Joe Biden is a National Embarrassment (Update: That's the Point, and With Examples by Hillary and Obama)

The one thing worse than the Vice President’s almost daily gaffes is the fact that he just can’t keep his mouth shut.  Hubert Humphrey was pretty bad about his inability to have an unuttered thought, but Joe Biden left him in the dust long ago.

Recent examples that still echo through the empty halls reserved for critics in the mainstream media include Biden’s comments about how nice it is that John Ryan “likes his dad, and quotes him too”.  When Ryan was 16, he discovered his father’s body, dead from a sudden heart attack.  This has been talked about in the last several days during the media’s incipient vetting process for Ryan, but Biden seems to have missed that, along with our obvious conclusion that Ryan has been a complete stranger to him for the last fourteen years that Ryan has been a principal member of the House of Representatives. 

This falls into line with some of Biden’s other tasteless, clueless remarks, like lamenting the death of the mother of the Irish Prime Minister standing next to him (she is still alive), or telling Missouri state Senator Chuck Graham to stand up during a political rally and wave to the crowd (Graham is confined to a wheelchair), or relating how President Franklin Roosevelt went on television when the stock market crashed (it crashed before he was President, and television did not exist outside a laboratory), or telling America to avoid airlines and subways because of the swine flu (panicking people about a major portion of America’s transportation industry).  He has already spoken of how East Indians have taken over 7-11s and doughnut shops, how the Democrats will still have at least a 30% chance of getting it wrong on the stimulus package (he was right on that one), how the word “jobs” has three letters (he is arithmetically challenged like Obama, with his 57 plus 1 states of the union), and praised Obama – when he didn’t call him “Barack America” – for being an “African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy” (imagine that!).  Then there is the sprinkling of his f-bombs (now an official Merriam-Webster word) throughout his comments that aren’t nearly as off-mike as the administration would like. 

Glossed over (actually, completely absent) in recent reportage on this subject is Biden’s outrageous claim, on top of the absurd notion that killing bin Laden was a “gutsy call”, that Obama’s dithering decision on the operation – the decision, not the operation itself – was the most audacious plan in over “500 years”. 

Now we see that Biden told an audience in Virginia (after saying that they can win in North Carolina) that Romney wants to “unchain” Wall Street, and in so doing (as he relates to the predominantly Black audience) then “he gon’ put you’awl back in chains”.  Some of the print media have cleaned up the phrase – they can’t gloss over the “you’awl” and “chains” – but the twang throughout the sentence is unmistakable.  Besides the clear allusion to slavery, he manages to deliver the threat in a ‘you people’ kind of way.

Notice the vain attempt to connect with the audience by trying to assume a 'down home' patois, like it’s really cool to shun any sense of proper rhetoric.  Even Jesse Jackson and Maya Angelou have condemned Ebonics, but Biden feels that he can emphasize a point for those who aren’t as "articulate" as Obama.  And if you think that this pandering is limited to just Joe, then you have forgotten about Hillary Clinton:

and even Obama himself, who forgets that he was born four years before the events he describes, which he claims led to his birth, picks up on the accent that would be hard to acquire growing up in Hawaii and Indonesia:

(Isn’t it interesting that people who are so strongly opposed to any connection between church and state, will practically leap into a pulpit of a Black church to deliver political stem-winders?) 

As for Biden, what does it say about the judgment of someone who would place him just a heartbeat away from the most powerful post in the world, who would place this nation in jeopardy by having such a buffoon in a position of such responsibility?  Seriously, isn’t that alone a reason to turn Obama out of the White House?  The reason he was on the ticket in 2008 is because, by dint of seniority and little else, he had lasted long enough to be the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which title (certainly not Biden’s intelligence or record) lent a balance to Obama’s lack of experience in … well, practically everything.

John Fund expounds on how Biden has become such a liability to the Democrats – the ones who proclaim through the media (but I repeat myself) how every Republican since Dwight Eisenhower has been some kind of dim-witted fool, but somehow they hold that Joe Biden is just a loveable, avuncular guy who we should just accept ("Oh well, that’s just Joe.").  This is the same story line that unfolded when former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger was caught red-handed stealing politically sensitive documents from the National Archives, and Bill Clinton’s 'aw-shucks' reaction was that Sandy was some kind of absent-minded professor who always had a messy desk.  (Did I say red-handed?  'Red-legged' would be more accurate, since he had the documents stuffed in his trousers and his socks.)  The media have given the Democrats a pass on that one too. 

Rudy Giuliani was direct in his assessment yesterday:

I’ve never seen a vice president that has made as many mistakes, said as many stupid things.  I mean, there’s a real fear if, God forbid, he ever had to be entrusted with the presidency, whether he really has the mental capacity to handle it.  I mean, this guy just isn’t bright.  He’s never been bright.  He isn’t bright.  And people think, ‘Well, he just talks a little too much.’  Actually, he’s just not very smart.

And the Editorial Board of National Review was close behind today, under the title of ‘Joe Biden’s Moral Illiteracy’:

To suggest as Biden did that Romney’s program has something – anything – in common with slave-trading is vile even by the standards of Democratic campaign rhetoric.  That no Democrat of note has spoken up against it is a testament to the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the party and the political movement it represents.

After all these years that Biden has been in the Senate and Blair House – coming up on 30 – he has shown no evidence of reforming his ways.  The best that the Democrats can do is to try and muzzle him.  The best that the Republicans will do is just have Paul Ryan show up at the Vice Presidential Debate on 11 October – that should be a major highlight of the campaign.

*****
Update:  Daniel Greenfield has an intriguing take on the Biden factor.  It's not so much that Biden is on the ticket despite his incompetence, he's on the ticket because of his incompetence.

Joe Biden, never a serious candidate, was the perfect match for Obama.  A dumb old white man, to confirm all the dirty impulses of the left, while mockingly giving mainstream Democrats someone they could relate to.  Biden's gaffes aren't an embarrassment, they are the whole point, signaling the end of the old American era of leadership. . . .

Biden is the successor of every dumb white male father figure on TV gawping at the screen, tumbling over chairs and down the stairs, scratching his head cluelessly at the wiser new generation around him.  He is every man in a commercial who can't figure out how to start a car, make coffee or clean the house until his wife or a helpful minority figure shows up and explains it to him. . . .

Biden still does not understand what he is.  He is a fellow traveler, a dupe, a scarecrow of the old white male liberal establishment hung up over a cornfield to attract unknowing liberals while serving as a figure of fun to the left.  And despite his corruption and arrogance, there is something sad and pathetic in the spectacle of a hollow man with capped teeth set in a grin making a fool of himself for the amusement of the Post-American crowd.  A crowd that he thinks are laughing with him, when they are actually laughing at him.

(H/T again to Donald Sensing)

*****
Update: But wait . . . there's more.
 

Combat Medic: Dark Presence, Bright Salvation

Michael Bailey, otherwise known as ‘Doc’ Bailey, is the frequent author of the web log titled 'The Madness of the Combat Medic' (also hosted on the Business Insider web log as a guest).  His self-description allows that he was a "Combat Certified Army Medic for 6 years 3 months", having deployed twice to Iraq and served in the "Darnall ER", referring to the emergency room at the Darnall Army Medical Center at Fort Hood, Texas.  He writes in a 'flow of consciousness' sort of style – he has something to say and he needs to say it, so policing up the occasional typo would just slow him down.  He cranks out a good volume of material, and I admire his perseverance and dedication to his creation.

Combat Medic Memorial, Fort Sam Houston, Texas

I bookmark Bailey in my perusals of the blogosphere because he provides an often raw but sincere reminiscence of small unit operations in our recent and on-going conflicts.  There is a beauty and humor that I can admire in his green-collar writing, an earthiness in his style that often can be the only manner to convey the scene.  He is one of my sources who helps connect me between my ever-widening gulf of time from my military career to what I can understand of the current situations with two of my sons – the eldest in heavy vehicles with the 101st Airborne Division, but most particularly with my youngest son, a Combat Medic with the Rangers.

I commend to you one of his recent postings – 'The Hard Choices a Medic Will Face', which provides some tough examples of when he gave vital aid but little comfort to his buddies who had suddenly become his charges.  My grandmother gave me sage advice when I was a little boy – “Bitter bitter makes you better” – to explain the confusion in a child’s mind about why the pain of an injury (or the noxious taste of medicine) must be made worse before the hurt can be fixed, but here Doc Bailey gives us some extremes:

“Oh God!  Stop!  Please!  Stop Doc!” he screamed.

I grit my teeth and tried to ignore his piteous pleas.  You have to plug his wounds.  A tourniquet simply won’t do it.  Plugging it will prevent infection, it will speed the healing, and is one of the quickest [ways] to start clotting in such a wound, but it will hurt so much.  And so on this day I put a man through unbelievable amounts of pain to save him.

“I can’t man I’ve got to do this.”

If you can imagine, an abrasion that’s getting cleaned, but far worse because its inside your body.  I put half a roll into his leg which probably only took 15-30 seconds.  But its 15-30 seconds that are seared into my memory.  It wasn’t the first or the last time I had done such things.

Once I had to help set a man who’d broken Radius and Ulna.  The Orthopedics doctors had given him locals, and he was on some pretty heavy Opoids, but he still cried out.  It was just a simple break or he would have been put under.  I’m here to tell you the sound of bone grinding on bone is something you’ll never forget.  You have to put it out of your mind or you’ll never get the job done.

The one of the worst things to treat are burns.  That stench of burnt hair is something you never forget, neither do you forget burned skin, or muscle.  The worst part is the pain.  You simply can’t touch their pain.  Every touch gives them pain, and it is not a good option to simply put them under.

He continues in this vein, telling of the torture he inflicts to save them and preserve their body as best he can.  But the worst of all:

I have heard men ask me "am I going to be ok?"

Often they will be, but sometimes they won’t.  In those times, he deals with them in the moment, each case different but tragically the same, as they fade away.  And then he deals with it for himself.  To me, that is the toughest call of all.  [Marine LtGen John Kelly has dwelt on this with his eloquent, heart-breaking remarks on the death in combat of his son.]  For all the other examples he lists, his "hard choices", I would apply the variation on Thomas Hobbes and his observation that the state of nature is "nasty, brutish, and short" – that if there is no alternative, there is no problem.  You do what you have to do, period.  But to comfort a man in his final minutes requires sympathy beyond diplomacy.  How do you reassure him, yet give the others gathered around you the confidence that if they become wounded, your reassurance to them will not cause panic instead?  This truth can be a harsh responsibility from which even Solomon would shrink.  But the Medic must take some degree of comfort in the fact that they know you, and they are confident that you are well trained and intelligent, and will do everything in your power to help them.

But that doesn’t extend only to the aid that he can render on the spot.  Often a soldier lies wounded at the precise place that is most dangerous and vulnerable to the enemy – that’s why he’s lying there.  And he and his buddies will call for the Medic or Corpsman (for the Marines), and they know that he will defy what seems to be the most common of senses and zigzag to the side of the wounded, moved as soon as possible (depending on 'possible') to an area described as safe, but only that it is slightly less dangerous than everywhere else.

And finally, this is all on top of the fact that the Medic or Corpsman is a functioning member of a combat unit; he isn’t immune from the fact that the enemy is trying to kill him and his brothers, and thus he is often every bit as much a combatant as the other soldiers.  I recently quoted Dietrich Bonhoeffer in another context, but it applies equally well here: "If I see a madman driving a car into a group of innocent bystanders, then I can't, as a Christian, simply wait for the catastrophe and then comfort the wounded and bury the dead.  I must try to wrestle the steering wheel out of the hands of the driver."  My primary experience is in the Marines, where every man is a rifleman, and one of my pieces of advice to my son as he departed for training was that a good Corpsman is often a rifleman with a Unit One bag.  But he is fortunate that he is a Combat Medic with the Rangers – a Medic or Corpsman is typically assigned from a pool to a combat unit, so he fits in on an ad hoc basis, preserving some sort of detachment, but in the Rangers he is a permanent member of a platoon and fully integrated into his Band of Brothers.  But Doc Bailey reminds us that there is still a difference:

The life of a Medic or Corpsman is not an easy one, indeed it is one of the most taxing, emotionally speaking, of any job in the military.  Only commanders have more responsibility, but their burden is lightened by the distance they keep from their troops.  Truth is, there is not a Soldier, Marine Airman or Sailor out there that isn't eternally grateful that their Medics and Corpsmen will risk their life and come running when they give the cry.

Before God, Before their Mothers, they call for me.  I am the Medic, and I will always come for you. 

It is well worth reading the whole thing.

George Will Expounds on the Romney/Ryan Ticket

George Will is one of the more cogent observers of what passes for politics these days: besides his intelligence, native wit, and command of rhetoric, he – like me – has a degree in Political Science (well, all right, his is a PhD from Princeton).  The key news of the past couple of days has been the choice of Mitt Romney to put Paul Ryan on the ticket as his vice presidential pick, and Will responds as usual with his clarity about what the story is really about – in this case, that Romney has gone for the bold, in a number of ways.  The money shot: 

 George Will channels Barry Goldwater: " 'Extremism' in defense of liberty ..." 

Romney embraced Ryan after the sociopathic – indifferent to the truth – ad for Barack Obama that is meretricious about every important particular of the death from cancer of the wife of steelworker Joe Soptic.  Obama’s desperate flailing about to justify four more years has sunk into such unhinged smarminess that Romney may have concluded: There is nothing Obama won’t say about me, because he has nothing to say for himself, so I will chose a running mate whose seriousness about large problems and ideas underscores what the president has become – silly and small.

Allow me to drift a bit – the particular background of the ‘Romney killed my wife’ gambit has been revealed to be a descent into a foolish ‘pay no attention to the man behind the curtain’ subterfuge, or to more accurately put it – how can I say this in a genteel manner … yes, that’s it – a lie.  Not only was the story essentially false in several allegations, in contrast to my line above about academic credentials (which is true, but not accurate), the Obama campaign and Jay Carney, Obama’s Press Secretary, superciliously demurred about it by stating that they have no responsibility for the ad since it comes from the Priorities USA Super PAC, which by law cannot coordinate with a campaign.  But Breitbart.com broke the news that Stephanie Cutter of the Obama campaign – the same Cutter who floated the ‘Romney is a felon’ canard – spoke with Soptic and coordinated his story, and the Democrats had even used him in a previous ad.  Cutter was quickly yanked from the Sunday ‘This Week’ slot in favor of David Axelrod who desperately danced around Stepanopoulos’ softball questions.

But to return to the original topic, I recommend Will’s article, as always, for his deft use of Occam’s Razor as well as his entertaining writing style.

Shooting Tragedies Exploit Military Stereotypes

Wade Michael Page, 40, has been identified as the lone murderer at the Sikh Temple shooting in Oak Creek, Wisconsin last Sunday.  A strong element in the reportage of this senseless tragedy is that Page was an Army veteran.  His identification in the news reports with the military is mentioned repeatedly and practically in the same breath with his name, yet the more telling aspect of his personality, that he was a neo-Nazi white supremacist, receives secondary billing.  This includes news reports from ABC, CBS, NBC, the New York Times, and the Washington Post.  Lakeshia Copeland of the Examiner.com site in Atlanta identifies him as an Army veteran in the headline and the first words of the nine-paragraph story, yet never speaks of the Nazi affiliation, despite a photo of him in Aryan regalia.  This afternoon, Shepard Smith of Fox News led the story identifying Page as an “Army veteran and neo-Nazi”.  The Huffington Post leads off its report about his veteran status but doesn't get to his "white supremacist and skinhead" affiliation until the middle of the post.

"Army veteran"

What exactly is it about Page’s Army enlistment that is so germane to the story?  He served from 1992 to 1998, beginning with boot camp at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, then a stint as a Hawk anti-aircraft missile system repairman at Fort Bliss, Texas, before his final assignment as a psychological operations specialist at Fort Bragg, North Carolina (essentially an administrative posting).  Nothing in his time in the Army involved combat training or support beyond the standard boot camp introductory experience.  He was never assigned overseas, much less to a combat area.  Page was finally discharged from the Army against his will with a General Discharge (less than an Honorable) due mainly to repeated cases of being drunk on duty and other unspecified infractions.  Yet somehow in the minds of the Commentariat, this connection with the Army is something that they cannot help but mention, and frequently, despite the fact that he left the Army fourteen years ago.

Consider also how the police started putting together information about Page, starting immediately after he was put down by responding officers.  The first clues they would see upon approaching his body would be the large, obvious, and numerous white supremacist tattoos.  The police were able to ascertain his name rather quickly, and a quick check of the internet would yield his association with his racist, heavy metal rock group, and thence to such neo-Nazi categories like Hammerfest, an annual white supremacist event, and such groups as Hammerskins and the National Alliance.  That is the information that would figure most prominently in the early phases of the investigation, and which holds the most promise for the warped motivation behind his killing spree, but the media nevertheless has to give his veteran status top billing.

I have written before about the persistent stereotype of the veteran within the popular culture, directly influenced by the media (here, for example, and here most recently).  Reporting on the recent shooting in Aurora was abuzz with speculation about whether the shooter was a veteran, and after that was discredited, the stories continued to comment on the fact that the shooter was not a veteran, constantly repeating the idea that it was reasonable, even expected, that there must be some military connection.  This is not a perception that is based in reality, even though by the luck of the statistical draw, a vet will turn up from time to time, but for other reasons.  Let us examine some of the more celebrated examples: 

• James Holmes, Cinemark massacre, Aurora, Colorado, 2012 – not a veteran
• Adam Lanza, Sandy Hook school shooting, Connecticut, 2012 – not a veteran 
• Jared Lee Loughner, mall shooting, Tucson, 2011 – not a veteran
• Michael McLendon, Geneva County, Alabama shooting spree, 2009 – not a veteran
• Carlos Bledsoe (aka A M Muhammed), Little Rock recruiting station, 2009 – not a veteran
• Seung-Hui Cho, Virginia Tech massacre, 2007 – not a veteran
• Matthew Murray, church shootings, Arvada & Colorado Springs, 2007 – not a veteran
• Charles Carl Roberts, Nickel Mines Amish school massacre, 2006 – not a veteran
• Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, Columbine massacre, Littleton, Colorado, 1999 – not veterans
• Colin Ferguson, Long Island Railroad shooting spree, 1993 – not a veteran
• George Hennard, Luby’s Cafeteria massacre, Killeen, Texas, 1991 – not a veteran
• James Edward Pough, GM offices, Jacksonville, Florida, 1990 – not a veteran
• Ramon Salcido, killing spree in Sonoma County, California, 1989 – not a veteran
• David Burke, shooting and crash of PSA Flight 1771, 1987 – not a veteran 
• Pat Sherrill, Post Office shootings, Edmond, Oklahoma, 1986 – not a veteran
• James Huberty, McDonald’s massacre, San Ysidro, California, 1984 – not a veteran

You have undoubtedly heard the phrase "going postal", associated with the rash of shootings involving postal employees starting in the early 1980s.  Here is how that stacks up in regard to military service: 

• Perry Smith, Johnston, South Carolina, 1983 – not a veteran
• James Brooks, Anniston, Alabama, 1983 – not a veteran
• Steven Brownlee, Atlanta, Georgia, 1985 – not a veteran
• Warren Murphy, New Orleans, 1988 – not a veteran
• John Merlin Taylor, Escondido, California, 1989 – not a veteran
• Joseph Harris, Ridgewood, New Jersey, 1991 – Navy 1974-1977, electrical repair
• Thomas McIlvane, Royal Oak, Michigan, 1991 – former Marine, dishonorable discharge
• Larry Jasion, Dearborn, 1993 – Army 1967-1969, unfit for service, demoted twice
• Mark Hilbun, Dana Point, California, 1993 – Air Force radar tech
• Bruce Clark, City of Industry, California, 1995 – not a veteran
• Charles Jennings, Las Vegas, 1996 – not a veteran
• Jesus Antonio Tamayo, Miami Beach, 1997 – not a veteran
• Jennifer San Marco, Goleta, California, 2006 – not a veteran
• Grant Gallaher, Baker City, Oregon, 2006 – not a veteran
• Kevin Julius Tartt, San Francisco, 2006 – not a veteran 

True, there are cases that involve a military background:

• Nidal Hasan, Fort Hood massacre, Killeen, Texas, 2009 – Army Psychiatrist, not associated with combat duty, never deployed
• Itzcoatl Ocampo, Santa Ana, California, 2012 – Marine, psychiatric derangement prior to enlistment, Iraq War veteran
• Abel Gutierrez, Gilroy, California, 2012 – Army, apparent PTSD, Iraq War veteran
• John Allen Muhammed, mentor in the Beltway Sniper attacks, 2002 – National Guard 1978-1986, Army 1986-1994, Engineers – mechanic and water truck driver, discharged after 17 years, short of retirement, more focused on al Qaeda than his failed military career
• Richard Farley, ESL Inc. shooting, Sunnyvale, California, 1988 – Navy computer tech

And this admittedly does not detract from the most celebrated case of a veteran involved with mass murder: Timothy McVeigh of the Murrah Federal Building bombing in Oklahoma City in 1995.  McVeigh was a veteran of the First Gulf War but was disqualified from entry into Special Forces training due to his Psyc Eval.

But how many cases are balanced by veterans saving lives?  That is data that cannot be accumulated to its full extent, often in the same category of trying to prove a negative.  But one such example was at Appalachian State University in 2002, when Peter Odighizuwa (not a veteran) started a shooting spree but was subdued by three veterans, some of whom had to retrieve their personal handguns from their parked cars. 

Another is the case of Luke Woodham (not a veteran) in a shooting spree at Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi in 1997, who killed two and injured seven, but was subdued by Assisstant Principal Joel Myrick (Army Reserve) who had to run to his car and remove his .45-calibre pistol, unlock a case with ammunition, load the pistol (all in accordance with the law), and run back into the school while Woodham was shooting his victims.  Woodham was subdued but later confessed that he was en route to the nearby Pearl Junior High School to kill more victims before Myrick ran him down and put his pistol to his head to stop him.

Is the media so blind to their own faults that they simply cannot recognize their own (shall we say it?) bigoted attitude about the military?

*****

Update:  The military satire site Duffel Blog recognizes the same problem.

Graphics are already being distributed across the AP Newswire of his boot camp photo from 20 years ago for use in tonight’s stories – with the caption “Solder’s Extremely Delayed PTSD Results In Domestic Terrorism.”

Read the whole thing.

Terrorist Ali Mussa Daqduq, Murderer of 5 US Troops, Ordered Released by Iraqi Court

Hezbollah commander Ali Mussa Daqduq is a Lebanese jihadi who was captured and held in Iraq after a 2007 attack in Karbala and the killings of five American troops, four of whom were captured, tortured, and executed.  As such, Daqduq is considered a “top threat to American troops in the Middle East”, and the US has requested his extradition from Iraq.

Ali Mussa Daqduq

Daqduq was a star member of Hezbollah in Lebanon, rising quickly through the ranks and eventually responsible for the personal security of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrullah.  He was later sent to Iran, Hezbollah’s sponsor, to train Iraqi Shiite “special groups” of 20 to 60 in Hezbollah-style tactics and structure, as part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps – al Quds [Jerusalem] Force.  From there he went to Iraq on at least four occasions to monitor and mentor the groups fighting the Iraqi government and the Americans through the IRGC-QF group Asaib Ahl al-Haq (AAH) lead by Qais al-Khazali.  On the last occasion in January 2007, Daqduq orchestrated the infiltration and attack on the Karbala Provincial Joint Coordination Center during a meeting between US and Iraqi officials, which resulted in the deaths of the five Americans and wounding of three others.  Evidence found at the site led to the capture of Khazali, his brother Laith, and Daqduq by US forces by the following March. 

When captured, Daqduq had numerous documents and a journal that showed his active participation in AAH and other extremist groups, and he subsequently freely confessed to the murders of the five US troops while in US custody.

In March 2009, negotiations began between the Iraqi government of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and AAH with an aim to bring the group into the internal Iraqi political process.  The discussions included a release of hostages under AAH control in exchange for AAH leaders then in US custody.  Within the next months, both Khazali brothers were transferred by the Americans to the Iraqis, and subsequently released by January 2010, leaving only Daqduq.  Shortly thereafter, news reports from Lebanon indicate that a delegation of Hezbollah met with Iraqi officials to discuss the release of Daqduq.

Having seen the Khazali brothers released, a group of twenty-one senators drafted a letter to the Obama administration urging it to transfer Daqduq to Guantánamo or another third-country ally with US detention facilities before 31 December 2011, before the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement took effect. 

Failure to transfer Daqduq to Guantanamo Bay or another American military-controlled detention facility outside the United States before December 31st will result in his transfer to Iraqi authorities, potential release to Iran and eventual return to the battlefield.  Daqduq's Iranian paymasters would like nothing more than to see him transferred to Iraqi custody where they could effectively pressure for his escape or release.  We truly hope you will not let that happen.

But before the letter could be completed and sent, the US turned Daqduq over to the Iraqis on 16 December.  Charges against Daqduq were not preferred by US military prosecutors until after his transfer to Iraqi custody.  But the chance for our prosecution has been blocked by Iraq.

The subsequent trial for Daqduq by the Iraqi courts ruled that the evidence against him, including his confession, was inadmissible since it was obtained by US forces and not an Iraqi investigating judge, in accordance with Iraqi law.  Daqduq claimed at trial that he had nothing to do with the crimes, and he was acquitted for lack of evidence in June.  An appeal by US sources, including calls from Vice President Joe Biden to al-Maliki, to at least extradite him to US custody for prosecution here, have been useless.  The case was reviewed on appeal by the US government, but the judgment of 30 July yielded the same result, from the three-judge Iraqi panel: 

It is not possible to hand him over because the charges were dropped in the same case.  Therefore, the court decided to reject the request to hand over the Lebanese defendant Ali Mussa Daqduq to the U.S. judiciary authorities, and to release him immediately. 

The Obama administration has scrambled to put a better face on the decision, according to an internal National Security Council talking points memo: 

Daqduq should be held accountable for his crimes.  Period.  While we strongly oppose his acquittal, protections for the accused are built into all judicial systems, including our own.  We transferred Daqduq to Iraqi custody out of respect for, and obligation to, the rule of law in Iraq, and while we disagree with this decision, we respect the independence of the Iraqi judiciary.  We will continue to work closely with the Iraqi government to explore all legal options to pursue justice in this case.

The memo goes on to blow smoke by praising the Iraqis for handling the case, and trying to show that they are not beholden to the Iranians: 

Our Iraqi partners worked to ensure that he was brought to trial and that the strongest case possible was brought against him, despite Iranian pressure for his immediate release without trial.  Iraq has already kept Daqduq in custody for more than four months [four whole months!], despite predictions by many that he would be released far earlier. 

Why wasn’t Daqduq, being such an important prisoner, sent to Guantánamo earlier, particularly when we saw how easily al-Maliki rolled over on the Khazali brothers?  Remember that the very first public directive of Obama upon taking office (along with the famous quote of “I won”) was that Guantánamo would be closed, because of the Left’s declaration that it was their bête noire, what they claimed was a notorious den of torture and a rallying point to recruit terrorists ‘militants’ to the cause of Jihad against America (without explaining where all those militants came from beforehand).  The US could have retained Daqduq due to his notoriety, particularly after we saw how the repatriation process in Iraq was going, but that would require an acknowledgement by the administration that Guantánamo served its purpose.  Alana Goodman of Commentary put it clearly: 

The Obama administration would argue that this isn’t their fault, that the Status of Forces Agreement required them to hand Daqduq over to the Iraqis when they pulled out.  But that’s a cop out.  The administration could have informed the Iraqis that, with all due respect, some prisoners are so reprehensible that they are simply not up for negotiation.  They could have brought Daqduq to justice when they had the chance.  Instead, they rolled the dice on the Iraqi court system, and lost – and the world may be less safe now because of it. 

The response from Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) was more direct: 

The Administration had years to transfer Daqduq to our detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, but because the President seemed to lack the political will to do so – I think because of campaign promises he improvidently made – one of the most dangerous, reprehensible terrorists ever in our custody will likely be allowed to go free.  We should never have been in this position. 

I and others saw this coming and we pleaded with the Administration not to allow it to happen.  Sadly, our warnings fell on deaf ears and, sadly, we were proven correct. …

This policy cannot be defended.  It has to end.  So I urge the President and his team to act forcefully now.  It may not be too late.  With strong action we may be able to ensure that Daqduq is not released, that he is able to be tried for the murders he committed and the American soldiers he killed. 

Daqduq’s lawyer, Abdul Mahdi al-Mitairi, states that Daqduq is still under house arrest in the Green Zone of Baghdad, even though the decision by the two courts should result in an immediate release: 

The political pressure from the American side has prevented Daqduq’s release.  He has not been released yet because the Iraqi government seeks U.S. support and it doesn’t want to embarrass Obama ahead of the elections.

A spokesman for the Iraqi Supreme Court, though, states that the ruling is definitive and final.

(H/T to Elizabeth O'Bagy, Stephen Wicken, and Ramzy Mardini at the Institute for the Study of War)

Media Coup: Mitt Romney Transcripts

Breathtaking. 

The Boston Globe is on it.  Their crack investigative reporters have somehow managed to track down the high school report card for Mitt Romney.  That’s his freshman high school report card.  And just to make sure that everyone understands it in its entirety, there is a photo copy of it. 

The main scandal here is that when Mitt was 15 years old, he received a grade of C in Beginning French.  (Yet somehow … he now manages to speak fluent French.)  And not one A – in any subject.  But in every course, across the board, every teacher left comments that he could have done better.  He didn’t seem to have an aptitude for genetics either; perhaps it’s that Mormon thing about genealogy.

Could do better in French

Perhaps the reporters for the Globe used the same down-in-the-trenches investigative technique that resulted in Governor Rick Perry’s transcripts from Texas A&M being published the day after he announced for the presidential nomination last July.  It wasn’t that it was big news – Rick had already told the world that he had been a C student in college; in fact, was rather bemused about it.  I suppose that being the governor of Texas for ten years was some sort of consolation prize. 

This same attitude fueled the criticism (among others) of George W Bush being a C student in college (again, self-admitted).  This was part of the meme that he just wasn’t up to par with the likes of those nuanced and intellectual people like Al Gore and John Kerry.  It would have been doubly amusing years later, had anyone publicized the news to even a minor fraction of the degree that this story got play, when we found that both Gore and Kerry had worse grades than Bush. 

Of course, the real story is that the MSM can dig up freshman high school transcripts from 51 years ago on Romney, but this hard-hitting investigative journalism somehow gives a complete pass to Obama on practically everything, including transcripts from three different colleges, anything related to how he entered and transferred among colleges, and his college thesis.  He managed to write not one but two autobiographies before he ran for president (a rather elevated opinion of himself, being an Illinois state senator) and both are coming under increasing literary investigation and criticism (such as who actually wrote one), but anyone trying to bring this to national attention continues to be just one among so many voices crying in the wilderness. 

I’m not much of a conspiracy buff – I think the whole birth certificate thing is a waste of time when many other, more substantive criticisms should be pursued against Obama.  But he was elected President and we have to deal with that now.  The other important questions can be dealt with afterward, over and above why such information is kept under lock and key. 

The riposte from the other side is that Romney should release even more of his tax history, based on Harry Reid's accusations from "unimpeachable" but secret sources (i.e., no evidence whatsoever).  And yes, both Obama and Biden have more on the table in this regard, including (again with hardly a peep from the MSM) how incredibly parsimonious they have been in regards to donations to charity. 

Just how long will the media pursue like ravening wolves those documents of conservative challengers but ignore the mysteries of their own?

*****
Update:  And while we're talking about Mitt Romney's tax returns, where are Harry Reid's?  Where did he get so much money?

Romney's Tour of Europe a Success

Mitt Romney has returned from his tour of Europe, and is shrugging off the US press dogging him for what it characterizes as a series of gaffes.  The accusations were repeated almost daily in headlines and editorials in the MSM, and recently by reporters screaming at him in Pilsudski Square in Warsaw during his visit to the Polish Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.  I confess to being somewhat perplexed at the steady kettle drumbeat (‘confined to a few points, and repeated over and over’) about what serious mistakes that Romney supposedly made.  What are these? 

United Kingdom 

The first instance was during Romney’s interview with NBC’s Brian Williams in London, after Williams asked him about the chance of success of the London Olympics.  Romney, having run his own Olympics in 2004, was uniquely qualified to comment and he candidly replied that it was “hard to tell” (he is like other sane people in that he doesn’t claim omniscience), that there is “disconcerting” news about the failure of the British Olympic private security firm and threats of a strike by immigration and customs officials, but there are “great volunteers” and the answer about the Games will come from the British people.  The British press, which is oddly so opposite of the stereotypical stoic British attitude, lambasted him, gleefully reproduced by the American press.  But Romney said nothing that wasn’t already widely proclaimed – almost word for word – by the British press themselves, and expressed the likelihood (somewhat ambiguously if one only relies on a printed transcript) that the British people would come through.  What did he say that was so wrong?  Some would want him to be more diplomatic, but his candor is rather refreshing in comparison to the claim of transparency by the Obama White House. 

Not so widely reported was the exchange when Williams droningly asked Romney about whether he was looking to choose an “incredibly boring white guy” for his vice presidential running mate.  Romney smilingly shot back to Williams, “You told me you weren’t available.”  What partly makes this so funny is that it’s true.  As far as I’m concerned, Brian Williams henceforth will always be the incredibly boring white guy. 

Romney also later stated that he had spoken with the director of the UK’s MI6, the equivalent to the CIA.  Faithful readers will know that security is an important consideration to me, so that could be placed into the category of an unforced foul, but it was already widely reported the year before that Romney had spoken with MI6 and MI5 (akin to the FBI) and Olympic officials to discuss security matters about their upcoming Olympics.  Would this be news – briefing an American presidential candidate?  Not likely, but best left unsaid.

Romney and Prime Minister David Cameron

Remember also that the news about Romney in Britain was loudly proclaimed against the background of the White House denying that the bust of Sir Winston Churchill, on loan to the White House since 9/11 to symbolize our special relationship, particularly during wartime, was returned by Obama, despite the British offer that he could continue to display it in the Oval Office.  The administration spokesman said that the story was a false and malicious political jab, that the bust was still in the residence portion of the White House.  The White House had previously ignored the story of the returned bust (with the help of the press) to the point that the press considered it a non-story, but now (talk about an unforced foul) they themselves opened up the story and were embarrassed to find that there were two busts (the one in the residence being a much earlier gift) and that the bust in question – as reported by the British Embassy – had indeed been returned.  (During the administration’s high dudgeon, it strongly criticized Dr Charles Krauthammer for bringing it up again.  When they were found to be demonstrably in error, a spokesman apologized.  Krauthammer responded graciously, but quipped that he was “the only entity on earth, other than rouge states, that has received an apology from this White House.”) 

Israel 

The media’s gaffe meme followed Romney to his next stop in Israel, where he enjoyed a pleasant time with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as the two have been friends since they worked together in New York in 1976.  But here the press jumped on Romney’s remarks that Israel has seen such enormous success because of its culture.  The Palestinians immediately accused Romney of racism for pointing this out, and the New York Times claimed that the Palestinian economy was oppressed by the Israelis.  But Romney did not address the Palestinian side of the cultural question, although, as Charles Krauthammer very effectively points out, no less than the United Nations has.  Marc Thiessen, writing a column in the Washington Post, provides ample sources to back up Romney’s conclusions on the part of Israel, and the failures of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas in Gaza.

Romney and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Israel has suffered from the abandonment by Obama in order to curry favor with the Palestinians.  His remarks about returning to the pre-1967 borders, only hours before the visit of Netanyahu to Washington last year, were breathtaking in their contemptuous audacity, and Netanyahu’s  reaction to Obama in the Oval Office was practically palpable in its sense of restrained anger. 

Poland 

Romney’s stop in Poland was probably his most successful, receiving an endorsement from the famous Lech Walesa, one of the major players in winning the Cold War and freeing Poland from the Soviets through the Solidarity movement that he led.  (One doesn't typically receive endorsements from foreign leaders.  Obama will have to be content in the meantime with an endorsement from Hugo Chavez.)  But first, some background: Poland enjoyed a very close and mutually beneficial relationship with the United States during the terms of George W Bush, knowing that America ‘had its back’ in any showdown with the Russians, enthusiastically joining NATO in deliberately stark contrast to their enforced and subservient membership in the Soviet Warsaw Pact, and providing support and excellent troops to the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan.  But in the minds of many Poles, that relationship was shattered almost from the beginning of the Obama administration, when plans for a promised anti-missile radar station (to counter the threat of a potential Iranian missile) were abandoned (along with one in the Czech Republic) in order to placate the Russians, a concession to them for what amounted to nothing more than a photo op for the Obama ‘reset’ policy.  The Poles had expended an enormous amount of political capital to stand with the US government (under Bush) on this point against the reviled Russians, only to have the rug pulled out from under them.  Sending Joe Biden to placate them afterwards just added insult to injury.

Romney and wife Ann with former President Lech Walesa

Walesa is by now a former President of Poland (1990-1995) and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983 (back when it still meant something).  But Walesa was treated shabbily by some government figures after he left office – the next government, pledged like Walesa to move Poland to a more capitalist economy, was nevertheless composed principally of ex-Communists, like President Kwasniewski, and the relationship with the larger-than-life and contentious Walesa became strained – politics being the national sport of Poland.  (Solidarity, or Solidarność as it is known in Poland, while conservative, is nevertheless a labor union and was told by the AFL-CIO to reject the Romney visit.  No, seriously, that's exactly what they said.)  Walesa is nevertheless important to many within Poland and is a historical figure world-wide for his role in the demise of the Soviet empire.  (I was privileged to have met Walesa in 1998 when he received an honorary degree from Sam Houston State University.  He is far and away one of the most charismatic people I have ever met.) 

With that in mind, consider that when Obama swept through Poland on his European tour last year, he declined a visit to Walesa in his hometown of Gdansk, which was customary for visiting dignitaries.  Instead, Obama wanted Walesa to join with a group of other Polish figures and come to Warsaw for a meeting that would be more convenient to the American political rock star.  Imagine if a foreign leader came to America, say Putin for example, and he expected Bill Clinton to join in with a congressional delegation to visit him in Chicago.  Or do you think that Obama, were he to visit South Africa, would pass up an opportunity to pay his respects to Nelson Mandela in Qunu, requiring instead that Mandela join a delegation of the ANC and come to Pretoria?  That shows a blithering ignorance of protocol, not to mention an inflated sense of his ego.  Walesa, rightfully, rejected the invitation in a way that only barely concealed his disgust. 

Within a few months, the Polish government wanted to send Walesa to Washington to receive a Presidential Medal of Freedom for the late Jan Karski, hero of the Polish resistance against the Nazis.  The administration refused, saying that Walesa was “too political”.  Perhaps it ended up being a wise choice – it was during this ceremony that Obama referred to “Polish death camps” in World War II, and the Polish government reacted angrily, with the Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski accusing the Obama White House of being “ignorant and incompetent”.  While this may seem a minor semantic distinction – there were Nazi death camps in Poland – the Poles are extremely sensitive about this and insist that the reference is precise.  One would think that a group so dedicated to Political Correctness (imagine the exploding heads if a Polish diplomat referred to Obama as ‘mulatto’) would at least have the presence of mind to run the remarks past the Polish embassy.  (Imagine also, if Walesa had been on stage for the remarks.…)  Obama ended up having to send a letter of apology to the Polish government.  The MSM, once it catches its collective breath from yelling about Romney’s gaffes, characterizes this as Obama having “misspoke”.

Walesa remains an independent political force within Poland (some officials certainly are at a loss about what to do with him) but he commands an important following at home and abroad.  To him, the choice about the future American administration is stark, and he has no qualms whatsoever about the obvious choice.  An endorsement from a former foreign leader clearly ruffles some feathers, but he frankly doesn’t care.  In fact, I expect that he relishes it.

Romney has played his cards well, whether or not the MSM wants to admit it, or even consider it.  His visits to these three key allies, all politically betrayed by Obama, and his declaration of clear solidarity with them, will reap benefits far beyond the fact that it was simply the right thing to do.