Deadlines

Politico quoted an insider:

"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that seemed like posturing."

James Taranto, of the OpinionJournal's Best of the Web column comments:

This gives away the game, doesn't it? The "antiwar" people understand what it means to set a deadline — and they seek to do so because they want America to lose.

Taranto is right. These people are not stupid; they know what they're doing and what the probable effects of their actions are.

This strongly suggests that "They're not anti-war. They're just on the other side." The alternative is that they care only about their own political fortunes, and don't care about the effects of their actions for the country.

Culture of Corruption

From Powerline:

House Appropriations Committee chairman David Obey, who has falsely denied the existence of earmarks, now has decreed that earmarks in his bills will not be revealed until a measure passes both the House and the Senate. [emphasis added]

So Obey has already lied to us all, and now he wants to hide his dishonesty and malfeasance — at least until no one can do anything about it.

Seems to me the current Congressional (Democrat) leadership has a lot of brass trying to call the Republicans corrupt.

Reflecting on You Are Not Alone

Bill Whittle has another of his too-infrequent essays out. This one is You Are Not Alone, and in it he takes you through his analysis to demonstrate the conditions under which becoming a barbarian is the rational choice. His examples include explanation of why the "broken windows syndrome" works and effective means of destroying respect for law by convincing the society that laws are for chumps. Along the way he notes that

Everything the West has achieved — all the science, prosperity, security and freedom — is based upon the free exchange of ideas. We tolerate offensive ideas so that this free exchange of information may continue. Disagreement is the crucible of wisdom. The price we pay for this cooperation is the daily offense we suffer at the exposure to ideas we find distasteful.

There's a critical insight here. Look back over history and, to the degree you can, see where the societies had more freedom (particularly freedom of expression) and where they made more progress and created more prosperity. Such a review may be skewed by the fact that, across the distance of history, we are more able to see ideological ferment than ideological freedom, though the latter does not imply the former. But even with that limitation, the correlation is striking. Freedom of speech is not just an important freedom — it is mankind's most important freedom. That's probably why that is the freedom most constantly under attack (as this exemplifies) around the world by all those who want to be in control.

One fascinating thought that appears at points in the essay is that a key, critical difference between a society that we would call modern & civilized and one that we would call backward & barbarian is one that is not easily apparent. It is simply whether the society's dominant viewpoint is short-term or long-term. If the society takes a short-term view, it will follow strategies for immediate gains even if the gains they produce are small, and even if those strategies prevent long-term success. That is not a fault — given those societies' conditions, it is the rational choice. To make larger (and faster) progress the society has to cross a threshold, achieve a critical mass, so that it has the luxury of (and can see the value of) taking a long-term viewpoint. As a result, we make things with greater permanence. Bridges are engineered rather than just built, and last many years instead of a season or two. (This is Whittle's example, from The Bridge Over the River Kwai.) Architects plan every detail of buildings before construction begins. (Think of the World Trade Center. This process sometimes becomes somewhat iterative, as seems to have been the case with the Sagrada Familia Church in Barcelona.) And we're now applying that same sort of architecture and planning process to computer software development, now that we're coming to expect longer-term software performance.

Some of these examples suggest the transition from short-term to long-term viewpoints does not necessarily affect an entire society. We are told, for example, that most of Egyptian society was functioning at a near-subsistence level in the time of the pharoahs, yet that society built the pyramids and temples Egypt is so famous for. Same thing for medieval Europe and its cathedrals. It may be said, though, that these are the societies that showed the way — the ones that had made enough progress to enable some groups of people the luxury of longer-range thinking, and the necessary supporting luxury of not having to spend most of one's time working at getting the next meal. Even so, it still seems the quantum leap necessary for a society to begin making exponential progress is the shift from short-range to long-range thinking by the society as a whole. Or, as Bill Whittle puts it,

nice, forgiving and non-envious [arising from a long-range viewpoint] are advanced strategies that require a topsoil of general goodwill, trust, and respect for the rule of law.

Societies that embrace these qualities will always out-compete those that don’t.

And all that is just the set-up for the rest of Bill Whittle's essay. The best I can say about that is go read the whole thing. And think about it.

For explanatory purposes here, though, let me continue on with a related thing or two. If you take Bill Whittle's essay and put names to the active proponents of the short-term and long-term strategies in today's world, and flesh out the concepts with current world events, you get something like Melanie Phillips' essay Liberalism vs. Islamism. To avoid misunderstandings, here are the definitions she uses:

• Islamism - "the politicised version of Islam which mandates jihad, or holy war against the infidel and conquest of the non-Islamic world for Islam."
• Liberalism - "the commitment to a free society ... from which follow the concepts of equal respect for all people, freedom of conscience, tolerance and the rule of law."

On the first definition, she says "I’m well aware of the argument that there’s no difference between Islamism and Islam: that’s a theological argument for others to have." On the second, I woud note that her definition is what others have called classic liberalism.

Phillips sees Liberalism and Islamism, so defined, as being in a death struggle — though many twist their logic into pretzels trying to deny it. And so she asks and answers a key question:

Why is a liberal society so reluctant to defend its own most cherished values of freedom and tolerance? The answer, I suggest, lies both in the intrinsic nature of liberalism — and also in what I would call our dominant culture of corrupted liberalism, in which true liberal values have actually been turned on their heads.

Essentially, she is saying we have been changing from a liberal society to a "liberal" one, to a society that still has the right words but has lost (or is losing) their substance. That is the same issue Bill Whittle was writing about in his essay — and the same one that (with Whittle's essays for inspiration) has made me write this one.

Is this a problem? Definitely. Can we recover? Absolutely. The only question is how and when (and under what conditions) we choose to do so. That is what You Are Not Alone is really all about. And that's another reason why I remain optimistic. I agree with Bill Whittle:

My friends, Western Civilization is not on its last legs.
Western Civilization is going to the stars. Count on it.

Iraqi "Insurgents"

It's an article of faith on the Left that nearly all the "insurgents" in Iraq are home-grown. Thus, the Left asserts these individuals and their attacks are part of the "civil war" in Iraq and not part of the Global War on Terror. Just as an example, I myself heard Alan Colmes on Fox News Channel's Hannity & Colmes show yesterday evening stating as fact that "at least 95%" of the insurgents are home-grown and not foreigners.

An inconvenient truth, for this viewpoint, has been published frequently — and ignored as frequently. It is that the substantial majority of the insurgents are, in fact, imported fighters. The latest is from Gateway Pundit who reports that more than 2/3 of the insurgents — currently 70% — are foreigners imported into Iraq through Syria using forged passports and travel documents provided by Syria.

This is part of a broader issue, which is the reason the Left is so adamant in claiming foreigners are a trivial part of the attacks and attackers. The Left (aside from those who want to pretend the Global War on Terror doesn't exist) wants with all its heart to believe Iraq is a diversion from the Global War on Terror. They need to believe the attacks in Iraq are part of a civil (rather than proxy) war, and that al Qaeda has little or nothing to do with Iraq. Too bad (for them) the facts on the ground tell a different story.

“Fascist!”

In his Impromptus column on Tuesday, Jay Nordlinger notes that “All of us who are conservative, or classically liberal, have had to be called fascist.” He also notes, correctly, that

“Fascist” is an epithet used by mean or stupid people against those they dislike who are perceived to be “on the right.” One result is that, when a real fascist comes along, there is no word left for him.

The people calling others fascists or nazis almost never have any conception of the real meaning of the words. Followers of Jefferson, Lincoln, Churchill, Roosevelt, JFK, and Reagan are not nazis and fascists.

Perhaps we can help these poor ignorant people. We can follow the example of one of Nordlinger’s friends — instead of using the terms ‘nazi’ or ‘fascist’, we can use the more specific correct term ‘national socialist’. And that may help them understand that these were parties of the left, not the right.

Two Outstanding Marines

New Mexico has a long history of providing men of valor to the U.S. military. Troops from New Mexico rode up San Juan Hill with Colonel Theodore Roosevelt in the Spanish-American War. New Mexico's National Guard (coastal artillery units) were at Bataan and in the Death March at the start of World War II, with many members remaining in Japanese Prisoner of War camps throughout the war. The famous Code Talkers were drawn from the Navajo Reservation of New Mexico and Arizona. Many others from New Mexico, whether in New Mexico by birth or assignment, have served with honor and valor in U.S. military actions from territorial days to the present.

From among New Mexico's more recently valorous men, allow me to bring two particularly outstanding men to your attention. One is from November of 2004 when Falluja was one of the most violent and dangerous places in Iraq. Private First Class Christopher Adlesperger was with one of the teams that moved in to pacify that city on November 10. His squad encountered a well-prepared machine gun position in one of the houses, which turned out to be an enemy command and control position. Adlesperger's response was to attack. He pinned down those at the gun position while he helped his wounded comrades up a stairway he cleared to a rooftop area from which they could be evacuated. From there, though wounded, he was able to use a grenade launcher to make holes in the building wall so he could fire on and destroy the enemy gun position. In doing so, he destroyed the last strongpoint in Fallujah's Jolan District. For this action, Adlesperger was awarded the Navy Cross and has been nominated for the Congressional Medal of Honor. He was subsequently promoted to Lance Corporal. LCPL Christopher Adlesperger was killed while leading a clearing mission on December 2, 2004. His Navy Cross was presented to his family on April 13, 2007. Chris Adlesperger graduated from Albuquerque's El Dorado High School.

In the same district of the same city a few months earlier, Captain Douglas Zembiec climbed up on a tank while under fire to guide it to where his men were pinned down. He coordinated the actions of his Marines from atop the tank while bullets and rocket-propelled grenades impacted all around him. He was already badly wounded before climbing onto the tank. And that wasn't the only time. Those who served with him call him a warrior without peer, not much different from those who led the Spartans into combat. He commanded incredible respect from his men, always leading from the front. That action was on April 26, the last day of major fighting before the Marines pulled out of the city under the terms of a cease-fire worked out by politicians and diplomats — a cease-fire that created the conditions under which PFC Adlesperger's unit would have to reenter the city six months later. Since that day in Fallujah, Zembiec has been promoted to Major and given more responsibility. MAJ Douglas Zembiec was reported killed last week in Iraq. As of yesterday, the Defense Department has not yet confirmed his death or provided information on its circumstances. Based on his history, I think we may assume he was taking the fight to the enemy, creating what he called "menacing delimmas for the enemy," when he died. Doug Zembiec graduated from Albuquerque's La Cueva High School where, as a junior, he brought the school its first ever state wrestling title. (He won again as a senior.) MAJ Zembiec was a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, and a veteran of combat in Kosovo and the Middle East.

The stories of men and women like these are usually not easily available or widely published. Stories on Major Zembiec and Lance Corporal Adlesperger were printed on the front page of the Albuquerque Journal only because they were from Albuquerque. I suspect some of the papers near Camp Pendleton were the only others to print them. The stories of their heroism apparently were not printed before their deaths. These stories can be found, but they commonly have to be explicitly sought out (as Blackfive frequently does).

And then there is the larger question: Where do we find such men? How do we grow or create them? I don't know the answer, and sometimes think the answer may be unknowable. But I do know we can all be very grateful for men and women like these — and many thousands of others. And we need to do better in telling their stories.

Insanities

I saw several reports and interviews on the television while at the gym this afternoon. And some of them were really nuts.

First was a report on Al Sharpton's attack on presidential candidate (former Massachusetts governor) Mitt Romney. What Sharpton said was “As for the one Mormon running for office, those that really believe in God will defeat him anyway, so don’t worry about that, that’s a temporary – that’s a temporary situation.” (See also reports here and here.)

Sharpton denies ever saying that. He also claims he was talking about Christopher Hitchens, the atheist he was debating at the time he made the statement. But I — along with much of the country — have heard the audio on both radio and TV. There's no question of what he said.

Sharpton's apologists admit that's what he said, but claim it's not what he meant. They claim he made clear what he really meant to say later in the debate. If that's so, Sharpton should apologize for what he said and make clear that it wasn't what he meant. The fact that he won't do so indicates it really was what he meant, and that he's the same race-baiting bigot he's always been.

Then there's John Kerry. A report on the National Journal web site says he responded to a question about Building 7 at the World Trade Center on 9/11 by saying “I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things, that they did it in a controlled fashion.” It was not clear from the video clip I heard if he was really talking about WTC Building 7, though that was what people like Webster Tarpley asserted very firmly. If Kerry meant what he seems to have said, his connection to reality is much more tenuous that I'd previously thought.

And who is Webster Tarpley? On his web site (no, I'm not going to provide a link) he identifies himself as "Intelligence Expert, Activist, Historian" and author of 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA. I saw him interviewed this afternoon, too. He claims World Trade Center Building 7 was effectively undamaged, and was brought down by a controlled demolition. He says placing the explosives to do that would require several days of work by experts. (No suggestion was made as to how that was accomplished without anyone noticing.) He says Arabs do not have the capability to carry off such a task, and asserts it was an "inside job" carried out by rogue elements within the Bush Administration. Of course, this also means the attack on the World Trade Center's twin towers (and the Pentagon) was also carried out by Bush Administration elements. (He says the destruction of the twin towers was also by controlled demolition with explosives that took days of work by experts to place.) Tarpley does not deny the existence of Al Qaeda, but says it's a sham — "the CIA's Arab legion." He said, too, that there are several Osama bin Ladens, all actors on the CIA payroll.

Listening to Tarpley, I couldn't help wondering what color the sky is in his world. He gives moonbat a whole new level of meaning.

Col. Repya Is Tired

I don't like to reprint things whole — I'd much rather quote them, and point to them. But I'm making an exception for this piece. It's too good not to reproduce in full.

Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq to finish my tour.

I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning, to return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in 1971 after my tour in Vietnam. Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old in just four months, but I'm tired:

I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks through.

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the going gets tough.

I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they 'Support the Troops' by wanting them to 'Cut and Run' before victory is achieved.

I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of their hotels to report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on the battlefield.

I'm tired that so many Americans think you can rebuild a dictatorship into a democracy over night.

I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to the voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon a permanent Parliament.

I'm tired of the so called 'Elite Left' that prolongs this war by giving aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War.

I'm tired of antiwar protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in a just and noble cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is beyond shameful.

I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom -- Vietnam generation, who have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult tasks through to victory.

I'm tired that some are more concerned about the treatment of captives than they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens and allies.

I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom reported by the press, but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news.

Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from history that there is no substitute for Victory.

Sincerely,
Joe Repya,
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division

The line about those who claim they 'support the troops' particularly struck me. In part, that was because I am also frustrated by the apparent disingenuousness of it. But I have also run across Jay Tea's commentary on The Support Trap, which has brought up the possibility that the Left's self-deception is the only deception involved.

$3 Is Not An Appropriate Price for 85¢ Worth of Gas!

There's nothing else to say.

Non Sequiturs

Sometimes I read statements that simply make no sense at all. That's happened several times in the last couple of days. The outstanding ones, just from James Taranto's Best of the Web, are these:

In yesterday's entry of the continuing "Zero-Tolerance Watch" series, a student was told he was not being suspended while he was being suspended.

Two days later, he said, Vice Principal Paul Deal told him that he was not being suspended or expelled, but that he might be a threat to the school or himself. J.K. [the student] said he was told to leave and not return until being cleared by a mental-health professional.

Today, there's an item titled "Violently Opposed to Violence". It seems there was a peace demonstration in the Palenstinian territories, but the demonstrators don't seem peaceful — some carry rifles, and others RPGs. As Taranto says:

We've often noted that many so-called pacifists seem to have a taste for tumult, but only in Palestinistan would a peace protester carry an RPG launcher. Or should we say only in Reuterville?

The lead item today is about the statements by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. He says the war is lost, but we can still win it ... or something like that. "This war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday," Reid said at a press conference. He "knows" what Condi Rice, Robert Gates, and General Petraeus — and maybe President Bush — believe, which happens to be at odds with everything any of them has ever said. One thing he didn't explain is, if we have lost the war, who won? (At least Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee has balls enough to say we should claim victory and leave.) Other Democrats wouldn't say they agreed with Reid's statement, but said the war cannot be won militarily. That is, they don't agree with him but they agree with him.

It's not a non sequitur, but a particularly egregious statement cited in the Politico article was from Sen. Tom Harkin. When asked what our troops are doing in Iraq, he said "I don't know what they're engaged in, what they are trying to do. Our military is being abused, abused by this administration. Abused." In an actual non sequitur, he also said his 2002 vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq should not have been construed as a green light to invade Iraq.

Meanwhile, in the same column (second item), says Vice President Dick Cheney "took the unusual step of seeking out reporters." He was up on Capitol Hill — you'd think the reporters would be seeking him out. Guess they didn't want to hear what Cheney had to say.

What is perhaps my favorite continuing Leftist non sequitur, though, shows up in today's column in its fourth item, "Stand Up and Be Labeled a Terrorist." The extremists like to pretend their (they claim all of our) rights are being infringed, and they can't express their opinions. That's right, they are without any fear expressing their opinions that they are not allowed to express their opinions. Taranto's comment is right on point:

What's odd about this is that the plaintiffs apparently have no fear of announcing in open court that they fear designation as terrorists. If they really feared it, you'd think they'd be lying low. This is similar to the plaintiffs in the wiretapping case last year, who made declarations to the effect that they had various ties to terrorists, and who claimed in the case that their civil liberties were under siege. If civil liberties were really under siege, people wouldn't be openly confessing their ties to enemies of the country.

The only question left is whether these people are completely detached from reality, or are simply clueless.

A New Island

A new island has appeared off the coast of Greenland, and it's being touted as a proof and consequence of global warming. It had been thought to be the end of a peninsula, but it turned out to be an island when the ice over it melted.

Something tells me this isn't the first time this island has appeared. After all, the Vikings called the place Greenland for a reason, and it wasn't because it was all covered with ice.

That was during the Medieval Warm Period. Then the Little Ice Age came, and the Viking settlements simply disappeared.

Riehl World View notes:

So this island has most likely come and gone before, hundreds of years before man invented electricity or the internal combustion engine, but, well, this time it's different, it's proof positive that man is the cause of Global Warming?

Somehow that just doesn't make sense.

Incidentally, I remember that Al Gore and his global warming activists are saying the global warming ice melt will cause the sea level to rise twenty feet or more. But I also recall that Venice was thriving — and not flooded — during that Medieval Warm Period.

Where Was God?

Terrible events, like Monday's shootings at Virginia Tech, bring up questions like "Where was God?" The more general question is something like "If God is all-powerful, and God is (and desires) good, then why is there evil?" One of the better discussions of this question I've read was in a column written this week by Don Crawford because of the Virginia Tech shootings. That article is good despite saying Tuesday rather than Monday.

Of course, the answer the article gives is from the Christian perspective. The answers from at least some other religions are different.

From reading in Experiencing the World's Religions just this week, for example, I understand that the Jain answer is that there is no god, and the earth just is. So this question doesn't occur.

Islam has an equally simple answer -- what happened at Virginia Tech was the will of Allah. Muslim philosophy has been governed since the middle of the ninth century by Asharite doctring and al-Ghazali’s teaching Allah's unlimited power, expressed in the view that each instant exists as is does entirely because Allah wills it so.

Obviously, I prefer the Christian answer, but I think there's more to it,too. The whole issue brought to my mind an essay by Bill Whittle called Tribes" that I ran across right after Hurricane Katrina, a little more than 18 months ago. (I used some ideas from this essay in discussing Hurricane Katrina.) Whittle's tribes are not characterized by black and white skins, but by the black and white hats the tribe's members choose (by their choices and viewpoints) to wear. To avoid unconscious overtones, he tags these tribes as the Pinks and the Greys. The Pinks just want to be left alone, feel that everyone is really much like them, and feel that any conflict can be resolved if we just understand the other side's issues. This has as a corollary that, if something bad happens, somebody made it happen. The Greys would also rather be left alone. But they also know that bad things sometimes happen, even without a malicious agency. Putting it in engineering terms, they know that "things break sometimes," and feel "please don't let it be my bridge." And the Greys know one more thing that the Pinks don't, or won't -- they know that an enemy exists that wants to destroy both Pinks and Greys. (Whittle does not give the enemy a tribe or a color.)

Whittle mixes metaphors a little to relate his tribes to the Loony Toons cartoon characters -- sheep, sheepdogs, and wolves -- featured in the introduction to The Bulletproof Mind by LtCol (Ret.) Dave Grossman, whose related essay "On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs" was reprinted a few days ago. The sheep are the Pinks, the sheepdogs are the Greys, and the wolves are the enemy. When the wolves are actually in the flock and attacking, they fill the sheep with terror. The rest of the time, though, the sheep would rather believe wolves don't exist. The sheepdogs, when the sheep recognize them, make the sheep uncomfortable -- they are a reminder that evil exists. And some sheepdogs are always recognizable. Others, like the shaggy cartoon sheepdog, may be taken by sheep as other sheep, and so pass unnoticed -- until the wolves arrive.

And so we come back to Virginia Tech. With a wolf loose in the fold, a few people showed their grey. The heroism of Holocaust survivor Professor Liviu Librescu was outstanding, and he paid for his heroism with his life. (Update: So was that of Waleed Mohammed Shaalan, who distracted the shooter's attention from another injured student at the cost of his own life.) The grey of others was less obvious, and less deadly, like that of student Derek O'Dell. And others, like the student sitting next to O'Dell in class, never got the chance to show their color, pink or grey. There are other grey stories we may never know, in some cases possibly because the sheepdog was unsuccessful in stopping the wolf. After all, there's nothing that says the sheepdog always wins. But what's undeniable is that there are people alive today who would not be alive were it not for the protective actions of these individuals.

Note that these were not recognized protectors, recognized Greys. These were what we might call "undercover Greys" -- apparent Pinks who stepped up when they were needed, and helped save others' lives.

In a way, maybe that's an answer (though perhaps not one we'd hope for) to the original question: Perhaps it's as I was taught, that God usually works through people. And in this case the people he was working through are the ones who showed their grey.

Recommended: Read the Crawford article, the Whittle essay, and the Grossman reprint. You'll be glad you did.

No More GWOT

Ike Skelton, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has banished the phrase "Global War on Terrorism" (and, presumably, the shorthand GWOT) as too vague and non-specific. This has produced the suggestion that GWOT be replaced by WOIITUSAAPLMGWAAEEFISDGTPTKJIRCSDYBMQTITCSKCAN.

I hope this makes Mr Skelton happier (follow the link for the definition).

NM Voter IDs Killed

It's not bad enough that

• a federal judge struck down the voter ID law the voters of Albuquerque passed by a 73-27% margin as a partial solution to the vote fraud problem

• more than 201,700 voter ID cards (over 18% of the 1+ million total) sent out last year were returned by the post office as undeliverable, suggesting at least that number of voters had moved or died — or had never existed and had been fraudulently registered (and that's not counting the fraudulently registered children and pets)

• the U.S. Attorney in New Mexico, David Iglesias, failed to take any action on vote fraud cases even when he reportedly had an iron-clad case and a confession (a failure to act that was apparently at least partly responsible for his termination)

Now the New Mexico legislature has passed, and Governor Bill Richardson has signed, a new law that ends even the pretense of a voter ID in this state.
 

It seems to me what's going on is the attempt to deliver the new voter ID cards demonstrated huge problems with the voter registration system and with the current voter rolls. The state's politicians didn't want to acknowledge the system's problems, and responded by killing the activity that gave evidence of the problems.

It's not right but, apparently, that's the way it is.

Something I Never Knew

Several people have noted the ill-fitting suits the British soldiers and marines were wearing — presumably so the one female sailor wouldn't be the only one out of uniform. They also noted the lack of ties on all of them.

I never knew till this week that the necktie was considered a Christian symbol.

Easter Reflections: A Visit to Ocotlán

It’s Easter time — a time to be reminded that God didn’t (and doesn’t) do things the way man expects. And that has made me remember and reflect on something that happened a few months ago.

We were part of a group on a pilgrimage to central Mexico at the end of the summer. The highlight of our trip had been a visit to the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe, some distance from the center of Mexico City. We visited the Basilica and climbed Tepeyac Hill, where San Juan Diego met with the appearance of Our Lady in 1531 — barely ten years after the Spanish had conquered Mexico’s Aztec kingdom.

Our group was taken out to Teotihuacan the next day. I remember being taught as a child that the pyramids there were built by the Aztecs, but that’s not so. Now we know that Teotihuacan started being built about the time of Christ, and it was in ruins when the Aztecs arrived, having been abandoned some eight centuries before.

Leaving the area of the pyramids, we ended up on a minor road heading for Tlaxcala and its nearby village of Ocotlán to see a beautiful and historic church there. It seemed to take an awful long time getting there, and some of us wondered why we were on a minor road when it seemed one of the major highways would have suited the trip better.

On the way, we were told a little about the Basilica of Our Lady of Ocotlán. This church is associated with an appearance of Our Lady to another Juan Diego, this one in 1541 — just ten years after her appearance at Tepeyac. Near the church is a miracle spring that figures in the story of this appearance. We were told we might be able to get some water from the spring while we were there — if we got there while the gates were still open.

We finally arrived in Ocotlán about 5 p.m. Mass was just starting as we came into the church. Naturally, we stayed and participated. It must have surprised the elderly priest to see such a group there for a midweek Mass. Hearing the group fully participating in the Spanish of the Mass might have surprised him a bit, too.

We noticed during the Mass that the priest never moved from where he was behind the right side of the altar at any time. The reason became evident as the Mass ended. He was in a wheelchair, and evidently not in very good shape. The priest and deacon with our group went up to talk to the older man while the rest of us were looking at (and admiring) this beautiful church and the figure of Our Lady featured there in accordance with her wishes.

And then things started to get unusual, in ways far beyond any coincidence.

It turned out the elderly priest was just returning from major surgery — an amputation. This was apparently one of his first days back in his church. Part of his leg had become infected, and he had been unable to fight the infection because of his diabetes. For that same reason, his recovery was being painfully slow.

He had been aware that we were from the United States, but only now did he learn we were from New Mexico. That was particularly striking for him because he had studied at the seminary in Montezuma, New Mexico, which was set up as a gift from the United States Council of Catholic Bishops during the time when many priests were killed and all the seminaries in Mexico were closed by the Mexican government. Our accompanying deacon attended the Montezuma seminary later, and was known to this priest by reputation. (!)

As the priest spoke with us, he became more animated; our visit was clearly giving him a lift. We all gathered around the priest and gave him a special blessing before we left. He was very moved, and we saw a tear in his eye.

After we were back on our bus, on the way out of the area, the meaning of what had just happened began to dawn on us. We began to realize how it must have been for him, at this time of personal trial, having us arrive — a pilgrim group from an area full of good memories for him — dropping in, blessing him, and almost magically disappearing again. We did a real good deed that day. That day we were angels.

And that explains why it had to take so long getting to Ocotlán — it was so we would get there at the right time.

Jaw-Droppers

I noticed a couple or three jaw-dropping items today. One is from the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled (5-4) that you and I are polluters. (See also this New York Times article.) Since the Supreme Court has now ruled that — whether or not science agrees — carbon dioxide is politically a pollutant which EPA has the authority to regulate, I wonder how long before we all have to get a license to be allowed the privilege of breathing.

Then I saw the article on the "Aroma in Tacoma" talking about the Washington State city officially blaming the victim for being attacked. Tacoma is billing the U.S. Department of Defense for their $500,000 costs in providing a significant law enforcement presence necessitated by the violent "peace" demonstrations against the military. This seems to me logically equivalent to the Saudi Arabian "justice" system punishing a woman for being the victim of a gang rape. Tacoma clearly has no principles in this. They just figure they have a better chance of getting money from their fellow victims than from the unscrupulous (and probably totally unproductive) "peace" protestors violently attacking those who protect them.

The first two items in today's Best of the Web were not quite that bad. In one, the Democrats in the House Armed Services Committee have made the Global War on Terror into "the war that must not be named" by banning the use of that phrase (among others). Column author James Taranto notes that

America seems dangerously close to a tipping point: a return to the 9/10 mindset that led to 9/11. It may be that President Bush's steadfastness is the only thing standing in the way, and that his departure from the scene in January 2009 will leave a more timid America.

Or, more optimistically, it may be that the current opposition to the "global war" is less about the war itself than about partisanship and Bush-hatred — and that its apparent gain in strength is really only a reflection of the president's political weakness late in his term.

Taranto also notes (second item) an interesting flip-flop by the Left. The Left previously demanded that Islamist extremists captured on the battlefield and in terrorist attempts be given Prisoner of War status, even though they are explicitly excluded from such status by the terms of the Geneva Accords. Now, however, they think Prisoner of War status is too severe since it mandates imprisonment until the war's end. The Left thinks that's far too long and wants these terrorist barbarians released soon (or now) so they can murder more innocent victims. In effect, they are insisting these war criminals be given more rights than legitimate Prisoners of War.

All in all, just unbelievable!

Midnight Company

Omar's friends have often asked him what he knows about American soldiers' behavior during house searches. They challenged him because "The Americans never searched your home."

Well, now that's no longer true. American soldiers came to Omar's house last week, and — if others' descriptions of their experiences are true — Omar's description demonstrates that being pleasant and cooperative (and without terrorist arms) makes things go much more smoothly with the Americans.

Read the whole thing.

Proof of Global Warming

Iran's Ransom Demand

According to news reports, the Iranian government is demanding an admission from the British government that the its sailors and marines were captured inside Iran's territorial waters before Iran will consider releasing them. This despite the fact that Iran very well knows the hostages were kidnapped from within Iraqi territory. That's even proven by the GPS coordinates Iran gave to Britain to "prove" the sailors transgressed, which clearly showed the attack was in Iraqi waters. (When the British pointed this out, the Iranians responded by providing a new set of coordinates.)

Iran desperately wants to save some face. It has gotten caught in a lie and a fraud, and hopes to avoid responsibility for the actions of its rogue Republican Guard unit which operated in such a negligent manner in committing an act of war against both Britain and Iraq.

But the bottom line is that Iran expects Britain to lie as part of the ransom to be paid for the release release of the hostages Iran well knows were kidnapped from within Iraqi territory. That shouldn't really be surprising. The government of Iran has no honor and lies constantly. So, of course, they would automatically project similar ill behavior onto other governments.