It’s an overused word, but I think it’s applicable here in its most neutral sense of inspiring awe: photos from the volcanic eruption in Iceland.
Via The Long War Journal, US and Iraqi forces in an Iraqi-led operation have killed the head of al Qaeda in Iraq, as well as several other high-ranking jihadis:
Iraq’s Prime Minister and the US military confirmed that al Qaeda in Iraq’s top two leaders have been killed during a raid in a remote region in the western province of Anbar.
“Abu Ayyub al Masri, also known as Abu Hamza al Muhajir, Abu Omar al Baghdadi and a number of al Qaeda leaders in Iraq were killed during a security operation in al Thar Thar region in Anbar,” Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki told reporters at a press conference in Baghdad, according to Voices of Iraq.
US Forces Iraq, the US military command in Baghdad, confirmed the report in a press release.
“A series of Iraqi led joint operations conducted over the last week resulted in the Iraqi Forces with US support executing a nighttime raid on the AQI [al Qaeda in Iraq] leaders’ safehouse,” the press release stated. “The joint security team identified both AQI members, and the terrorists were killed after engaging the security team. Additionally, Masri’s assistant along with the son of al-Baghdadi who were also involved in terrorist activities were killed.”
A US soldier died in a chopper crash during the operation, but that appeared not to be caused by enemy fire.
Al Masri and al Baghdadi have been reported killed before, but in those cases the Iraqis had jumped the gun to release the information before it was confirmed. With confirmation coming from General Odierno’s office, I think we can take these as confirmed kills.
Well done to everyone involved. And to al Masri, al Baghdadi, and the rest of the brave, brave jihadis medieval psychopaths, enjoy your 72 white raisins!
There is a single reason why Clinton, Obama, and the mainstream media are in a tizzy about the Tea Party protests. As Bill Kristol said:
- It’s an attempt to demonize and discredit the movement and not engage it on its ideas. … I think this notion that — the left pretends to think the Tea Parties are a problem for the Republicans. The fact is the left is terrified of the Tea Parties.President Obama knows they have done a huge amount of damage to his attempt to transform America in a left-wing direction. And therefore, they don’t want to debate the issues. They want to demonize them.
You don’t see the liberal attack machine getting this bent out of shape over nothing. As Bill remarked, “The Obama administration has given rise to a more powerful conservatism than has existed for 20 years, since Ronald Reagan in this country.” And it’s not the GOP Beltway crowd that has done this — it’s ordinary citizens. I don’t think Bill was exaggerating when he said: “The Republican establishment is the threat to the future of the Republican Party and conservatism. The Tea Party is the best thing that’s happened for conservatives.” (You need look no further than the Florida Senate race, where the insiders picked the hapless Charlie Crist, and the Tea Party amateurs identified Marco Rubio as a rising star.) And so the liberals attack and make ludicrous connections to murders like Timothy McVeigh or concoct racist allegations that do not stand up to scrutiny.
It’s the same as with their attacks on Sarah Palin: you can tell whom the progressive statists really fear by the targets they pick and the vitriol they throw.
Britain has called a general election for a new Parliament, to be held on May 6th. Looking at today’s Telegraph, I came across what appears to be Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s main argument for giving Labour a new majority: “the Tories will screw things up worse than we have.”
Gordon Brown says Conservative election victory would threaten economy
The Prime Minister told a London news conference David Cameron’s ”big society means big cuts in public services.
”It’s a risk for our mainstream public services that Britain cannot afford to take.”
Mr Brown was attempting to shift the election spotlight away from Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg’s recent poll successes and back on the substantive issues like the economy.
He said Labour was in the ”futures business” with bold and ambitious plans for the country, while the Tories were in the ”risk business”.
Then again, the Conservatives under Cameron don’t seem all that different from Labour, these days. They’re certainly not Thatcherites.
What’s truly surprised me is the strength of Britain’s main third-party, the Liberal Democrats. Formed from a merger of the old Liberal Party and the Social Democrats, I don’t believe it’s ever been the official Opposition(1), the number two party in Parliament, let alone formed a government. But the polls show they’re currently in second place and perhaps have momentum. Could they wind up forming the government? Part of a coalition with Labour? The party is a strong believer in individual liberty in the tradition of John Stuart Mill, but their commitment to social liberalism with its inherent high taxes and extensive welfare state seem at odds with this.
And again I ask, given Labour’s track record, the Conservatives’ promise to not change too much, and the Lib-Dems’ official support of an expensive welfare state, is there really all that much daylight between the three? And, if there isn’t, will the dissatisfied vote for the fascist BNP in significant numbers?
(1)The article refers to the old Liberal-Social Democrat alliance polling ahead of Labour in the 1983 general election, in which the Conservatives won a crushing majority, but Britain’s “first past the post” system gave Labour the second-highest number of seats.