From the Another One Bites the Dust file:

Saddam Hussein’s notorious cousin “Chemical Ali” was executed Monday, Iraq’s government spokesman said.

Hassan al-Majid was convicted Sunday, Jan. 17, of crimes against humanity, receiving a death sentence for his involvement in a poison gas attack on Halabja — one of several hanging over him. . . .

He had received three previous death sentences for atrocities committed during Saddam’s rule, particularly in the government’s campaigns against the Shiites and Kurds in the 1980s and 1990s.

I usually oppose the death penalty, but I make exceptions. Time to send this one to hell.

Technorati Tags: Hassan al-Majid, Chemical Ali, Death Penalty, Liberating Iraq, War on Terror, War on Islamofascism

ABC News, the BBC and ARD German TV conducted a poll of Afghan adults last December and found that we are winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan populace.

Nearly seven in 10 Afghans support the presence of U.S. forces in their country, and 61 percent favor the military buildup of 37,000 U.S. and NATO reinforcements now deploying, according to a poll released Monday.

Now that’s not something you hear every day.

Even in the south, in the Taliban region where the fighting is most intense, only 27% of the population support the insurgents (the number is 10% nationwide).

Overall, 42 percent of Afghans blame the Taliban for the violence — up 27 percent from a year ago. Seventeen percent blame the U.S. and NATO, or the Afghan government or Afghan security forces — down 36 percent from a year ago.

42% blame the Taliban, 17% blame the coalition or the Afghan government. I wonder who the other 41% blame? Regardless, having this much of the population against the Taliban — even in their stronghold region — makes it increasingly difficult to win a gorilla war.

And Afghans are more hopeful:

After steep declines in recent years, nearly seven in 10 Afghans also think their nation is headed in the right direction. That’s up 30 percent since January 2009. The number of Afghans who expect their lives will be better a year from now also has jumped 20 percentage points from a year ago — to a new high of 71 percent, the poll said.

Moreover, 61 percent of the Afghans surveyed said they expect the next generation will have a better life — up 14 percent in the past 12 months, according to the poll.

And that’s the best news of all.

Technorati Tags: Afghanistan, Taliban, Fighting Religous Extremism, War on Islamofacism

Now that an actual attack on a US plane was undertaken during the Obama administration, some new policies are being implemented. One of them, according to the Economist, is outright racial profiling:

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which governs America’s airport security, said on Sunday that citizens from 14 named countries will face enhanced security measures before they are allowed to fly to the US. If you are from one of the countries that the State Department names as “state sponsors of terrorism” (Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria), or one of ten others deemed to be “of interest” (Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen), then you will be subject to a full-body pat-down and extra scrutiny of your carry-on baggage.

Other passengers flying into America from or via those 14 countries also face the same measures. And the TSA has pledged to step up both random and “threat-based” screening of international arrivals from elsewhere, hinting at greater use of behavioural-based and perhaps other forms of profiling.

So passengers will be discriminated against on racial grounds, and civil-rights advocates are none too impressed.

This is not to say that I am personally against racial profiling. After all, it just makes sense to give more attention to a man in robes with a Lebanese passport than an elderly female in a nun’s habit from Wichita, Kansas. Then again, maybe that’s just me.

At this time, a search of news sources for TSA and “Racial Profiling” turns up precious little — mostly links to blogs. CNN doesn’t cover the topic at all except in an article dedicated to coverage of CAIR’s disapproval of the policy (now there’s a shocker).

I only ask what would the headlines, news alerts, and stories at the top of the hour on every major news station be clamoring about if this had been implemented during the Bush administration? Why does Obama get a pass?

Technorati Tags: Racial Profiling, Underwear Bomber, War on Islamofascism, Barack Hussein Obama the Dangerous Choice

At the beginning of the month, the Iraqi police captured almost 9,000 pieces of ordinance, thus preventing more than 200 possible vehicle-borne-improvised-explosive-device attacks:

Through the help of local Iraqi citizens looking out for the safety and well being of their community, the police received information on the location of the cache.

"The Iraqi Police are 100 percent responsible for finding this cache," said Staff Sgt. Robert Fertal, 26, platoon sergeant with 2nd. Plt., Co. E. "Their hard work and sacrifice has created an environment where Iraqi nationals freely offer information. This information has led to several smaller caches and explosive remnants of war (ERW) finds, as well as the large one." . . .

"This find demonstrates the post PIC (Provincial Iraqi Control) capabilities of an Iraqi Police force in the lead, using its own intelligence to take the fight to the enemy by depriving him of a significant supply of ammunition," said Lt. Col. Steven J. Grass, the battalion commander of TF 2nd Bn., 2nd Marines. "It was a big win."

Didn’t see that reported by the MSM, did you?

Pajamas Media reports Vindication For Marine Charged in Haditha Cover-up. Tag line:

Lt. Andrew Grayson has been acquitted of charges that he helped cover up the killing of 24 Iraqis in Haditha. With charges dropped against five of the eight Marines involved the incident and only two more trials to go — apologies may soon be in order.

Update: Best headline dealing with this story comes from Investor’s Business Daily:

Another Marine ‘Murderer’ Goes Free; No Apologies From Murtha Or Media

The Strategy Page has a fascinating list of reasons why Arabs fail, time after time (e.G., the Six Day War). Given our efforts to train Arabs in Iraq, I highly recommend reading the entire article as it will help you understand what we are up against. A taste:

Why do Arabs so often lose wars against non-Arabs? Why has so much of the terrorism activity for the last few decades been carried out by Arabs? Why are Arab societies so corrupt, so uneducated and lacking in economic or scientific progress? Even raising these issues is considered un-diplomatic, provocative, racist or worse. But there is something going on. . . .

At lot has been written about why Arab armies so consistently lose wars with non-Arabs. These reasons also explain why Arab nations, and many other Third World nations as well, also have trouble establishing democratic governments or prosperous economies. A lot of it has to do with culture, especially culture influenced by Islam. Some of the reasons for these failures are;

Cuba’s Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque demanded today that the US return Guantanamo Bay, claiming that suspects held there have been subjected to torture.

Meanwhile in other news, an al-Qaeda video has surfaced that shows horrifying images of what appear to be prisoners in Iraq being doused with an inflammatory liquid and then burned alive.

As I look at the array of available candidates left in the smoking ruins of the 2008 presidential primaries, several things occur to me. First, I understand the Left being jerked to the left by the MoveOn.org and George Soros crowd. I really do. It makes sense. The socialists have taken control of the liberal movement.

But what the hell is jerking MY party to the left?

Why is it that there is not a single candidate that represents anything even close to what I believe?

Where was I when Reaganism died?

With "Bye, Bye Miss American Pie" playing softly in my head (now with new meaning — think about it), I return to the question I have been struggling with since Fred Thompson left the race: who do I support now?

Given that Huckabee and Giuliani seem to be lost causes (not that I could support either one, anyway), and given that I do not consider doing nothing a viable option, I am left with seven choices.

I could support Mitt Romney, the man that went to Michigan and made promises no one could possibly keep in order to woo Detroit voters. The man whose campaign spread a lie in order to suppress support of Thompson during the crucial Iowa caucus. The man that has flip-flopped on at least 15 issues, including my beloved Second Amendment.

I could support John McCain, war hero and experienced Senator. Of course, Ann Coulter properly points out that McCain’s "Straight Talk Express" takes a very crooked path as he "enthusiastically (promotes) amnesty for illegal aliens, Social Security credit for illegal aliens, criminal trials for terrorists, stem-cell research on human embryos, crackpot global warming legislation and free speech-crushing campaign-finance laws." Not to mention his repeated opposition to the Bush tax cuts, waterboarding terrorists and drilling in the ANWR. And Ann completely left out McCain’s poor record on gun rights and that he is a danger to the Second Amendment.

I believe Mitt will tell voters anything they want to hear, and will take his own liberal path when elected. With McCain, at least I know what I’m getting. The trouble is, apart from the continued prosecution of the War on Islamofascism, I don’t like much of it.

I could support Ron Paul, a man who absolutely will not prosecute the War on Islamofascism. So no, I won’t vote for him. Besides, as the Club for Growth said, the man is a purist to a fault (literally).

And so I come to choices 4 through 6: Hillary, Edwards or Obama. That’s right, I could cross party lines in the primary and vote Democrat.

On the night of the Iowa caucus, I listened to the speeches of Edwards, Hillary and Obama. I will tell you now that Edwards’ and Hillary’s speeches scared me to the point that I decided right then and there that if either one of them is elected then I’m joining a militia to prepare for the coming disintegration of the Union. In fact, if I can’t find a militia then I’m going to start one. Buy a few hundred acres of Tennessee wilderness and go practice war and survival.

Obama’s speech was scary, but not to the point where I fear for the survival of my offspring. I can see me crossing the line to vote for him.

One major problem: I want to support someone in a local race (Bill Giannini for county Tax Assessor!) and voting in the Democrat primary would make that impossible. I have a larger impact in local races, so the Democrat options are out (until November, that is).

My seventh and final option is to vote for Fred Thompson in the primary (he is still on the Tennessee ballot) and Libertarian in the fall. I could easily get behind Wayne Allyn Root. These would be pure protest votes, a message to the collective GOP that they no longer represent me. [Besides, I saw Root speak at the Conservative Leadership Conference and absolutely loved him. His speech is on YouTube and also his campaign site.]

You often hear people say that they didn’t leave the party, the party left them. I used to feel that way. But now I feel that I didn’t leave the party, the party has run screaming past trying to be "moderate" to a total abandonment of all that makes it a force for good in this dangerous world.

And so I am decided. Fred Thompson in the primary. Then a few months to think about it with a probable vote for Wayne Allyn Root (current frontrunner in the Libertarian race) in the fall.

Update: The Fourth Horseman writes via email:

The only real issue I see between McCain and Clinton is Iraq, and I don’t think there will be that much difference in the result once Clinton stops running to the left, i.e. after she has the nomination.  I am almost to the point of "let them have it for four years" and then let’s see if we can’t have a candidate who can get it right. That might be better than letting McCain "work" with the Dems to pass "bi-partisan" socialist legislation.

To which Advised by Wolves responds:

Agreed. . . Either a McCain or a Clinton Presidency will be a failure. Let the “D” get the blame.

My problem with that is the fact that it would be Clinton with a Democrat (of the Pelosi flavor) congress working together — a dangerous combination that could very well do irreparable harm to our flavor of freedom. Besides, with the press solidly on Hillary’s side, the fact that the presidency is a failure won’t come out for another 20 years. Just look at how many people still think Bill will be thought of kindly by history.

Still, their positions lend credence to my support of the Libertarian option.

Washington Post’s Peter Carlson starts off by telling us how great it is in Ramadi. I mean, how really, really great it is:

When David J. Morris returned to Ramadi in October, he was mobbed by Iraqis. But this time they weren’t trying to kill him, they were trying to sell him bars of Dove soap.

Street vendors in Ramadi? It blew his mind. For years, Ramadi vied with Fallujah as the toughest, deadliest hellhole in Iraq and now, Morris writes in a brilliant piece in the Virginia Quarterly Review, you can walk the streets like a tourist, fearing only "the platoons of vendors assaulting you."

Of course, Carlson’s real purpose for the entire article is to praise a fellow journalist and direct readers to peruse the Virginia Quarterly Review. He even goes as far to try and question the "surge" (scare quotes included):

The Bush administration and its supporters tout the turnaround of Ramadi as proof that the "surge" is working. Antiwar critics wonder how long the sheiks will remain friendly.

Still, you can’t come away from the article without feeling that things are going well in Iraq. And the thoughtful reader will know that whatever the reason, it certainly isn’t due to Democrat’s forced withdrawal deadlines.

"I’d rather be waterboarding", from ThoseShirts.com.

Now that’s funny, I don’t care who y’are.