Medary.com

Michael Totten:

So many Westerners, liberal and conservative alike, are only interested in the Middle East and the wider Islamic world at the points of inter-civilizational contact, when and where its problems intersect with us and become our problems. It's understandable, but it's blinkered. Islamism exists independently of the West, not merely in reaction to it, and it would continue to exist if America and the rest of the West did not. It's not all about us.

. . .

First of all, let's get one thing out of the way. "Terrorism," suicidal or otherwise, isn't the enemy. Totalitarian Islamists are the enemy. They won't go away just because Western troops go away. Terrorism is merely the tactic they use against Westerners because they're too militarily incompetent to use anything else.

The overwhelming majority of Islamist killers aren't terrorists. They are soldiers and members of state-sanctioned death squads. Most victims of Islamists violence aren't Westerners...they're the Islamists' fellow Muslims. It's easy to forget this -- or not even be aware of it -- if you aren't interested in what happens inside the Muslim world when George W. Bush, Tony Blair, and the rest in the West aren't involved.

The Islamist regime in Sudan has killed more than a million people all by itself in the Christian south and in the Muslim region of Darfur. It would take tens of thousands of terrorists to do worse than that.

But the Islamists in Algeria gave it a hell of shot. More than 100,000 were killed during the past ten years in that country's civil war between radical Salafi fundamentalists and literally everyone else.

Iran's Islamist regime killed its way into power and kills to remain in power. Afghanistan's former Taliban regime likewise killed its way into power and killed to remain in power.

If we can't agree on who the enemy is, how are we going to win? We have crazed momma Sheehan and her political allies screeching the "Leave Iraq Now" chorus.

No, Mrs. Sheehan, that way lies disaster. If we stay, we die by ones and twos, taking tens and hundreds of the thugs with us. If we leave, we die by the thousands, and they kill themselves by the tens of thousands. Leaving Iraq, disingaging from the war on terrorists, is an utterly immoral and indefensable policy. Those who advocate it should be ashamed.

#10: Royals lose 13th in a row, break team record
#9: The Blair Crackdown
#8: British attack on terror websites overstated
#7: News Flash: Some Internet News Is Fake
#6: Getting a handle on the warbloggers
#5: Supersize THIS!
#4: NCAA backpedals on Indian name ban
#3: A reminder for Mrs. Sheehan
#2: Family splits with Cindy Sheehan
#1: Able Danger: The 9/11 Commission Scandal

Another grand slam dooms the Royals to their thirteenth straight loss, a franchise record.

Royals manager Buddy Bell kept the clubhouse closed for 30 minutes after the loss.

"When they got the four runs, we can't stop playing," Bell said. "We've got to keep playing. The nature of the game is to keep going. I didn't think the focus was there at the end after they got the four runs. That can't happen. I'm kind of running out of answers."

Royals need to go 43-5 to finish .500, 25-23 to avoid 100 losses, 1-47 to avoid losing all of their remaining games.

Tony Blair's Liberal government in Britain begins deporting Muslim radicals, starting with ten foreigners:

LONDON - Britain's top legal official on Friday defended plans to deport a radical Muslim cleric and nine other foreigners suspected of posing a threat to national security despite claims by human rights campaigners that they could face torture in the countries they are sent to.

Five years ago, this policy change would have seemed radical and draconian:

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain said on Friday as part of an anti-terrorism drive it may reform laws to force judges to give equal weight to national security as well as human rights in the cases of foreign nationals facing deportation.

Not in the post-9/11 and post-7/7 world, however.

Reported previously here, a Times of London story about MI5 taking out Islamic terrorist-related web sites seems to have beenoverstated at best.

"Somebody was trying to make a big story," said Yigal Carmon, head of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI.org). MEMRI monitors and translates newspaper and magazine articles, editorials, public statements, and web publishing from the Islamic world. Its product (memri.org), has become an invaluable resource for Westerners seeking to understand -- not just speculate about -- Muslim thought. This is what Arabs really say to each other.

Carmon also dismissed one unidentified source in the story, Uri Mahnaimi, with a snort and a memorable wisecrack which he asked me not to quote. "Not credible," he said. Two websites had in fact been taken down, along with two more which are back up now, Carmon said.

In short, don't believe everything you see on the Internet.

This is real, though. Trust me.

The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, which conducts regular polling on attitudes toward the media, said that in 1985 about 84 percent of Americans said they believed most of what they read in their daily newspaper. By 2004, that had dropped to 54 percent.

What isn't clear is whether fabrications have become more common, or just easier to uncover.

These days, an army of amateur and professional media critics have made a hobby out of attempting to discredit news reports and statements by politicians.

Skepticism is healthy. Just don't fall into the trap of being asymetrically skeptical (i.e. skeptical of the right but not of the left, or vice versa).

Wired has a story on warbloggers, documenting the Iraq war in realtime from the front:

Milbloggers constitute a rich subculture with a refreshing candor about the war, expressing views ranging from far right to far left. They also offer helpful tips about tearing down an M16, recipes for beef stew (hint: lots of red wine), reviews of the latest episode of 24, extremely technical discussions of Humvee armor configurations, and exceptionally raw accounts of field hospital chaos, gore, and heroism.

For now, the Pentagon officially tolerates this free-form online journalism and in-house peanut gallery, even as the brass takes cautious steps to control it. A new policy instituted this spring requires all military bloggers inside Iraq to register with their units. It directs commanders to conduct quarterly reviews to make sure bloggers aren't giving out casualty information or violating operational security or privacy rules. Commanding officers shut down a blog that reported on the medical response to a suicide bombing late last year in Mosul. The Army has also created the Army Web Risk Assessment Cell to monitor compliance. And Wired has learned that a Pentagon review is under way to better understand the overall implications of blogging and other Internet communications in combat zones.

A sample of a warblogger, thunder6, who was mentioned in the Wired story:

Have you ever stopped to think about who the insurgents really are? Or about what their final goal really is? Do you think for a moment that they are fighting for freedom? For their people? Have you ever wondered why foreign jihadists are trickling into Iraq to attack our forces? In case you have been living under a rock for the last several years I will spell it out for you in as clear a fashion as I am able. The insurgents are composed of two primary groups. The first is composed of former Baath Party member who long to once again crush their populace for their own personal gain. The second group is inhabited by jihadists whose malignant form of Islam calls for the destruction of anything counter to their backwards ideology. Don’t misunderstand me, I’m not bashing the whole of Islam. I’m referring to a small but virulent subset of the religion that is bent on imposing their draconian will on others. That is the face of our enemy, and you would be a fool to think that leaving that plague unchecked would bring anything except disaster.

Perhaps Cindy Sheehan should be asking to meet with him rather than with the President?

Via Reason Hit and Run.

The most dishonest and irresponsible movie I've seen in a long time, Morgan Spurlock's Supersize Me (I confess I have avoided Michael Moore movies) has spawned a backlash of McDieters who, unsurprisingly, get different results:

Spurlock, who turned his surprise-hit movie into a TV show on the FX network, isn't talking about Morgan or the many other McDieters who have criticized his film and found success losing weight by eating healthy foods off the McDonald's menu, said his publicist, David Magdael.

One person went so far as to make her own independent film about dieting at McDonald's. "Me and Mickey D" follows Soso Whaley, of Kensington, N.H., as she spends three 30-day periods on the diet. She dropped from 175 to 139 pounds, eating 2,000 calories-a-day at McDonald's.

It would seem that the NCAA didn't get the whole story on Florida State University and the Seminole tribe.

Among the reasons, he said, are that the NCAA Executive Committee thought the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma opposed FSU's use of the Seminole image as a mascot.

That was based partly on letters the committee received from David Narcomey, a member of the General Council of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma.

But Narcomey was not authorized to speak on behalf of the tribal nation and "misrepresented" its view, the tribe's attorney general said Thursday.

In fact, Narcomey pushed for a tribal resolution condemning the use of American Indian mascots and imagery, specifically at FSU. It was defeated last month by an 18-2 vote.

Perhaps there's a job waiting for the NCAA bureaucrats on the 9/11 Commission.

Via Free Republic.

In 2003, another military mother was considering joining an anti-war demonstration. She was dissuaded by this letter from her son:

Dear Mom,

It's really your decision to march if you want to or not. You are the one who has to decide if what we are doing out here is right or not. My opinion is not yours.

I do, however, have things I would like for you and Grandma and everyone else at home to know.

I am a United States soldier. I was sworn to defend my country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. People may not agree with the things we are ordered to do. I would like to address those people by telling them that terrorism is not only a threat to us as Americans, but to many other innocent people in the world.

What type of country would we be if we didn't defend the rights and freedoms of others, not because they're Americans, but how about just because they're human?

We live in a country where people feel secure with their daily lives. They do business like usual and don't worry about the thought of terrorism actually happening to them.

The people of 9-11 thought the same thing. We now know that it can happen to anyone at any time.

Yet as Americans we're afraid of losing our soldiers to defend our security. I can only speak for myself when I say that my life is an easy expense to ensure that my family and friends can live in peace.

I strongly believe in what we are doing and wish you were here to see for yourselves the honor and privilege that American soldiers aboard this ship are feeling, knowing that we are going to be a part of something so strong and so meaningful to the safety of our loved ones. Then you would know what this potential war is about.

We will stand tall in front of terrorism and defeat it. We as soldiers are not afraid of what may happen. We are only afraid of Americans not being able to understand why we are here.

I ask for your courage as Americans to be strong for us; I ask for your understanding in what we believe is right. I ask for your support in what we are sworn to do: defend our country and the life of all.

We will succeed in our task and will end the threat of terrorism in our back yard. We will also end the threat of terrorism in our neighbors'.

We have to remind ourselves of what this country stands for: life, liberty and justice for all. In order to maintain those rights we have to stop the threat of terrorism.

I am proud to be here. I will be coming home, but not until I know that it's going to be safe for all Americans and for everyone I love.

My family is first. My country is where they live. I will defend it.

Lonnie J. Lewis Navy corpsman C Co. 1/4 WPN PLT UIC 39726 FPO AP 966139726

P.S. Mom, please send this to everyone who has a hard time understanding why we are here. Ask the paper to put what I've said in a column so that others will know why we are here and what we are here for.

I love you all and will be home soon. I left my address so that if anyone feels like writing to let me know how they feel, they can.

"Supporting the troops" means that you support what this corpsman writes, as his is the opinion of the majority of our military. Opponents of the "war on terror" are falling into the classic military mistake of fighting the last war. Vietnam was over thirty years ago. This is a different time, this is a different war, this is a different military.