US removes uranium from Iraq

From Associated Press, that arm of the vast right wing conspiracy:
US removes uranium from Iraq.

Let's pay attention to that: The United States military have removed

550 metric tons of "yellowcake" - the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment

which was stored at the nuclear facility in Tuwaitha, Iraq, some 12 miles south of Baghdad.

Again:

• Saddam Hussein had a nuclear program
• At the Tuwaitha nuclear complex just south of Baghdad
• Which included 550 metric tons (over 1.2 million pounds) of "yellowcake", or concentrated uranium
• And multiple devices that could be used in a nuclear weapon

The AP does not say alleged nuclear program. It does not add "according to military experts." It simply says "Saddam Hussein's nuclear program."

Other important points:
1. The yellowcake removed is the last mayor remnant of Saddam's nuclear program. There was more.
2. The military had removed earlier this year four devices for controlled radiation exposure which "contain elements of high radioactivity that could potentially be used in a weapon".
3. The yellowcake was sold to Cameco, which may have been involved in the Oil-For-Food scam, and is a company in which Soros Fund Management LLC owns a substantial portion.

It Must Suck Being Joe Wilson Today - Joe, you’ve been punk'd!

In other news, Iraqis lead final purge of Al-Qaeda, Islamism is discredited, and We're winning this War on Terror.

The Carnival of Latin America and the Caribbean will be up in a couple of hours. Bear with me - with the rescue of the Colombian hostages, it's going to be huge!

Special thanks to Hip Hop Republican and Larwyn.

Crossposted



Share on Facebook

Today's must-read: Saddam and al-Qaeda

At American Thinker, via Larwyn, Debra Baker's article, Saddam and al-Qaeda

• In Extract 12 on page 16 of the Pentagon papers, there is another memorandum that was drafted in Saddam's office which specifically shows that Saddam was directly financing and training the EIJ
• captured Iraqi archives reveal that Saddam was training Arab fighters (non-Iraqi) in Iraqi training camps more than a decade prior to Operation Desert Storm (1991).
• Saddam provided support to terrorists that only a state could provide by issuing passports to known terrorists so they could move about freely.

Go read the rest.


Share on Facebook

On Saddam’s Order

On Saddam's Order
The Iraqi tyrant didn't "just" aid anti-American terrorist groups; he explicitly ordered them to attack.

What is not debatable, based on the Iraqi Perspectives Project, is that Saddam Hussein's regime funded, trained, and assisted terrorist groups (including al-Qaeda proxies), and sometimes actually ordered them to attack American citizens, American interests, and American allies. To compound the danger, Saddam Hussein's Iraq was simultaneously using its intelligence and security apparatus to plot and conduct terror attacks of its own.

The article lists the groups that Saddam's regime funded, trained, and assisted:

• "Renewal and Jihad Organization"
• Egyptian Islamic Jihad (al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri's group, which merged with Osama bin Laden's terrorists to form al-Qaeda)
• The Islamic Scholars Group in Pakistan
• Pakistan Scholars Group
• "Army of Muhammad" that it knew to be loyal to Osama bin Laden

A September 2001 document mentions Saddam's efforts "make common cause" with a number of Islamic radical groups in Kuwait, including a Shiite group. Another document mentions a Sri Lankan group that volunteered to carry out suicide bombings on Saddam's orders during the first Gulf war. Additional internal memos show Iraqi officials reporting to one another that Hamas was willing through the 1990s to conduct suicide attacks against Americans on behalf of Saddam’s Iraq. These memos also listed Abu Abbas, the notorious Palestinian terrorist, as another man willing to lead his forces for Saddam in attacks against Americans.

Additionally,

The report details the regime's production of suicide vests, IEDs, and car bombs for plots that included targets in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Saddam's embassies in these countries were warehouses for missile launchers, plastic explosives, TNT, Kalashnikovs, booby-trapped suitcases, and grenades. These tools were all available to a regime that had internal orders to attack American civilians, military members, bases, embassies, and ships.

The report where Mark Eichenlaub found all this information is five volumes long. What journalist out there is taking the time to comb through this information, rather than continue to believe that Saddam's Iraq was harmless country that presented no threat to anyone?

UPDATE
While we're at it, Brian Faughnan at the Weekly Standard posts about Iraq's Unheralded Political Progress.
Brian's going to be on next Friday's postcast. Don't miss it!




Share on Facebook

Skype sucks: The wait; and today's links

After the phishing, the wait
.
.
.
.
waiting
.
.
.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Saddam's Files, They Show Terror Plots, But Raise New Questions About Some Media Claims

The Bolivarian Republic of Massachusetts, via Instapundit

Why Can’t People Just LEAVE KWAME ALONE!!!!

Three stages in a man's life

Via Ed,


Major offensive against Hizbolla - in IRAQ

Wishing Kevin McCullough great success!

Dance time, with Miro's art:




Share on Facebook

Saturday afternoon mini-linkfest

The Saddam-Al Qaeda Links: In Photos and Video

Washington Post Duped Instead of D.U.P.E.S. (UPDATE: WaPo Purposeful Dupe)

Via Dan, Report Details Saddam's Terrorist Ties

The report also undercuts the claim made by many on the left and many
at the CIA that Saddam, as a national socialist, was incapable of
supporting or collaborating with the Islamist al Qaeda. The report concludes
that instead Iraq's relationship with Osama bin Laden's organization
was similar to the relationship between the rival Colombian cocaine
cartels in the 1990s. Both were rivals in some sense for market share, but
also allies when it came to expanding the size of the overall market.

The Pentagon study finds, "Recognizing Iraq as a second, or parallel,
'terror cartel' that was simultaneously threatened by and somewhat
aligned with its rival helps to explain the evidence emerging from the
detritus of Saddam's regime."

Back To The Saddam/Al Qaeda Question

Puerto Rico and Hugo's subs, in today's round-up

No, not these subs; the Russian subs: Mora writes,

Chavez is heading to Russia in the next few days, to discuss the purchase of five kilo-class submarines, and possibly four more advanced amur-class subs. There are questions as to how he would be able to finance them as well as how obtain the advanced training to bring them online, but there is no question from his statments that he wants them.

The financing might involve not only oil, but also drugs. As I have pointed out, Hugo needs money for financing his "Bolivarian Revolution", i.e., his desire to control all of Latin America's politics. For that he needs money. A huge amount of money. The drug trade is one source.

As for the advanced training, I'm sure Putin will provide the personnel as part of the deal. Don't believe for a moment that Vlad's going to hand Hugo valuable war weapons without keeping a firm hand in the works.

Mora also points out,

Although there are many islands in the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf Of Mexico, and many colonial powers, it's significant that Chavez alluded to the U.S.'s and France's prime presences there. In the past he's threatened Netherlands and its overseas territories, and he's always hated Britain, but now he seems to have singled out France. While Chavez's antipathy to the U.S. is well-known, what's less well-known is that France's new president, Nicolas Sarkozy, has an interest in the region and a clear understanding about Chavez. He's stepped up his ties to Venezuela's battered neighbor, Colombia, and probably will become more active in the region as Chavez's aggression steps up. Chavez knows this, and wants to throw out a few threat to France and the U.S. now.

This segues well with my theory on the drug trade: France has repeatedly caught tons of cocaine proceeding from Caracas in the past (including the seizing of a vessel carrying 18 tons of cocaine on March last year. I explored this connection between Chavez and the drug trade on my post of April 13, 2006 (scroll down).

Hugo may be fooling some, but he's certainly not fooling Lech Waleska: Via Gateway Pundit

"I believe Chávez is a huge demagogue and populist who says one thing and does a quite different thing. He likes giving away what does not belong to him and tries to take advantage of people's dissatisfaction," he added.

One thing for sure, Hugo's not fooling Newton---------------------------------------------------------
Immigration and Terrorists in the US: Connect the Dots

In a nutshell - terrorists flew under the radar in 1986, over-stayed visas, and rode the curtails of illegal Mexicans who had crossed the border all the way to citizenship. Do we want to do that again? Can we afford it?

---------------------------------------------------------
In other, totally unrelated news, Hitchens asks, Let's stop channelling angry Muslims

Look Forward to Anger
It's impossible to satisfy "Rage Boy" and his ilk. It's stupid to try.
...
The lives of Shiite Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Christians—to say nothing of atheists or secularists—are considered by Sunni militants to be of little or no account. And yet they accuse those who criticize them of bigotry! And many people are so anxious to pre-empt this accusation that they ventriloquize the reactions of Sunni mobs as if they were the vox populi, all the while muttering that we must take care not to offend such supersensitive people.

This mental and moral capitulation has a bearing on the argument about Iraq, as well. We are incessantly told that the removal of the Saddam Hussein despotism has inflamed the world's Muslims against us and made Iraq hospitable to terrorism, for all the world as if Baathism had not been pumping out jihadist rhetoric for the past decade (as it still does from Damascus, allied to Tehran). But how are we to know what will incite such rage? A caricature published in Copenhagen appears to do it. A crass remark from Josef Ratzinger (leader of an anti-war church) seems to have the same effect. A rumor from Guantanamo will convulse Peshawar, the Muslim press preaches that the Jews brought down the Twin Towers, and a single citation in a British honors list will cause the Iranian state-run press to repeat its claim that the British government—along with the Israelis, of course—paid Salman Rushdie to write The Satanic Verses to begin with. Exactly how is such a mentality to be placated?

We may have to put up with the Rage Boys of the world, but we ought not to do their work for them, and we must not cry before we have been hurt. In front of me is a copy of this week's Economist, which states that Rushdie's 1989 death warrant was "punishment for the book's unflattering depiction of the Prophet Muhammad." There is no direct depiction of the prophet in this work of fiction, and the reverie about his many wives occurs in the dream of a madman. Nobody in Ayatollah Khomeini's circle could possibly have read the book for him before he issued a fatwah, which made it dangerous to possess. Yet on that occasion, the bookstore chains of America pulled The Satanic Verses from their shelves, just as Borders shamefully pulled Free Inquiry (a magazine for which I write) after it reproduced the Danish cartoons. Rage Boy keenly looks forward to anger, while we worriedly anticipate trouble, and fret about etiquette, and prepare the next retreat. If taken to its logical conclusion, this would mean living at the pleasure of Rage Boy, and that I am not prepared to do.

Interesting to see that The Economist is referring to the Prophet Mohammed; I've been subscribing to The Economist for decades now and never once have I seen them refer to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Fred Thompson has more to say about Rushdie.
---------------------------------------------------------
GreenMountain politics posts on Giuliani.

Go, Pundit, Go has a video on the Dems and the unions

---------------------------------------------------------
Side note:
We've been on the road, and I'm happy to recommend the Subway franchise for a fast lunch. You can get a freshly-made salad with as many or as few toppings as you like, without having to put up with greasy burgers or overfried, overseasoned chicken.


Share on Facebook

The Jamil syllogism

The Anchoress explains,

At least Media Matters included the transcript in its post. But its summary pushes the false narrative that lefties have been pushing for the last 44 hours or so: that the mere existence of Jamil Hussein means that The AP Has Been Vindicated on Everything, Because All Warbloggers Claimed He Was a Made-Up Person.

Indeed that does seem to be the narrative that the left is pressing - because Jamil Hussein has been "found" that means the story about four burned mosques and six immolated human beings must be true.

Let's test that logic with a syllogism, shall we?

Major Premise: The AP reported four mosques burned down and six people were murdered, and their source was Jamil Hussein.
Minor Premise: Jamil Hussein exists.
Conclusion: Therefore four mosques burned down and six people were murdered.

No, that doesn't work. The logic fails.

The fact that the AP itself could not find serious corroboration for the story, that it changed the "four" mosques to "one" but has not been able to provide a single picture, that it has never named the victims or talked to the victim's families or done anything at all to substantiate the story beyond saying "we stand by it," seems not to matter to some. But it matters, and that is what the bloggers on the right, "war" or otherwise, have been trying to say. A report matters. The credibility of a report (even if the story is "brief") matters. It matters because every time a horrible story crosses the wires and into the public perception, it plays on gut-level emotions and raises discontent among already warring local factions. In the same way that some would use our own liberties to work against us, such reports embolden those who would take advantage of the fact that America is a compassionate country, that makes war only with relucance. Am I saying that ugly or troubling stories should not be reported? Of course not. But they must be true

Across the Atlantic, Richard North of EU Referendum looks at the London Times story Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran and realizes It's a crock...

Under the by-line of Uzi Mahnaimi in New York and Sarah Baxter in Washington, the newspaper further asserts that two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear "bunker-busters".

Nothing of this is new however. We have been reading reports of IAF practising a strike for some considerable time and, ten days short of a year ago, posted a picture of the IAF Squadron that would lead the raid. The IAF has also published a picture of one of what might be a back-up squadron (above left). And the idea of a nuclear strike on Iran goes back to at least October 2003 when the LA Times "revealed" planning for such an attack.

However, the Sunday Times, in that infuriatingly self-important way that so typifies the MSM, seems to think such plans are new. It is thus able to announce, "Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran", telling us that they were prompted "in part" by the Israeli intelligence service Mossad's assessment that Iran is on the verge of producing enough enriched uranium to make nuclear weapons within two years.

Actually, this is also not new. Iran has been "on the verge" for some considerable time. But, as we pointed out in February last, it is producing a uranium bomb, which means it will be too heavy for its current or any known means of delivery in the foreseeable future.

This minor piece of information seems to have escaped the Sunday Times and nor have I seen it in any other MSM outlet. But it has an enormous significance in assessing the threat from Iran. Even if it could get a bomb together in two years, it would take several more before it could get anywhere close to developing a means of delivery that could carry the weight.

Another highly significant issue is the delivery to Iran by the Russians, which started last November, of the Tor-M1 air-defence missile systems. Time and time we have argued, not least here, that the presence of these highly capable missiles would tilt the balance of advantage against an Israeli airstrike, to the extent that, once deliveries are complete, it would no longer be an option.

This is something which the Sunday Times itself, when it was forecasting a raid by March 2006, thought important in December 2005 - but now seems to have forgotten about. It also seems to have forgotten about its earlier report in March 2005 that an Israeli strike had been given "initial authorisation", that too being announced in the same, breathless, self-important tones, the headline proclaiming: "Revealed: Israel plans strike on Iranian nuclear plant".

Once again, we have the same pair of journalists in the by-line, Uzi Mahnaimi - in Tel Aviv, not having yet moved to New York - and Sarah Baxter, in Washington. And, as for Mahnaimi, he is a very odd cove indeed.

Both stories point to the fact, as Maxed Out Mama commented to The Anchoress, that, when it comes to journalists,

They do not share your ideals; they believe instead that they have to play the right "themes", and that accuracy is unimportant.

Journalistic accuracy, the oxymoron of our day.

Related reading: last month Augean Stables was asking, Do Iraqis have free will?

Update: Bush didn't lie, either: Saddam and cousin discussed killing thousands: tapes

Update
Fausses déclarations du ''Sunday Times'', qui manipule? Nidra Poller has translation and commentary.

The Carnival's up, a few items, and this year's favorite videos

-----------------------------------
A few current news items from Maria and Larwyn:
Dictator's daughter told her father would hang as she enjoyed beauty salon

In the beauty salon, and elsewhere in the Jordanian capital Amman, the 39-year-old mother of five, who is nicknamed "Little Saddam' because her temperament so closely resembles that of her father, is much-feared.

Especially if her upper lip is not waxed just right.

Knowing the enemy, and a World Exclusive: Saddam Hussein's Last Interview.

Nancy's going to have a heck of a time Draining the swamp.

My neighbor TigerHawk explains Some of the things I believe, but cannot prove: regarding risk
-----------------------------------
My two favorite You Tube videos this year:
First, Bryn having a haptic moment:

Too bad I sing like a frog or I'd audition for her understudy. Love the Spanish subtitles, too.

and second, the cannonball guy:

-----------------------------------
The last Christmas card of the year, from Maria.
-----------------------------------
In case you're wondering, I don't do year-end predictions, and I never make New Year's resolutions. Have a wonderful New Year's eve.

Saddam to hang at 10PM EST

A top Iraqi official said Saddam will be executed before 10 p.m. EST Friday.

I certainly hope al-Jazeera carries the execution. This is why:
Earlier this year when I went to listen to Dan Senor, one of the main points he made was that

Arab Muslims are voting and holding their governments accountable; al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya have broadcast this around the regions... This is very powerful and very important.

Specifically, on Saddam's trial, he stated,

The trial sends a message to almost every ruler who identifies with Saddam. The only thing that never happened is the governments to be held accountable - until now. The trial's being aired by al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya. Senor spent half a day with one of Saddam's attorneys and was told that other area rulers are terrified, and particularly mentioned Al-Assad.

One dramatic development in the trial in recent days was Saddam's admission that he was responsible for the 1981 assassination of a small Sunni town where 150 people killed and the town was razed.

It is important for Iraq to close this 3-decade chapter [in its history].

Let's not underestimate the power the image of Saddam's execution will carry across the Middle East.

Update Round-up at Right Voices

Iraq The Model has the latest.

Update, Saturday December 30 While CNN spouts off how Saddam - whose own official documents suggest that a staggering 5 million executions were made during Baath era alone - was a"champion of the Arab cause", Gateway Pundit points out that Saddam was hanged inside one of his former torture centres. As I said above, area rulers are watching.
The Anchoress, who's a much better woman than I, grapples with the issues of morality. Me, I'm glad the SOB's dead. So is Pamela.

And now for The Very Briefest of Neocon Retrospectives. More from Claudia Rosett.

Another update: Again, we can be proud that the United States of America brought him down. And that no dictator can ever feel entirely safe again.

Hat tips: Larwyn

Later update, Sigmund, Carl and Alfred and Dr Sanity examine the reaction from the Left.