggression while urging them to seek peace when the other party seeks peace: “Fight in the way of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression, for God loves not aggressors. And fight them wherever you meet them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution is worse than slaughter. But if they cease, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no oppression and the religion is only for God, but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.” (2:190-193)

Did you catch that? I supposedly ignore Qur'anic verses "that direct Muslims to initiate fighting only to repel aggression while urging them to seek peace when the other party seeks peace." In support of this Safi quotes 2:190-193, which I've actually discussed at some length in both The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. But here's the irony. That verse contains this: "fight them on until there is no oppression and the religion is only for God."

So Muslims are to fight until "the religion is only for God." They are to fight, in other words, until Islam reigns supreme, for Islam is the only religion acceptable to Allah (Qur'an 3:85). If Muslims must fight until "the religion is only for God," they must fight until Islam is the dominant religion all over the world. So in accusing me of cherry-picking the Qur'an to portray Islam as violent, Safi has inadvertently highlighted a verse that is one of the principal foundations of the Islamic supremacist imperative.

Trouble Brews At Islamabad's Jihad-preaching Mosque

"We teach the students complete Islam...Jihad is a big pillar of Islam." And while putative Muslim reformers in the West self-righteously remind us that Islam is not a monolith and jihad is a spiritual struggle, these clerics and students in Islamabad teach jihad is warfare and peaceful Muslims have mounted no effective theological response to them.

From DPA, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

The hostage-taking of three police officers by students attached to Islamabad's notorious Red Mosque Wednesday again highlighted the rising strain of religious militancy in the very heart of the Pakistani capital.

If the police did not to release several of his students and teachers they would face a jihad, or holy war, warned cleric Abdul Rashid Ghazi, deputy head of the Lal Masjid, or red mosque, and adjacent madrassa religious school where Osama bin Laden is regarded as "our hero".

But their arrest and the seizure of the officers and an alleged manager of a local brothel during a morality dispute is a sideshow to more sinister activity inside the giant complex with 11,000 students.

"We encourage our people to go and fight (foreign troops in Afghanistan)," Ghazi told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa during a recent visit.

Any means of stopping the "aggressors" was justified, including suicide bombings, and it was just a matter of time before the international contingents are forced to leave, he said.

Pakistan is a key ally of the United States in the war against terrorism, yet hatred towards the western "occupiers" in Afghanistan is openly preached a short distance from the offices of the prime minister, parliament and the Supreme Court.

Earlier attempts to take action against the complex were dropped amid fears of a broad backlash, leaving Ghazi free to impress the call to arms upon the 6,500 females and 4,500 males who take classes and worship on premises he jointly administers with his brother.

While a generation of young fighters appears to be taking shape under their tutelage, the state's authority now seems to end at the heavily guarded gates....

Foreign armies had no right to invade Afghanistan after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, says Ghazi, who in 1998 met al-Qaeda leader bin Laden in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar.

"They will never succeed, they will go, defeated like the Russians," he pronounces, before rhetorically asking how many of the 50,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan would be willing to carry out a suicide attack on the Taliban.

Hearing the answer "none", Ghazi says opposition among the masses to western intervention can produce "hundreds of thousands of suicide bombers" eager to sacrifice themselves....

"We teach the students complete Islam," Ghazi explains, but noting that, "Jihad is a big pillar of Islam."

"We teach them the concept of jihad, not how to fight," he clarifies, confident of the superior determination of those waging the armed struggle.

"For us this life does not matter," says Ghazi. "(The fighting) will continue for some time, there will be a lot of casualties on our side, no doubt, but finally (the foreign troops) will retreat."

A return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan is the only solution for the country, he believes, while claiming that his men have contacts with the militant resistance and al-Qaeda.

Bin Laden and Taliban leader Mullah Omar are alive and actively continuing the fight and neither their death or capture would not significantly weaken the effort, according to Ghazi.

"In our jihad a person is not important - another would just take over," he says.

As we have often noted here.

Four Muslims charged with terrorism in Denmark

An update on this story, from AFP:

COPENHAGEN (AFP) - Four young Muslims have been charged in Denmark with planning terrorist bombings in Denmark or abroad, the justice ministry said Wednesday.

The four men were accused of acquiring chemicals and laboratory instruments to make triacetone triperoxide (TATP) explosives, often used by suicide bombers.

TATP bombs were used in the July 2005 London bombings.

The identities of the four were not disclosed. They are residents of Denmark but do not hold Danish citizenship.

The men were part of a group of nine people arrested in a September 2006 swoop in Odense in central Denmark.

Three of the nine had been remanded in custody, while the six others, including the fourth person indicted on Wednesday, were released.

At the time of the raid, Danish Justice Minister Lene Espersen said that the discovery of the alleged terrorist cell was "the most serious" such case Denmark has known.

If convicted, the four face life sentences.

How two teens were recruited for jihad

An illuminating piece by Mushtaq Yusufzai and Carol Grisanti for NBC News (thanks to all who sent this in):

"We were told to fight against Israel, America and non-Muslims," said Muhammed Bakhtiar, 17, explaining why he wanted to become a suicide bomber. "We are so unhappy with our lives here. We have nothing," he said.

Last month, Bakhtiar and his school friend, Miraj Ahmad, also 17, left their home, families, and boarding school in Buner, a district of the Malakand Division of the Northwest Frontier Province. Their destination was the Muridke madrassa right outside of Lahore, Pakistan’s second-largest city. The madrassa or religious school is run by the Jama’at-ud-Da’awah, the charity linked to the outlawed terrorist organization, Lashkar e Taiba. And Lashkar e Taiba has links to al-Qaida.

The grounds of this madrassa looks much like the campus of any exclusive boys boarding school – except for the bearded armed guards sporting Kalashnikovs checking all those who come and go. There is a cricket field, swimming pool, all sorts of sport activities, and horses too. In addition to religious instruction, the school offers computer sciences, engineering and pre-med classes for students ranging in age from six to 17.

It also offers jihad.

"We read about jihad in books and wanted to join," said Ahmad. "We wanted to go to the Muridke madrassa so we would have a better life in the hereafter."

Recruited at local high school

Ahmad said that he and his friend Bakhtiar were recruited at their high school in Buner. The recruiter offered to take the boys to Muridke for two weeks of training and then to Peshawar where they would be introduced to people and make contacts.

"We were told it is our choice to become a freedom fighter or a suicide bomber," explained Ahmad, who had a neat beard and wore a white Muslim prayer cap. "But we should never fight against Pakistan."

Every morning the students were taught Islamic studies; afternoons were reserved for sports. Jihadi training was given in the evenings; two classes a night.

General McCaffrey: "No Iraqi government official, coalition soldier, diplomat, reporter, foreign NGO, nor contractor can walk the streets of Baghdad, nor Mosul, nor Kirkuk, nor Basra, nor Tikrit, nor Najaf, nor Ramadi, without heavily armed protection"

And why is that?

From the Washington Post:

The retired general, who on his latest visit also interviewed a U.S. intelligence official and some Iraqi officers, is especially critical of the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. It is "despised" by the Sunnis, he writes, is seen as "untrustworthy and incompetent" by the Kurds, and now enjoys "little credibility among the Shia populations from which it emerged."

The government lacks dominance in every province, he added. One result is that "no Iraqi government official, coalition soldier, diplomat, reporter, foreign NGO [nongovernmental organization], nor contractor can walk the streets of Baghdad, nor Mosul, nor Kirkuk, nor Basra, nor Tikrit, nor Najaf, nor Ramadi, without heavily armed protection."

Militias and armed bands are "in some ways more capable of independent operations" than the Iraqi army, he added.

McCaffrey is gloomy about the continuing strength of the insurgency. At this point, he said, about 27,000 fighters are being held, and at least 20,000 others have been killed, yet enemy combatants continue to produce new leaders and foot soldiers. The result, five years into the war, he said, is that "their sophistication, numbers and lethality go up -- not down -- as they incur these staggering battle losses."

And why is that?

British hostages "confess" on Iranian TV

"Hopefully it won't be long till I'm home to get ready for Molly's birthday party and with a present from the Iranian people."

Oh, I am sure it will be a most memorable present.

"Paraded On Iranian TV," from SkyNews, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

Footage of the 15 British sailors and marines being held in Iran has been aired by Iranian TV.

The pictures show the group being arrested, eating food in captivity and carries an interview with Leading Seaman Faye Turney.

Turney is seen looking worried, wearing Iranian clothes and smoking.

She says the group "trespassed" into Iranian waters.

"I was arrested on March 23 and obviously we tresspassed into their waters," she says.

"They were very friendly and very hospitable and nice people and explained to us why we were being arrested," she said.

"There was no hurt or no harm."

Turney is due to be released shortly, the Iranian government said, and will carry a letter to her parents "confessing" to what happened.

Turney said: "I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologise for us entering their waters.

"Please don't worry about me. I'm staying strong. Hopefully it won't be long till I'm home to get ready for Molly's birthday party and with a present from the Iranian people."

Shi'ite police reportedly rampage against Sunnis in Tal Afar

Tal Afar Update. "Shiite cops reportedly rampage vs. Sunnis," by Sinan Salaheddin for Associated Press:

BAGHDAD - Shiite militants and police enraged by massive truck bombings in the northwestern town of Tal Afar went on a revenge spree against Sunni residents there Wednesday, killing as many as 60 people, officials said.

The gunmen began roaming Sunni neighborhoods in the city, shooting at residents and homes, according to police and a local Sunni politician.

Ali al-Talafari, a Sunni member of the local Turkomen Front Party, said the Iraqi army had arrested 18 policemen accused of being involved after they were identified by the Sunni families targeted. But he said the attackers included Shiite militiamen.

He said more than 60 Sunnis had been killed, but a senior hospital official in Tal Afar put the death toll at 45, with four wounded.

The hospital official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to security concerns, said the victims were men between the ages of 15 and 60, and they were killed with a shot to the back of the head.

Police said earlier dozens of Sunnis were killed or wounded, but they had no precise figures, and communications problems made it difficult to reach them for an update. The shooting continued for more than two hours, the officials said.

Army troops later moved into the Sunni areas to stop the violence and a curfew was slapped on the entire town, according to Wathiq al-Hamdani, the provincial police chief and his head of operations, Brig. Abdul-Karim al-Jibouri.

"The situation is under control now," said al-Hamdani. "The local Tal Afar police have been confined to their bases and policemen from Mosul are moving there to replace them."

House votes to protect 'John Does' on flights

A major victory for common sense. By Audrey Hudson in the Washington Times (thanks to Davida):

House Republicans tonight surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity -- the first step by lawmakers to protect "John Doe" airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit.

After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats' Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121.

Republicans said the lawsuit filed by six Muslim imams against US Airways and "John Does," passengers who reported suspicious behavior, could have a "chilling effect" on passengers who may fear being sued for acting vigilant.

Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, offered the motion saying all Americans -- airline passengers included -- must be protected from lawsuits if they report suspicious behavior that may foreshadow a terrorist attack.

"All of our lives changed after September 11, and one of the most important things we have done is ask local citizens to do what they can to avoid another terrorist attack, if you see something, say something," said Mr. King.

"We have to stand by our people and report suspicious activity," he said. "I cannot imagine anyone would be opposed to this."

Mr. King called it a "disgrace" that the suit seeks to identify "people who acted out of good faith and reported what they thought was suspicious activity."

Indeed.

Russian intelligence sees U.S. military buildup on Iran border

So says the Russian News & Information Agency Novosti (thanks to Davida):

MOSCOW, March 27 (RIA Novosti) - Russian military intelligence services are reporting a flurry of activity by U.S. Armed Forces near Iran's borders, a high-ranking security source said Tuesday.

"The latest military intelligence data point to heightened U.S. military preparations for both an air and ground operation against Iran," the official said, adding that the Pentagon has probably not yet made a final decision as to when an attack will be launched.

He said the Pentagon is looking for a way to deliver a strike against Iran "that would enable the Americans to bring the country to its knees at minimal cost."

Brits To Be Paraded On TV

Iran follows its Hostage Crisis playbook, as the West reads out of the Jimmy Carter Hostage Crisis Response Handbook, at least so far. From SkyNews, with thanks to Mackie:

The British sailors and marines being held in Iran are to be paraded on television - but the female sailor who was captured could be released "today or tomorrow."

Turkish TV has quoted the Iranian foreign minister as saying Faye Turney could be freed within hours.

And an Arabic Iranian broadcaster says it will show footage of the captives on television.

The news comes after Tony Blair said the time had come to "ratchet up the pressure" on Iran.

Al-Qaeda says it struck at Tal Afar

Tal Afar Jihad Strike Update: "Iraq: Al-Qaeda Says It Struck In Talafar," from AKI, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

Baghdad, 28 March (AKI) - The 'Islamic State of Iraq' a name used by a group affiliated to al-Qaeda in Iraq has said it blew up two trucks - one in a crowded market - in the town of Talafar which killed some 60 people and injured scores more. In a statement posted on the Internet the group said it has carried out Tuesday's attack as part "of a noble plan called 'expeditions to avenge the honour' proclaimed by our emir Abu Omar al-Baghdadi."

The blasts marked one of the largest attacks in Talafar since US President Geroge W Bush used the town, which lies north of Baghdad near the Syrian border, to illustrate progress in Iraq.

According to witnesses one of the trucks stopped at the town's food market and the driver waited for hungry people - the town has experienced food shortages - to gather round the vehicle before detonating an explosive device.

Fitzgerald: Success in Tal Afar

Little more than a year ago, in Cleveland, President Bush delivered a speech, and at great length told the audience all about the "success" of his "strategy" in Tal Afar, a model city in what will be Iraq the Model (that's right -- Sunni Arab regimes everywhere will look on Shi'a dominated Iraq as a splendid model of what they can be, if only they get with the program).

Here is that speech. Read it, and weep, as a celebrated writer offhandedly wrote, "like a Babylonian willow":

President Discusses War on Terror and Operation Iraqi Freedom Renaissance Cleveland Hotel Cleveland, Ohio

12:25 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. (Applause.) Thank you all. Please be seated. Sanjiv, thanks for the introduction. He called me on the phone and said, listen, we believe in free speech, so you're going to come and give us a speech for free. (Laughter.) Thanks for the invitation, thanks for the warm welcome. It's good to be here at the City Club of Cleveland.

For almost a century, you have provided an important forum for debate and discussion on the issues of the day. And I have come to discuss a vital issue of the day, which is the safety and security of every American -- and our need to achieve victory in the war on terror.

I want to thank the Mayor for joining us. Mr. Mayor, appreciate you being here. (Applause.) It must make you feel pretty good to get the "Most Liveable City" award. (Laughter.) I want to thank all the members of the City Club for graciously inviting me to come. I want to thank the students who are here. Thanks for your interest in your government. I look forward to giving you a speech and then answering questions, if you have any.

The central front on the war on terror is Iraq. And in the past few weeks, we've seen horrific images coming out of that country. We've seen a great house of worship -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra -- in ruins after a brutal terrorist attack. We have seen reprisal attacks by armed militia on Sunni mosques. We have seen car bombs take the lives of shoppers in a crowded market in Sadr City. We've seen the bodies of scores of Iraqi men brutally executed or beaten to death.

The enemies of a free Iraq attacked the Golden Mosque for a reason: They know they lack the military strength to challenge Iraqi and coalition forces in a direct battle, so they're trying to provoke a civil war. By attacking one of Shia Islam's holiest sites, they hoped to incite violence that would drive Iraqis apart and stop their progress on the path to a free society.

The timing of the attack in Samarra is no accident. It comes at a moment when Iraq's elected leaders are working to form a unity government. Last December, four short months ago, more than 11 million people expressed their opinion. They said loud and clear at the ballot box that they desire a future of freedom and unity. And now it is time for the leaders to put aside their differences, reach out across political, religious, and sectarian lines, and form a unity government that will earn the trust and the confidence of all Iraqis. My administration, led by Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, is helping, and will continue to help the Iraqis achieve this goal.

The situation on the ground remains tense. And in the face of continued reports about killings and reprisals, I understand how some Americans have had their confidence shaken. Others look at the violence they see each night on their television screens, and they wonder how I can remain so optimistic about the prospects of success in Iraq. They wonder what I see that they don't. So today I'd like to share a concrete example of progress in Iraq that most Americans do not see every day in their newspapers and on their television screens. I'm going to tell you the story of a northern Iraqi city called Tal Afar, which was once a key base of operations for al Qaeda and is today a free city that gives reason for hope for a free Iraq.

Tal Afar is a city of more than 200,000 residents, roughly the population of Akron, Ohio. In many ways, Tal Afar is a microcosm of Iraq: It has dozens of tribes of different ethnicity and religion. Most of the city residents are Sunnis of Turkmen origin. Tal Afar sits just 35 miles from the Syrian border. It was a strategic location for al Qaeda and their leader, Zarqawi. Now, it's important to remember what Al Qaeda has told us, their stated objectives. Their goal is to drive us out of Iraq so they can take the country over. Their goal is to overthrow moderate Muslim governments throughout the region. Their goal is to use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks against America. To achieve this goal, they're recruiting terrorists from the Middle East to come into Iraq to infiltrate its cities, and to sow violence and destruction so that no legitimate government can exercise control. And Tal Afar was a key way station for their operations in Iraq.

After we removed Saddam Hussein in April 2003, the terrorists began moving into the city. They sought to divide Tal Afar's many ethnic and religious groups, and forged an alliance of convenience with those who benefitted from Saddam's regime and others with their own grievances. They skillfully used propaganda to foment hostility toward the coalition and the new Iraqi government. They exploited a weak economy to recruit young men to their cause. And by September 2004, the terrorists and insurgents had basically seized control of Tal Afar.

We recognized the situation was unacceptable. So we launched a military operation against them. After three days of heavy fighting, the terrorists and the insurgents fled the city. Our strategy at the time was to stay after the terrorists and keep them on the run. So coalition forces kept moving, kept pursuing the enemy and routing out the terrorists in other parts of Iraq

Unfortunately, in 2004 the local security forces there in Tal Afar weren't able to maintain order, and so the terrorists and the insurgents eventually moved back into the town. Because the terrorists threatened to murder the families of Tal Afar's police, its members rarely ventured out from the headquarters in an old Ottoman fortress. The terrorists also took over local mosques, forcing local imams out and insisting that the terrorist message of hatred and intolerance and violence be spread from the mosques. The same happened in Tal Afar's schools, where the terrorists eliminated real education and instead indoctrinated young men in their hateful ideology. By November 2004, two months after our operation to clear the city, the terrorists had returned to continue their brutal campaign of intimidation.

The return of al Qaeda meant the innocent civilians in Tal Afar were in a difficult position. Just put yourself in the shoes of the citizens of Tal Afar as all this was happening. On the one side, you hear coalition and Iraqi forces saying they're coming to protect you -- but they'd already come in once, and they had not stopped the terrorists from coming back. You worry that when the coalition goes after the terrorists, you or your family may be caught in the crossfire, and your city might be destroyed. You don't trust the police. You badly want to believe the coalition forces really can help you out, but three decades of Saddam's brutal rule have taught you a lesson: Don't stick your neck out for anybody.

On the other side, you see the terrorists and the insurgents. You know they mean business. They control the only hospital in town. You see that the mayor and other political figures are collaborating with the terrorists. You see how the people who worked as interpreters for the coalition forces are beheaded. You see a popular city councilman gunned down in front of his horrified wife and children. You see a respected Sheik and an Imam kidnapped and murdered. You see the terrorists deliberately firing mortars into playgrounds and soccer fields filled with children. You see communities becoming armed enclaves. If you are in a part of Tal Afar that was not considered friendly, you see that the terrorists cut off your basic services like electricity and water. You and your family feel besieged and you see no way out.

The savagery of the terrorists and insurgents who controlled Tal Afar is really hard for Americans to imagine. They enforced their rule through fear and intimidation -- and women and children were not spared. In one grim incident, the terrorists kidnapped a young boy from the hospital and killed him And then they booby-trapped his body and placed him along a road where his family would see him. And when the boy's father came to retrieve his son's body, he was blown up. These weren't random acts of violence; these were deliberate and highly organized attempts to maintain control through intimidation. In Tal Afar, the terrorists had schools for kidnapping and beheading and laying IEDs. And they sent a clear message to the citizens of the city: Anyone who dares oppose their reign of terror will be murdered.

As they enforced their rule by targeting civilians, they also preyed upon adolescents craving affirmation. Our troops found one Iraqi teenager who was taken from his family by the terrorists. The terrorists routinely abused him and violated his dignity. The terrorists offered him a chance to prove his manhood -- by holding the legs of captives as they were beheaded. When our forces interviewed this boy, he told them that his greatest aspiration was to be promoted to the killer who would behead the bound captives. Al Qaeda's idea of manhood may be fanatical and perverse, but it served two clear purposes: It helped provide recruits willing to commit any atrocity, and it enforced the rule of fear.

The result of this barbarity was a city where normal life had virtually ceased. Colonel H.R. McMaster of the Third Armored Cavalry Regiment described it this way: "When you come into a place in the grip of al Qaeda, you see a ghost town. There are no children playing in the streets. Shops are closed and boarded. All construction is stopped. People stay inside, prisoners in their own homes." This is the brutal reality that al Qaeda wishes to impose on all the people of Iraq.

The ability of al Qaeda and its associates to retake Tal Afar was an example of something we saw elsewhere in Iraq. We recognized the problem, and we changed our strategy. Instead of coming in and removing the terrorists, and then moving on, the Iraqi government and the coalition adopted a new approach called clear, hold, and build. This new approach was made possible because of the significant gains made in training large numbers of highly capable Iraqi security forces. Under this new approach, Iraq and coalition -- Iraqi and coalition forces would clear a city of the terrorists, leave well-trained Iraqi units behind to hold the city, and work with local leaders to build the economic and political infrastructure Iraqis need to live in freedom.

One of the first tests of this new approach was Tal Afar. In May 2005, Colonel McMaster's unit was given responsibility for the western part of Nineva Province where Tal Afar is located, and two months later Iraq's national government announced that a major offensive to clear the city of the terrorists and insurgents would soon be launched. Iraqi and coalition forces first met with tribal leaders and local residents to listen to their grievances. One of the biggest complaints was the police force, which rarely ventured out of its headquarters. When it did venture, it was mostly to carry out sectarian reprisals. And so the national government sent out new leaders to head the force. The new leaders set about getting rid of the bad elements, and building a professional police force that all sides could have confidence in. We recognized it was important to listen to the representatives of Tal Afar's many ethnic and religious groups. It's an important part of helping to remove one of the leading sources of mistrust.

Next, Iraqi and army coalition forces spent weeks preparing for what they knew would be a tough military offensive. They built an 8-foot high, 12-mile long dirt wall that ringed the city. This wall was designed to cut off any escape for terrorists trying to evade security checkpoints. Iraqi and coalition forces also built temporary housing outside the city, so that Tal Afar's people would have places to go when the fighting started. Before the assault on the city, Iraqi and coalition forces initiated a series of operations in surrounding towns to eliminate safe havens and make it harder for fleeing terrorists to hide. These steps took time, but as life returned to these outlying towns, these operations helped persuade the population of Tal Afar that Iraqi and coalition forces were on their side against a common enemy: the extremists who had taken control of their city and their lives.

Only after all these steps did Iraqi and coalition authorities launch Operation Restoring Rights to clear the city of the terrorists. Iraqi forces took the lead. The primary force was 10 Iraqi battalions, backed by three coalition battalions. Many Iraqi units conducted their own anti-terrorist operations and controlled their own battle space, hunting for the enemy fighters and securing neighborhoods block by block. Throughout the operation, Iraqi and coalition forces were careful to hold their fire to let civilians pass safely out of the city. By focusing on securing the safety of Tal Afar's population, the Iraqi and coalition forces begin to win the trust of the city's residents -- which is critical to defeating the terrorists who were hiding among them.

After about two weeks of intense activity, coalition and Iraqi forces had killed about 150 terrorists and captured 850 more. The operation uncovered weapons caches loaded with small arms ammunition and ski masks, RPG rockets, grenade and machine gun ammunition, and fuses and batteries for making IEDs. In one cache we found an axe inscribed with the names of the victims the terrorists had beheaded. And the operation accomplished all this while protecting innocent civilians and inflicting minimal damage on the city.

After the main combat operations were over, Iraqi forces moved in to hold the city. Iraqis' government deployed more than a thousand Iraqi army soldiers and emergency police to keep order, and they were supported by a newly restored police force that would eventually grow to about 1,700 officers. As part of the new strategy we embedded coalition forces with the Iraqi police and with the army units patrolling Tal Afar to work with their Iraqi counterparts and to help them become more capable and more professional. In the weeks and months that followed, the Iraqi police built stations throughout Tal Afar -- and city residents began stepping forward to offer testimony against captured terrorists, and inform soldiers about where the remaining terrorists were hiding.

Inside the old Ottoman fortress, a Joint Coordination Center manned by Iraqi army and Iraqi police and coalition forces answers the many phone calls that now come into a new tip line. As a result of the tips, when someone tries to plant an IED in Tal Afar, it's often reported and disabled before it can do any harm. The Iraqi forces patrolling the cities are effective because they know the people, they know the language and they know the culture. And by turning control of these cities over to capable Iraqi troops and police, we give Iraqis confidence that they can determine their own destiny -- and that frees up coalition forces to hunt the high-value targets like Zarqawi.

The recent elections show us how Iraqis respond when they know they're safe Tal Afar is the largest city in Western Nineveh Province. In the elections held in January 2005, of about 190,000 registered voters, only 32,000 people went to the polls. Only Fallujah had a lower participation rate. By the time of the October referendum on the constitution and the December elections, Iraqi and coalition forces had secured Tal Afar and surrounding areas. The number of registered voters rose to about 204,000 -- and more than 175,000 turned out to vote in each election, more than 85 percent of the eligible voters in Western Nineva Province. These citizens turned out because they were determined to have a say in their nation's future, and they cast their ballots at polling stations that were guarded and secured by fellow Iraqis.

One young teacher described the change this way: "What you see here is hope -- the hope that Iraq will become safer and fairer. I feel very confident when I see so many people voting."

The confidence that has been restored to the people of Tal Afar is crucial to their efforts to rebuild their city. Immediately following the military operations, we helped the Iraqis set up humanitarian relief for the civilian population. We also set up a fund to reimburse innocent Iraqi families for damage done to their homes and businesses in the fight against the terrorists. The Iraqi government pledged $50 million to help reconstruct Tal Afar by paving roads, and rebuilding hospitals and schools, and by improving infrastructure from the electric grid to sewer and water systems. With their city now more secure, the people of Tal Afar are beginning to rebuild a better future for themselves and their children.

See, if you're a resident of Tal Afar today, this is what you're going to see: You see that the terrorist who once exercised brutal control over every aspect of your city has been killed or captured, or driven out, or put on the run. You see your children going to school and playing safely in the streets. You see the electricity and water service restored throughout the city. You see a police force that better reflects the ethnic and religious diversity of the communities they patrol. You see markets opening, and you hear the sound of construction equipment as buildings go up and homes are remade. In short, you see a city that is coming back to life.

The success of Tal Afar also shows how the three elements of our strategy in Iraq -- political, security, and economic -- depend on and reinforce one another. By working with local leaders to address community grievances, Iraqi and coalition forces helped build the political support needed to make the military operation a success. The military success against the terrorists helped give the citizens of Tal Afar security, and this allowed them to vote in the elections and begin to rebuild their city. And the economic rebuilding that is beginning to take place is giving Tal Afar residents a real stake in the success of a free Iraq. And as all this happens, the terrorists, those who offer nothing but destruction and death, are becoming marginalized.

The strategy that worked so well in Tal Afar did not emerge overnight -- it came only after much trial and error. It took time to understand and adjust to the brutality of the enemy in Iraq. Yet the strategy is working. And we know it's working because the people of Tal Afar are showing their gratitude for the good work that Americans have given on their behalf. A recent television report followed a guy named Captain Jesse Sellars on patrol, and described him as a "pied piper" with crowds of Iraqi children happily chanting his name as he greets locals with the words "Salaam alaikum," which mean "peace be with you."

When the newswoman asks the local merchant what would have happened a few months earlier if he'd been seen talking with an American, his answer was clear: "They'd have cut off my head, they would have beheaded me." Like thousands of others in Tal Afar, this man knows the true meaning of liberation.

Recently, Senator Joe Biden said that America cannot want peace for Iraqis more than they want it for themselves. I agree with that. And the story of Tal Afar shows that when Iraqis can count on a basic level of safety and security, they can live together peacefully. We saw this in Tal Afar after the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra. Unlike other parts of Iraq, in Tal Afar the reaction was subdued, with few reports of sectarian violence. Actually, on the Friday after the attack, more than a thousand demonstrators gathered in Tal Afar to protest the attack peacefully.

The terrorists have not given up in Tal Afar, and they may yet succeed in exploding bomb or provoking acts of sectarian violence. The people of the city still have many challenges to overcome, including old-age [sic] resentments that still create suspicion, an economy that needs to create jobs and opportunity for its young, and determined enemies who will continue trying to foment a civil war to move back in. But the people of Tal Afar have shown why spreading liberty and democracy is at the heart of our strategy to defeat the terrorists. The people of Tal Afar have shown that Iraqis do want peace and freedom, and no one should underestimate them.

I wish I could tell you that the progress made in Tal Afar is the same in every single part of Iraq. It's not. Though most of the country has remained relatively peaceful, in some parts of Iraq the enemy is carrying out savage acts of violence, particularly in Baghdad and the surrounding areas of Baghdad. But the progress made in bringing more Iraqi security forces online is helping to bring peace and stability to Iraqi cities. The example of Tal Afar gives me confidence in our strategy, because in this city we see the outlines of the Iraq that we and the Iraqi people have been fighting for: a free and secure people who are getting back on their feet, who are participating in government and civic life, and who have become allies in the fight against the terrorists.

I believe that as Iraqis continue to see the benefits of liberty they will gain confidence in their future -- and they will work to ensure that common purpose trumps narrow sectarianism. And by standing with them in their hour of need, we're going to help the Iraqis build a strong democracy that will be an inspiration throughout the Middle East; a democracy that will be a partner in the global war against the terrorists.

The kind of progress that we and the Iraqi people are making in places like Tal Afar is not easy to capture in a short clip on the evening news. Footage of children playing, or shops opening, and people resuming their normal lives will never be as dramatic as the footage of an IED explosion, or the destruction of a mosque, or soldiers and civilians being killed or injured. The enemy understands this, and it explains their continued acts of violence in Iraq. Yet the progress we and the Iraqi people are making is also real. And those in a position to know best are the Iraqis, themselves.

One of the most eloquent is the Mayor of Tal Afar, a courageous Iraqi man named Najim. Mayor Najim arrived in the city in the midst of the al Qaeda occupation, and he knows exactly what our troops have helped accomplish. He calls our men and women in uniform "lion-hearts," and in a letter to the troopers of the Third Armored Cavalry Regiment, he spoke of a friendship sealed in blood and sacrifice. As Mayor Najim had this to say to the families of our fallen: "To the families of those who have given their holy blood for our land, we all bow to you in reverence and to the souls of your loved ones. Their sacrifice was not in vain. They are not dead, but alive, and their souls [are] hovering around us every second of every minute. They will not be forgotten for giving their precious lives. They have sacrificed that which is most valuable. We see them in the smile of every child, and in every flower growing in this land. Let America, their families, and the world be proud of their sacrifice for humanity and life." America is proud of that sacrifice, and we're proud to have allies like Mayor Najim on our side in the fight for freedom.

Yesterday we marked the third anniversary of the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom. At the time there is much to -- this time, there's much discussion in our country about the removal of Saddam Hussein from power and our remaining mission in Iraq. The decision to remove Saddam Hussein was a difficult decision; the decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision. (Applause.)

Before we acted, his regime was defying U.N. resolutions calling for it to disarm; it was violating cease-fire agreements, was firing on British and American pilots which were enforcing no-fly zones. Saddam Hussein was a leader who brutalized his people, had pursued and used weapons of mass destruction, and sponsored terrorism. Today Saddam Hussein is no longer oppressing his people or threatening the world. He's being tried for his crimes by the free citizens of a free Iraq -- and America and our allies are safer for it. (Applause.)

The last three years have tested our resolve. The fighting has been tough. The enemy we face has proved to be brutal and relentless. We're adapting our approach to reflect the hard realities on the ground. And the sacrifice being made by our young men and women who wear our uniform has been heartening and inspiring.

The terrorists who are setting off bombs in mosques and markets in Iraq share the same hateful ideology as the terrorists who attacked us on September the 11th, 2001, those who blew up commuters in London and Madrid, and those who murdered tourists in Bali, or workers in Riyadh, or guests at a wedding in Amman, Jordan. In the war on terror we face a global enemy -- and if we were not fighting this enemy in Iraq, they would not be idle. They would be plotting and trying to kill Americans across the world and within our own borders. Against this enemy, there can be no compromise. So we will fight them in Iraq, we'll fight them across the world, and we will stay in the fight until the fight is won.

In the long run, the best way to defeat this enemy and to ensure the security of our own citizens is to spread the hope of freedom across the broader Middle East. We've seen freedom conquer evil and secure the peace before. In World War II, free nations came together to fight the ideology of fascism, and freedom prevailed. And today, Germany and Japan are democracies -- and they are allies in securing the peace. In the Cold War, freedom defeated the ideology of communism and led to a democratic movement that freed the nations of Central and Eastern Europe from Soviet domination. And today, these nations are strong allies in the war on terror.

In the Middle East, freedom is once again contending with an ideology that seeks to sow anger and hatred and despair. And like fascism and communism before, the hateful ideologies that use terror will be defeated. Freedom will prevail in Iraq; freedom will prevail in the Middle East; and as the hope of freedom spreads to nations that have not known it, these countries will become allies in the cause of peace.

The security of our country is directly linked to the liberty of the Iraqi people -- and we will settle for nothing less than victory. Victory will come when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq's democracy, when the Iraqi security forces can provide for the safety of their citizens on their own, and when Iraq is not a safe haven for terrorists to plot new attacks against our nation. There will be more days of sacrifice and tough fighting before the victory is achieved. Yet by helping the Iraqis defeat the terrorists in their land, we bring greater security to our own.

As we make progress toward victory, Iraqis will continue to take more responsibility for their own security, and fewer U.S. forces will be needed to complete the mission. But it's important for the Iraqis to hear this: The United States will not abandon Iraq. We will not leave that country to the terrorists who attacked America and want to attack us again. We will leave Iraq, but when we do, it will be from a position of strength, not weakness. Americans have never retreated in the face of thugs and assassins, and we will not begin now. (Applause.)

Thanks for listening. (Applause.) And I'll be glad to answer some questions, if you have any.

Yes, I have one.

Could you tell us how it is, four years into a war, after 3,250 dead and 25,000 wounded, and nearly one trillion dollars either spent or committed, that you cannot figure out how the only outcome in Iraq that will actually weaken the Camp of Islam is offered not by your stated, naive, ill-informed goal, but by the opposite -- by the American troops leaving, and letting those sectarian and ethnic fissures work to divide and demoralize and weaken the Camp of Islam, and to use up Muslim energies, Muslim men, money, materiel (not only in Iraq, but from co-religioinists outside Iraq)?

How is it that you remain so completely oblivious to this, and so, apparently, do so many of those merely military men who advise you? They are "merely" military men in the sense that they have not understood the need to understand and to thoroughly assimilate the tenets of Islam, the attitudes of Islam, the atmospherics of Islam. Nor have they understood the necessity not to accept but to reject the "mission" as defined, however vaguely and incompletely and even at times incoherently, by Bush, Cheney, Rice, and their stout loyalists among the "counter-insurgency" experts who fail to realize there is not one but a dozen "insurgencies," and that every single one of them, whatever the hatreds within Islam, is also directed, in the end, against Americans as Infidels. They do not understand that any "general laws of counter-insurgency" as to techniques, or as to duration, are simply silly unless Islam itself is understood, and the goals of the Iraq operation redefined to be what they should always have been, whether publicly stated or not: not to bring "freedom" ("democracy," "prosperity," whatever the hell else you want to stick in here that sounds good) to the "ordinary moms and dads" in the Middle East, but only to weaken the Camp of Islam and Jihad.

And that can only be achieved, in Tel Afar as in Baghdad or Basra or Kirkuk, by getting out, and stopping the squandering of American resources, and doing such damage, incredible damage, to the military. That damages begins but does not end with the morale of the civilian army, that is plummteing because those who have served in Iraq once, however inarticulate some may be in expressing their views, know that the "mission" makes no sense and that the "Iraqi people" are not wonderful, are not grateful, are in fact on the whole deeply hostile. It is madness to sacrifice American soldiers, such as the boy from Maine blown up the other day while he was -- in what is a grim metaphor for the American winning of unwinnable hearts and minds -- handing out candy to Iraqi children, the ones still young enough (below the age of 10) not to be taught, quite enough, to hate the Americans.

Basta with Bush and the dream-palace, in Ajami's phrase, of his imaginary Arabs, and his imaginary Islam, and his imaginary Iraq.

I am John Doe

A magisterial column by Michelle Malkin (with video here):

Dear Muslim Terrorist Plotter/Planner/Funder/Enabler/Apologist,

You do not know me. But I am on the lookout for you. You are my enemy. And I am yours.

I am John Doe.

I am traveling on your plane. I am riding on your train. I am at your bus stop. I am on your street. I am in your subway car. I am on your lift.

I am your neighbor. I am your customer. I am your classmate. I am your boss.

I am John Doe.

I will never forget the example of the passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 who refused to sit back on 9/11 and let themselves be murdered in the name of Islam without a fight.

I will never forget the passengers and crew members who tackled al Qaeda shoe-bomber Richard Reid on American Airlines Flight 63 before he had a chance to blow up the plane over the Atlantic Ocean.

I will never forget the alertness of actor James Woods, who notified a stewardess that several Arab men sitting in his first-class cabin on an August 2001 flight were behaving strangely. The men turned out to be 9/11 hijackers on a test run.

I will act when homeland security officials ask me to "report suspicious activity."

I will embrace my local police department's admonition: "If you see something, say something."

I am John Doe.

I will protest your Jew-hating, America-bashing "scholars."

I will petition against your hate-mongering mosque leaders.

I will raise my voice against your subjugation of women and religious minorities.

I will challenge your attempts to indoctrinate my children in our schools.

I will combat your violent propaganda on the Internet.

I am John Doe.

I will support law enforcement initiatives to spy on your operatives, cut off your funding and disrupt your murderous conspiracies.

I will oppose all attempts to undermine our borders and immigration laws.

I will resist the imposition of sharia principles and sharia law in my taxi cab, my restaurant, my community pool, the halls of Congress, our national monuments, the radio and television airwaves, and all public spaces.

I will not be censored in the name of tolerance.

I will not be cowed by your Beltway lobbying groups in moderates' clothing. I will not cringe when you shriek about "profiling" or "Islamophobia."

I will put my family's safety above sensitivity. I will put my country above multiculturalism.

I will not submit to your will. I will not be intimidated.

I am John Doe.

Saudi king slams 'illegitimate occupation' of Iraq

Friend and Ally Alert. By Lydia Georgi for AFP, with thanks to Mackie:

RIYADH (AFP) - Saudi King Abdullah, whose country is a close US ally, on Wednesday slammed the "illegitimate foreign occupation" of Iraq in an opening speech to the annual Arab summit in Riyadh.

"In beloved Iraq, blood is being shed among brothers in the shadow of an illegitimate foreign occupation, and ugly sectarianism threatens civil war," Abdullah said.

He also said that Arab nations, which are planning to revive a five-year-old Middle East peace plan at the summit, would not allow any foreign force to decide the future of the region.

Really? What will they do to prevent this? Does this go for any attempt to stop Iran's genocidal nuclear ambitions also?

45 Iraqi Shi'ites massacred in reprisal attacks

Another indication of the fact that the Iraqi adventure was undertaken without sufficient understanding of the realities of Islam, much less of the Sunni/Shi'ite divide, which Condoleeza Rice recently asserted breezily that Middle Easterners would just have to "overcome." Yes, I'm sure they'll get right on that.

"45 Iraqis massacred in reprisal attacks," by Mujahid Mohammed for AFP, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:

MOSUL, Iraq (AFP) - Gunmen massacred 45 men in an overnight rampage in apparent revenge for bombings that killed 75 people in a mixed Iraqi town once hailed by US President George W. Bush as a beacon hope.

"We received 45 bodies of handcuffed and blindfolded men from al-Wahada neighbourhood overnight. They were killed yesterday just after the bomb," said a doctor at Tal Afar hospital in northern Iraq on Wednesday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The wanton shootings and lethal bombings underscore the raging Sunni-Shiite sectarian warfare that continues to grip the country, as well as a Sunni-led insurgency fighting against the Shiite-led government and its US backers.

Two bomb attacks in Tal Afar on Tuesday killed 75 people and wounded 190 in Shiite districts of the mixed town, which is witnessing its worst violence since Bush in March 2006 held up the onetime militant stronghold as a model for efforts to create a stable Iraq.

In the worst attack, a suicide bomber tricked soldiers into believing he was delivering food supplies to a Shiite area where he detonated his cargo of explosives within a crowd of waiting men and women.

"Everybody knows Islam is a religion of peace"

And so the learned terrorism expert just can't quite figure out what might have been the common denominator among the London would-be suicide bombers. This is a funny clip, but it isn't quite so funny when you realize that it could just as easily be not a segment from a parody news show, but a verbatim transcript of real-life analyses by all too many real-life terrorism "experts." Remember when 17 jihadists were arrested in Toronto last summer: the Toronto Star in all seriousness said that authorities were searching for a common denominator. Investigate the jihad ideology and call the local mosques to account? Pah! Everybody knows Islam is a religion of peace!

From Fox's Half Hour News Hour via YouTube, with thanks to Jihad Watch News Editor Anne Crockett.

Saudi Foreign Minister to Israel: Accept peace plan or face war

Our Friend And Ally threatens our real friend and ally. "Accept peace plan or face war, Israel told," by David Blair in the Telegraph, with thanks to Jay:

The "lords of war" will decide Israel's future if it rejects a blueprint for peace crafted by the entire Arab world, Saudi Arabia's veteran foreign minister warned yesterday.

As leaders began gathering in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, for today's summit of the Arab League, Prince Saud al-Faisal told The Daily Telegraph that the Middle East risks perpetual conflict if the peace plan fails.

Under this Saudi-drafted proposal, every Arab country would formally recognise Israel in return for a withdrawal from all the land captured in the war of 1967.

This would entail a Palestinian state embracing the entire West Bank and Gaza with East Jerusalem as its capital. Every Arab country will almost certainly endorse this blueprint when the Riyadh summit concludes tomorrow. Prince Saud said Israel should accept or reject this final offer.

"What we have the power to do in the Arab world, we think we have done," he said. "So now it is up to the other side because if you want peace, it is not enough for one side only to want it. Both sides must want it equally."

'Islam needs to reform'

In this Radio Netherlands interview (thanks to all who sent this in) by Michel Hoebink, the celebrated "apostate of Damascus," Sadiq al-Azm, says what I have been saying for years now: that genuine Islamic reform "requires a departure from the literal text of the Koran."

What is the difference between you and mo