I just checked this to be sure, and "AfPak" definitely stands for Afghanistan and Pakistan. It's the region in which we're currently engaged in a hot war that we're desperately trying not to lose. So - at least in theory - alienating the leaders of both Afghanistan and Pakistan would be one of those geopolitical blunders that we've been assured were hallmarks of the Bush administration. Smart...

Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai questioned the reliability of the United States as a partner Sunday, as he fought off criticism of his government's legitimacy following fraud-marred elections... underscoring the political headache that Washington faces if Karzai wins a run-off against Abdullah next month, Karzai pointed the finger at the United States in a separate, pre-recorded CNN interview. "Is the United States a reliable partner with Afghanistan? Is the West a reliable partner with Afghanistan?" Karzai asked... The comments appeared to allude to Karzai's longstanding criticism of civilian deaths in US air strikes, and to President Barack Obama's still unresolved review of US strategy and his commander's request for up to 40,000 more US troops.

... power:

In Lahore, Pakistan, today Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered a blunt message to six prominent Pakistani newspaper editors. Asked by Asha'ar Rehman, an editor of Dawn, why the US war on terror is so localized to Pakistan, Clinton did not mince words. "Al-Qaeda has had safe haven in Pakistan since 2002," she said. "I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to... there are issues that not just the United States but others have with your government and with your military security establishment.''

Which is not to say that Clinton was wrong to be concerned about everything from Pakistan's internal stability to the reliability of their security forces. Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is most definitely not secure. And it's no secret that the ISI has some gentlemen who are disinclined to view the West favorably. When Pakistan finally becomes a failed state - and ignoring the geopolitical situation its economic freefall will ensure that it does - things are going to get real dicey real fast.

But Clinton's job as a diplomat is to express those concerns in a way that doesn't cause potentially irreparable rifts with countries we rely on for military victory. Though she did find the time to blame it all on Bush! So at least there was that.

There's a much broader discussion to be had about the sheer self-absorbed gullibility of liberal foreign policy experts. They've spent the last 7 or 8 years in conferences at Geneva and Doha, and they actually belied the cocktail party chatter about how things would be copacetic if only Bush was out of office. "Emir so and so, don't you think that President Bush is destroying the US's credibility in the Arab and Muslim world?" "Certainly Madam such and such, Islam would totally abandon its thousand year ebb-and-flow intrusions into the West if the US had a 3 point electoral shift."

Morons.

References and related after the jump...

Each week, the members of the Watchers Council nominate one of their own posts and a second from outside the Council for consideration by other council members in a contest for the week's best post. My submissions for this week are roughly "liberals always support the war we're not in" and "liberal American Jews always support Israeli self-defense except when Israel actually tries to defend itself." It's almsot like they're being insincere.

I think I've already locked down my favorites for the week, though I'm still in the air about my non-Council picks. Feel free to sound off which ones you would chose under the Mere Rhetoric Facebook page under this post.

In the meantime, make sure you check out the most current post on the Watchers site. TV stations won't show a picture of Muhammad delivering a pizza, but peeing on Jesus is oh so risque. Dumb.

Council Submissions
* Mere Rhetoric - Lefty Meme Congeals: The Real War Is In Pakistan Not Afghanistan
* Joshuapundit - J Street - A Particularly Nasty Dead End To Be Avoided
* Bookworm Room The march of the thought police
* The Provocateur - My Interview with Wade Rathke
* The Glittering Eye - Are We Promoting Our Grand Strategy?
* Rhymes With Right - And To Think The Average Income Of American Families Dropped By 3.6%
* Right Truth - - Overwhelmed by current situation in America and the world

Council Submissions
* Submitted By: The Watcher - Dismantling America - Thomas Sowell at Real Clear Politics
* Submitted By: The Watcher - Riehl World View - Exclusive: How The NRCC Bungled NY - 23
* Submitted By: Mere Rhetoric - Pajamas Media - Showdown on J Street
* Submitted By: Joshuapundit - The Augean Stables - Investigate the investigators: A time to rebuke Goldstone
* Submitted By: Bookworm Room - GM's Place - Splitting: Fox News and the White House
* Submitted By: The Provocateur - Mercury News - Racial Skirmishes in our Own House
* Submitted By: The Glittering Eye - Daniel W. Drezner - Theory of International Politics and Zombies
* Submitted By: Rhymes With Right - JammieWearingFool - Why Is GE Exempt From Government-Ordered Pay Cuts?
* Submitted By: Right Truth - The Tygrrrr Express - Why not just kill all conservatives?

References and related after the jump...

But this time they pinky swear they'll be enthusiastic about supporting any US war effort. Not like when they promised to support "the necessary war" in Afghanistan if only we would abandon Iraq. For realsies this time.

This FP post from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace fellow David Rothkopf, subtly titled "Afghanistan is just not that important", is the second appearance in a week for this nuanced position. It includes the querulous insistence that Obama shouldn't be tied down by his over-the-top campaign posing, where he obnoxiously lectured Republicans about military priorities. Because why should Democrats have to run on what they actually intend to do? If they did that they might never get elected.

Of course changing circumstances require changing tactics, and if the left was making that argument it'd be a different debate. But that's not the argument they're making. They're not saying the Taliban or Al Qaeda have become less "the people who attacked us on 9/11," which was one of the left's tropes ad nauseam during the campaign. Instead they're saying - explicitly - that Afghanistan's just not that important. Now it's true that Obama convinced the American people to trust him as Commander in Chief by saying the exact opposite. But the left didn't really believe him at the time - they know Democrats have to say moderate-sounding things to get elected, and they don't hold that against them - so what's the big deal if he flip-flops now?

Of course The One will need a sophisticated-sounding excuse. And right on cue, here's the matriarch of the nutroots herself. In this post she's advocating that Biden should resign as part of a principled stance against putting more troops in Afghanistan, a decision she insists "generations to come will always be grateful for." Technically true, but obviously not for the reasons she thinks. Anyway:

If Biden truly believes that what we're doing in Afghanistan is not in the best interests of our national security -- and what issue is more important than that? -- it's simply not enough to claim retroactive righteousness in his memoirs. Though it would be a crowning moment in a distinguished career, such an act of courage would likely be only the beginning. Biden would then become the natural leader of the movement to wind down this disastrous war and focus on the real dangers in Pakistan.

That same post also had Huffington comparing Biden to Socrates. Unironically. Because when I think "the most honest and wisest of all men," I think about a a serial liar who, having declared that we have to bankrupt the country to avoid bankrupting it, this week announced that we're in a depressing. This is a thinker of such geostrategic genius that he managed to get every single thing wrong on Iraq, voting for the war, voting against the surge, and in between proposing a 3-way partition plan of such incandescent stupidity that factions engaged in a genocidal civil war came together to oppose it. This is ostensibly our military Socrates, a modern day warrior-scholar.

So in addition to being reflexive appeasers who coat their whimpering pro-surrender histrionics with tough-sounding pseudo-sophistication, leftists also appear to be thoroughly serious people.

References and previously after the jump...

A counterpoint to today's new found Taliban-related sophistication, this comes from the second Obama/McCain debate and was and parcel of Obama's empty blustering about going hardline on Pakistan if they didn't crack down on militants. After the inauguration Karzai had to intervene and tell our nuance-filled international celebrity to "settle down" and use "better judgment," lest he find himself without even erstwhile allies in Central Asia.

Bonus: this is the same answer where Obama talked about sending more troops to Afghanistan and linked AfPak instability to resources diverted into Iraq. I cropped out the the resources part because I'm not sure why he made the claim, given that he started running from it even during the primaries. The "more troops" promise is a bit more timely given how he's barely clinging to "keep troop numbers stable" these days. He was on quite the roll that night, wasn't he?

They are plotting to kill Americans right now. As Secretary Gates, the defense secretary, said, the war against terrorism began in that region and that's where it will end. So part of the reason I think it's so important for us to end the war in Iraq is to be able to get more troops into Afghanistan, put more pressure on the Afghan government to do what it needs to do, eliminate some of the drug trafficking that's funding terrorism. But I do believe that we have to change our policies with Pakistan. We can't coddle, as we did, a dictator, give him billions of dollars and then he's making peace treaties with the Taliban and militants. What I've said is we're going to encourage democracy in Pakistan, expand our nonmilitary aid to Pakistan so that they have more of a stake in working with us, but insisting that they go after these militants.

And if you want to know why CBS's Lora Logan was so emphatic about tearing into the WH's moronic pronouncements today, here's Obama during the campaign bloviating to her about what a grim anti-Pakistani realist he is. Yes, of course the word "I" was prominently featured:

Hot Air has the substantive critique of the WH's discovery that the Taliban aren't really our enemy. It's also worth noting that Obama's been peddling similar-but-not-identical nonsense for a while - CT Blog was already ripping our super-keen CiC's myth of two Talibans back in March.

And isn't it interesting how administration officials have now become literal mouthpieces for Taliban propaganda. I saw this Taliban statement in the wires yesterday and wanted to blog it with a line like "how long before this gets picked up as the new sophisticated liberal read on the AfPak theater?" Good thing for you guys I didn't get to it. Can you imagine how insufferable I'd be right now?

Afghanistan's insurgent Taliban marked the eighth anniversary of the U.S. invasion Wednesday saying they have no "agenda" to harm other countries but would continue fighting as long as America and its allies remain in the troubled nation. The Taliban insistence that it would pose no threat to other countries appeared aimed at countering suspicions that the Islamist movement would support al-Qaida's global jihad if they returned to power. Supporters of the war fear that al-Qaida would regain its once-dominant position in Afghanistan if the Taliban topple the U.S.-backed Afghan government.

In an Internet statement Wednesday obtained by the SITE Institute, a U.S. group that monitors terror messages, the Taliban said their goal was "independence and establishment of an Islamic system. We did not have any agenda to harm other countries including Europe, nor we have such agenda today," the group said. "Still, if you want to turn the country of the proud and pious Afghans into a colony, then know that we have an unwavering determination and have braced for a prolonged war."

First, Europe isn't a country, regardless of what Obama said during the primaries. More importantly, I'm trying to square yesterday's wide-eyed claim of innocence with previous Taliban threats to destroy Paris, but I'm coming up short. Maybe someone in the administration can untangle it for me.

References:
* New White House spin: Taliban not really an enemy, has role in Afghanistan's future [Hot Air]
* The Myth of the Two Talibans [CT Blog]
* Taliban say they're no threat to other countries [MSNBC]
* NO WONDER THEY'RE AFRAID OF BRIT HUME [Ann Coulter]
* Taliban says maybe we won't always have Paris [Jihad Watch]

Previously:
* AfPak [MR]
* Obama Vs. Obama On Victory In Afghanistan
* AfPak | Mere Rhetoric

Well it only makes sense. Now that Pakistan's back to ramping up their nuke production and building brand new nuclear facilities, they probably need the advice of a guy like Khan.

Of course it's an symbolic and potentially tactical disaster from our point of view. But since Obama's smart power has given us leverage over states like Pakistan - cf. Jim Jones's hosannas from yesterday about how The One's "radically different" approach to foreign policy has increased global cooperation and decreased terrorism - this will probably get cleared up in no time:

Disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who has admitted leaking nuclear secrets to Iran, North Korea and Libya, said Tuesday restrictions on his movements had been lifted. Asked if local newspaper reports that the government restrictions had been removed were correct, Khan told AFP: "By the grace of Allah, yes." In February, a Pakistani court declared Khan a free man, five years after the reputed father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb was effectively put under house arrest for operating a proliferation network... The United States in February had expressed concern that Khan's release could lead to renewed nuclear proliferation.

Then again we also criticized Pakistan over Khan's initial release back in February, and that didn't help. Though in fairness our pushback fell somewhat short of strident:

At today's press briefing, this was Robert Gibbs' response to a question about whether Barack Obama is concerned about the release of nuclear black marketeer A.Q. Khan: "Uh, obviously we've seen the reports of the release, but have not received, uh, have yet to receive official word, uh, from the government. Uh. Obviously this President has made clear, uh, many times, the great concern he has for nuclear proliferation, uh, and, uh, as we hear from the government about, uh, these reports, uh, obviously, uh, the President, uh, and this government want assurances that, uh, that Dr. Khan is not involved or engaged in, uh, any of the activity, uh, uh, that resulted in, uh, in, in his house arrest earlier."

I'm sure this time it'll be different.

References and previously after the jump...

Happy Wednesday!

U.S. President Barack Obama has started reaching out to some of Pakistan's most fervent Islamist and anti-American parties, including one that helped give rise to the Taliban, trying to improve Washington's image in the nuclear-armed state. Obama's special envoy, Richard Holbrooke, is initiating dialogue between the United States and religious parties previous administrations had largely shunned, both sides said. "The purpose is to broaden the base of American relations in Pakistan beyond the relatively narrow circle of leaders Washington has previously dealt with," explained Vali Nasr, senior adviser to Holbrooke.

I'd love to know the paper trail behind this stroke of sophistication. Do you think that it originated in one of those roundtables that State occasionally organizes, where academics earn their consulting fees by spinning outlandish pro-diplomacy scenarios (top prize: a guaranteed invitation to the next roundtable!) Or did State's South Asia people just skip the formalities and conclude that (a) engaging people ideologically committed to our destruction is good and (b) Pakistani Islamists are really, really ideologically committed to destroying us so (c) engaging Pakistani Islamists must be super-good?

I wonder if we'll ask them about how radical Pakistani clerics are urging kids to spread Islam violently because "the tree of Islam was irrigated with the blood of martyrs?" Or about Pakistani intelligence, increasingly controlled by their side of the political spectrum, is outing US intelligence officials to Al Qaeda? Or about how Pakistani officials willfully destroyed a Christian graveyard to make room for a shopping mall? Or about how rampaging Pakistani mobs have taken to snatching up Christian women and children and openly torturing them? Or about how hardline Pakistani officials forced the government to free AQ Khan? Or about how the rape of Christian girls in the context of persecuting non-Muslims is now a thing?

I'm thinking we'll gloss over most of that and go straight to explaining all the reasons they should give us a second look. Because that's the problem - they just don't understand us enough.

References and previously after the jump...

UPDATE (1:45am PST): Last one for the night. @AtiaAbawi:

ISAF let journos film some 100 meters at scene. CNN will try to get you more images as the day progresses...so far 4 killed, 91 injured.

UPDATE (11:48pm PST): @Hairan:

6 killed and 75 wounded in Kabul attack, confirmed health ministry

UPDATE (11:45pm PST): Given their total failure to penetrate the embassy, you'd think they'd be a little more reticent in their braggadocio. Not so much. @pajhwok:

Taliban spokesman: 'attacker resident of Bagrami district in #Kabul, we put 500 kg explosives in this car'

UPDATE (11:35pm PST): They got mostly civilians and kids. Well done filthbags. @W7VOA:

US Embassy spokesperson in Kabul tells VOA News no damage to compound nor to any Embassy personnel from car bomb blast nearby.

UPDATE (11:20pm PST): AFP says 3 dead, which lines up with what @W7VOA - VOA South Asia - is saying about minimal casualties. That said, the number of injured is creeping toward three digits.

UPDATE (11:15pm PST): @W7VOA:

Reuters: Taliban claim responsibility for Kabul blast, say target was US Embassy. (If that's so, they missed but managed to maim some kids)... Injury toll from Kabul blast outside NATO ISAF HQ climbing. But only few fatalities confirmed... Taliban claim in phone call to AP that Kabul car bomb contained 500kg of explosives.

UPDATE (11:05pm PST): @AFGMatters:

Blast was in front of transportation ministry - I think this is between HQ ISAF and US Embassy - difficult to get in there!

UPDATE (11:00pm PST): Good lord. @AtiaAbawi:

So far at least 55 injured at ONE hospital according to source. Working on more info.

UPDATE (10:15pm PST): @jimsciuttoABC:

Explosion was huge, felt it more than a mile away. This is first attack inside capital in months. It's a blow to security svces who had covered Kabul in checkpoints, security forces.

UPDATE (10:13pm PST): @BreakingNews:

AFP: Afghan Ministry of Defense confirms 3 dead, 14 injured after the suicide car bombing near NATO headquarters in Kabul.

UPDATE (9:45pm PST): CNN has it but naturally without anything useful.

UPDATE (9:42pm PST): @BreakingNews:

AP: Defense ministry spokesman says blast in Afghan capital was suicide car bomb.

ORIGINAL: I saw it through Twitter first but now AP has it:

A huge blast has echoed through the Afghan capital. A plume of smoke was rising Saturday morning in the direction of the U.S. embassy in Kabul. There was no immediate word on casualties. The explosion comes less than a week before the country holds elections for president and provincial councils.

There should be some rally-round-the-flag rhetoric from the right when the East Coast wakes up, followed by the President's "deep outrage," followed by a few hours of stomach-sinking dread in response to conciliatory White House statements, followed by comparisons to Mogadishu and the way it emboldened OBL, followed by a weekend's worth worth of MSM "Obama is so careful and sophisticated" agitprop.

Or Obama might respond with the wrath of the Almighty Himself. That was in one of the West Wing episodes that Favreau et al are convinced they're living. So there's that.

References:
* Huge blast rocks Afghan capital [AP]

Previously:
* Watcher's Council Results: Obama's Afghanistan Is Going To Be A Disaster But No One Knows It. Or Anything Else.
* UN Afghan Envoy: Obama Should Negotiate With The Taliban. All Of Them.
* Obama Vs. Obama On Victory In Afghanistan

Results for this week's Watchers Council contest have been posted under the title "Cash for Clunkers Failure: How Long Until Obama Blames Bush?" Given the increasingly salient point that C4C quite literally destroys wealth, I'd say two weeks. Max:

Rarely do you encounter a wealth-destroying green measure that literally destroys wealth but this is an exception and therefore a sweet, sweet metaphor for Obamanomics. I think some people are under the impression that C4C is just a trade-in program, where the dealer gets to keep the buyer's old ride and sell it for parts or to a used-car dealer, etc. Not so. The whole point is to get fuel-inefficient vehicles off the road, which means the engines -- the most valuable part -- have to be destroyed. The Examiner's Bill Dupray is horrified at the sheer inefficiency of it all.

Between Congressional foot dragging on health care and Obama's moronic comments on Gates - the latter unpacked at length by Council runner up Joshuapundit - it wasn't the best week for the White House. Luckily for them they don't have much to worry about. As Council winner The Razor explained, they're just better at destroying the other side:

Yet another ethics complaint against Sarah Palin has been dismissed. The particular complaint filed by Anchorage resident Andree McLeod* alleged that Palin's acceptance of her governor's salary while running as McCain's VP candidate was illegal. McLeod's sixth (and final) complaint was filed a week before Palin's resignation and charged the governor with failure to disclose gifts in a timely manner. Palin cited the strain and cost of fighting these ethics complaints as some of the reasons behind her resignation.

The ethics charges against Palin displays the power of lawfare... the tactics used by the Left abetted by "Republican" (as late as 2002 McCleod listed herself as "non-partisan") Andree McCleod worked. Palin is out of office - at least temporarily, and her martyrdom at the hands of the leftist press stands as an example of what can befall other women who refuse to pursue power as anything but liberal Democrats.

The post ends by calling on conservatives to fight fire with fire. That's one idea. A different idea is to obsess about Obama's birth certificate. Per non-Council runner up Heretical Ideas, that's borderline incoherent. So naturally it's exactly what a nontrivial sub-section of the right is embracing. Because why not?

Certainly it's a much more important topic than how the Taliban smuggle opium out of Afghanistan, which non-Council winner Michael Yon painstakingly documented. Obviously his incredible photojournalism is much less compelling than enlarged, heavily pixelated scans of photocopies of old documents. So let's do that.

References and previously after the jump...

What a difference a year makes. Barack Obama, July 2008:

Contending that the U.S. is not pursuing a sound strategy for keeping Americans safe, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Tuesday that fighting al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan would be his top priority after ending the war in Iraq. "This is a war that we have to win," Obama said in remarks prepared for delivery at the International Trade Center in Washington...

"By any measure, our single-minded and open-ended focus on Iraq is not a sound strategy for keeping America safe," Obama said. "In fact -- as should have been apparent to President Bush and Sen. McCain -- the central front in the war on terror is not Iraq, and it never was."... "Sen. McCain said -- just months ago -- that Afghanistan is not in trouble because of our diversion to Iraq. I could not disagree more. Our troops and our NATO allies are performing heroically in Afghanistan, but I have argued for years that we lack the resources to finish the job because of our commitment to Iraq," Obama said.

Barack Obama, July 2009:

President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but "victory" in the war-torn country isn't necessarily the United States' goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview. "I'm always worried about using the word 'victory,' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur," Obama told ABC News.

One of the left's oh-so-nuanced defenses about Dear Leader's walk back has been that he was never talking about a military victory. Which is weird because it certainly seems like a call for a military victory, what with how he said we need more troops to "finish the job" in the "war that we have to win." That's certainly how it was interpreted by the Associated Press when they reported his speech under the headline "Obama says a victory is a must in the war in Afghanistan."

Ah well. The hard left has spent the last few years insisting that victory in Afghanistan is impossible. "The place where empires go to die," etc etc. Looks like they were right! Sorry America. If you wanted a guy who was serious about victory in Afghanistan - rather than a guy who was using it to deflect attention from his Iraq defeatism - you should have elected the candidate who published a "Comprehensive Strategy for Victory in Afghanistan."

References:
* Obama: We Have To Win In Afghanistan [Sweetness and Light]
* Obama: 'Victory' Not Necessarily Goal in Afghanistan [Fox News]
* Obama says a victory is a must in the war in Afghanistan

Previously:
* Politico: Obama "Takes Tough Stance On Iran" By Urging Engagement
* Obama Rushing To Reinstall Clinton-Era Counterterrorism Approach
* New Obama Guidelines Already Undermining Military By Chilling Qualified Hires

Smart move. The Obama administration is credulous enough to believe that Hezbollah will go away if Israel only gives up another eight square miles of territory. So why not take the chance and try to get the US to sell out another ally?

Pakistan's military has offered to play a broker between the US and the Taliban, but in return it wants concessions from Washington over Islamabad's concerns with India, according to CNN. Pakistan military spokesman Maj Gen Athar Abbas said in an interview with the news channel that Pakistan's military was not only in contact with Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar but that it can bring him and other commanders to the negotiating table with the US.

The acknowledgment of on-going communication with Taliban forces using sanctuary in Pakistan to launch military strikes against US troops in neighbouring Afghanistan is part of a new diplomatic overture to help the Obama administration find an end to the long-running conflict, CNN said. But Abbas told the channel that in return for any role as a broker between the US and the Taliban, Pakistan wants concessions from Washington over Islamabad's concerns with longtime rival India.

And scoreboard says...

CNN said senior US officials had told it that the Obama administration is willing both to talk to top Taliban leaders and to raise some of Pakistan's concerns with India.

Of course they'll willing. This administration has yet to meet an Arab or Muslim claim against a pro-Western democracy that it wasn't willing to entertain. India's been reeling from a sustained terror offensive since the very first day of 2009, and now the administration is going to approach them with "Pakistan's concerns." No way that gets perceived as breathtakingly insensitive and gutless.

The Indians, to their credit, have seen this coming for a long time. They already told Obama to go pound sand back in February. The administration eventually responded by leaking that they want India to give up their nukes at the same time Pakistan was super-sizing their own arsenal. That went about how you'd expect.

I wonder how all of this will affect the Obama monkey god idol thing.

References and previously after the jump...

Pity. I really thought that the most recent peace deal - designed as it was with the explicit intention of "placating extremists" - would work out:

Taliban militants in a tribal region bordering Afghanistan say they have pulled out of a peace deal with the government, raising the prospect of wider unrest as the Pakistani army extends its efforts to eliminate insurgents. The militants in North Waziristan blamed continuing U.S. missile strikes and army offensives against the Taliban for their decision, which was announced in the wake of a Taliban ambush that killed 16 soldiers. Separately, a car bombing in Pakistan's southwest killed four people Tuesday, police said -- a reminder of how insecurity in the country stretches far beyond the northwest regions near Afghanistan.

The Taliban ambush that killed 16 Pakistani soldiers - that was still peace. The June attack on a convoy of 350 students - also still peace. But now they're done placidly sitting back and enjoying their sharia mini-state.

I was going to add how the Taliban's regular floggings and murders of "illegitimate" couples also seem to be less than peaceful. But that'd be a little unfair since those kinds of things are well-known to be Jewish plots. The beheading of barbers though - I think that's officially the Taliban again.

In the meantime, by the by, the Taliban have thoroughly infiltrated Pakistan's armed forces. So we've got that going for us.

References and previously after the jump...

People who think that Obama's "moderate Taliban" idea is asinine: Indian officials...

In an apparent message to the US, which has expressed willingness to hold talks with 'moderate' militia, India has cautioned against treating any section of Taliban as 'good'... it would be unwise to negotiate with Taliban and leave people to the mercy of the militant outfit.

... top experts on the Taliban:

President Barack Obama's proposal to reach out to moderate Taliban will fail to end the Afghan insurgency as it is inflexible Taliban leaders who are orchestrating the war, not moderates, analysts said... "Obama's comment resemble a dream more than reality," said Waheed Mozhdah, an analyst who has written a book on the Taliban [and] was an official in both the Taliban and the Karzai governments... "'Moderate Taliban' is like 'moderate killer'. Is there such a thing?," asked writer and analyst Qaseem Akhgar.

... and the Taliban themselves:

Afghanistan's Taliban on Tuesday turned down as illogical U.S. President Barack Obama's bid to reach out to moderate elements of the insurgents, saying the exit of foreign troops was the only solution for ending the war... "This does not require any response or reaction for this is illogical," Qari Mohammad Yousuf, a purported spokesman for the insurgent group, told Reuters.

People who think that Obama's proposal has the air of magical sophistication about it: the UN's envoy to Afghanistan:

The U.N. special envoy to Afghanistan, Kai Eide, became the latest to call for talks... "But it is important to talk to the people who count... You need to be ambitious and include all the Taliban movement." His remarks follow much more guarded comments by President Barack Obama who said in an interview with the New York Times that Washington might... "[reach] out to people that we would consider to be Islamic fundamentalists, but who were willing to work with us."

"People that we would consider to be Islamic fundamentalists" is a really elegant relativist touch. Usually if you've got people who consider themselves to be Islamic fundamentalists and who we consider to be Islamic fundamentalists, you'd just straightforwardly call them Islamic fundamentalists. But I like Obama's phrasing better. So much more nuanced!

In the West, war criminals who want to use sexual violence as a weapon usually rape people on the other side. Of course those Western cretins don't have the luxury of playing in the medieval anti-woman, anti-homosexual sandbox that jihadists inhabit. A pathological culture built around shame can really come in handy during recruitment drives. In Afghanistan - where religiously-based sexual repression does some really surreal things to sexual identity - raping men into becoming suicide bombers has become institutionalized:

Evil al-Qaeda chiefs are raping young male converts to shame them into becoming suicide bombers, it emerged yesterday. The intense social stigma and fear of more gay sex attacks leaves Muslims prepared to die. The warped new tactic was revealed by a reformed Algerian militant. Abu Baçir El Assimi said: "The sexual act on young recruits aged between 16 to 19 was a means to urge them to commit suicide operations." A 22-year-old had suffered sexual injuries before being shot dead on a suicide mission in Tademaït, Algeria, three weeks ago. Samples taken from his body are being analysed in a bid to identify his torturer. And the US military discovered two years ago that al-Qaeda were dishonouring women in Iraq to turn them into suicide bombers. A terror leader would marry, then let another man rape his wife.

That last tactic is pretty popular across the jihadist ummah. But in Iraq it's been perfected into a veritable science:

A woman suspected of recruiting more than 80 female suicide bombers has confessed to organising their rapes so she could later convince them that martyrdom was the only way to escape the shame. Samira Jassam, 51, was arrested by Iraqi police and confessed to recruiting the women and orchestrating dozens of attacks. In a video confession, she explained how she had mentally prepared the women for martyrdom operations, passed them on to terrorists who provided explosives, and then took the bombers to their targets. "We arrested Samira Jassim, known as 'Um al-Mumenin', the mother of the believers, who was responsible for recruiting 80 women'', Major General Qassim Atta said.

A woman who deals exclusively with death gets labeled the "the mother of the believers"? I'm beginning to suspect that there might be some salient differences between Western civilization and political Islam.

References:
* Taliban-Era Photos Prove That Brutal Islamist Repression Of Sexuality Not So Successful, Kind Of Surreal [MR]
* Al Qaeda In Gay Rape Horror [The Sun]
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Political Islam Lets You Choose Between Blowing Yourself Up Or Getting Bludgeoned To Death With Rocks [MR]
* Iraqi woman had 80 women raped then recruited as suicide bombers [News.com.au]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You're A Young Egyptian Girl Your Dad Will Offer You To Pathetic Iraqi Shoe Throwers
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You're A Maid In Saudi Arabia, You Might Have To Be Tortured And Mutilated
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Doing Your Chores Is No Excuse For Neglecting Your... Um... Wifely Duties [Video]

"Have to ignore..." is probably too strong. "Get to ignore" is probably more accurate:

The women's organization of the Lebanese Hizbullah terror group held a "protest march" along the Lebanese border with Israel Monday, according to Hizbullah news media quoted by The Blue Eye. The women began their march at Kafr Kileh in southern Lebanon and reached the border passage between Israel and Lebanon, which is named the Fatma Gate. There the Hizbullah women began shouting "death to Israel" and to hurl epithets at leaders of the Arab and Western world for allowing the Israeli "siege" of Gaza.

They didn't hurl epithets at Arab and Muslim leaders because 16 year old Jordanian girls are being strangled for visiting female friends. Or because girls' schools in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are regularly destroyed. Or because women are being set on fire for doing academic work in Afghanistan. Or because elderly men are allowed to legally rape 14 year old girls in Turkey and 12 year old girls in Saudi Arabia. Or because Afghani schoolgirls are getting acid thrown on their faces. Or because ritualized gang rape is a way of life in Afghanistan.

Instead they screamed hysterically about Israel. Because those Israelis with their female political leaders and female business leaders - inexcusable.

References:
* Hizbullah Women March on Border, Yell 'Death to Israel' [A7]
* Girl strangled slowly for family's honour [Daily Telegraph]
* The value of Saudi girls [Elder of Ziyon]
* Pakistan: "Unknown miscreants" destroy girls' school [Jihad Watch]
* Taliban Set Woman on Fire for Crime of Social Science Research [Jawa]
* Child-Sex Case Grips Turkey Amid Religious Young-Brides Split [Bloomberg]
* Saudi marries off 12-year old over mother's objections [Elder of Ziyon]
* Two schoolgirls blinded in acid attack in Afghanistan [CNN]
* After being gang raped by her village elders, Mukhtar fought back... [Telegraph]
* Feminist Magazine MS To Powerful Israeli Women: Sorry, You're Too Jewish To Be In Our Magazine [MR]
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Israeli Biotech Industry Skyrockets As Women CEOs Lead the Way [Video] [MR]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Feminists Are Defacing Marine Offices In Your Name (Plus: Tiny Reform Of Pakistani Rape Law Causes Major Rioting) [Video]
* Feminism in the Muslim World
* Feminist Magazine MS To Powerful Israeli Women: Sorry, You're Too Jewish To Be In Our Magazine [MR]

The CIA has launched more than 20 drone attacks over Waziristan and has already nailed three of the biggest Al Qaeda fish. But Pakistan has been growing increasingly shrill in its opposition, demanding an end to cross-border drone activity. Fair enough:

The alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind of a 2006 transatlantic airplane bombing plot was killed in a US missile attack in northwest Pakistan early Saturday, officials said. Rashid Rauf died when a missile hit a tribesman's house in the village of Alikhel... Also among the five killed in the early morning incident was Egyptian Abu Zubair al-Misri, another wanted Al-Qaeda operative... "The transatlantic bombing plot alleged mastermind Rashid Rauf was killed along with an Egyptian Al-Qaeda operative in the US missile strike in North Waziristan early Saturday," a senior security official told AFP. A Western diplomatic source told AFP the missile was fired from a jet across the border in Afghanistan.... Washington has apparently stepped up its missile strikes against suspected Al-Qaeda and Taliban hideouts in tribal areas, however the Saturday morning attack appeared to be the first that was not fired by an unmanned CIA drone.

Almost impossible to believe that he grew up in Britain.

References:
* 10 More Dead as Drone War Over Pakistan Continues [Wired]
* Afghan Official: Coalition strike kills civilians [AP]
* Pakistan to U.S.: Call Off the Killer Drones [Wired]
* Terror plot mastermind killed by US missile in Pakistan: officials [AFP]
* Rashid Rauf: profile of a terror mastermind [Telegraph]
* I'm Going To Miss Westminster Abbey - Thousands Of UK-Born Jihadists In Enclaves Across All Of Britain [MR]

Previously:
* Global Outcry As Pakistan Pounds Terrorist Strongholds In Assassination Response
* Great News - Nuclear Armed Islamic Country With Notoriously Unreliable Safeguards Now Going Bankrupt
* LAT Discovers That Christians Are Being Run Out Of The Middle East, Blames Bush

And you were hoping he'd settle for just ignoring top military experts on missile defense. Here's CIA Director General Michael Hayden on Nov. 13, 2008:

Without directly referring to the CIA's offensive blitz of unmanned missile attacks in the tribal areas of Pakistan, the CIA boss said the US had successfully isolated the al Qaeda leader bin Laden, referring to him in the present tense. "He appears to be largely isolated from the day-to-day operations of the organization he leads," Hayden said in a speech delivered to the Atlantic Council in Washington.

And now here's President-Elect Barack Obama three days later:

Kroft: Where does capturing or killing Osama bin Laden fall?
Mr. Obama: I think it is a top priority for us to stamp out al Qaeda once and for all. And I think capturing or killing bin Laden is a critical aspect of stamping out al Qaeda. He is not just a symbol, he’s also the operational leader of an organization that is planning attacks against US targets.

So either Bin Laden managed to reinsert himself into Al Qaeda's operational hierarchy in three days or Obama is so fixated on his "bomb nuclear-armed Pakistan" campaign bluster that he's ignoring security briefings. And since they don't really have wifi in isolated Waziristan caves... Perhaps self-declared "Adviser in Chief" Joe Biden - breathtakingly idiot that he is - is actually being allowed to speak regularly with the President-Elect. That would be unhelpful.

But what do I know? Obama is going to defeat anti-Western enemies by forcing them to embrace "new symbols." A guy like that - obviously he's got a good sense for the gravity of political Islam's challenge. Plus WaPo is quoting anonymous "senior U.S. military officials" who "welcome" his approach. So that's that.

How about a quid pro quo: Al Qaeda hands over Bin Laden and Obama keeps his promise to abandon Iraq like AQI wants him to? Everybody gets their "top priority" and nobody has to go home empty-handed.

The video of the interview is after the jump...

Another day, another brutal honor killing in Pakistan:

Islam places so little value in a female's life that mere suspicion of sexual relations is more than enough to get a woman killed... "A man killed his teenaged sister in Wah village over suspicion of having illicit relations, police believed on Sunday. Wah Cantonment police informed this correspondent that Hamza, 24, shot dead his sister, 18-year-old Zainab Bibi, on Saturday evening when she was sitting in the courtyard of their house. After the murder, Hamza escaped from the crime scene. Police handed over the body to Zainab's family for burial after autopsy at the Tehsil Headquarters (THQ) hospital in Taxila.

Ethnic Kurds, meanwhile, are launching a global campaign to end "honor killings." Which means that ethnic Kurds are more honest about the problem than the FBI. Almost difficult to believe we're having problems identifying the source of the West's tensions with political Islam.

References:
* Another Honor Killing in Pakistan, Man Shoots Sister After Suspecting she was Having "Illicit Relations"..... [Zippers]
* KRG campaigns to end violence against women [Kurdish Globe]
* FBI Removes Term "Honor Killing" From Wanted Poster of Muslim man who Killed Daughters for Being "too Western"...... [Zippers]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If Your Clothing "Violates Islamic Teachings" In Iraq, 40 Of You Might Have To Be Killed And Mutilated
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You're A Feminist Who Thinks That The Koran Should Give Women Rights, You May Have To Die
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You Sit With Your Fiance In The Park, Iranian Police May Have To Strangle You To Death

Remember how conservatives kept trying to make the basic point - self-evident to all but the most aggressively stupid toddler - that "change" can be bad? And remember how that never really sunk in? Maybe a few post-election examples will help avoid this nonsense next time around. So for instance, the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood, is pretty psyched about Obama's style of change:

They considered his win an "apology" from the American people to the peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan... IAF Secretary General Zaki Bani Ershaid [said]... "Obama's victory is also tantamount to an apology... for the crimes committed by the outgoing Republican administration"... his party [is] the political arm of the influential Muslim Brotherhood movement... "A real change in the US policies cannot materialize without rectifying the erroneous attitude considering Israel an ally, withdrawing troops from Iraq," he said.

Iran is similarly thrilled about the change an Obama administration will bring:

Iranian officials on Wednesday welcomed Barack Obama's victory in US presidential elections, calling it a sign of failure of President George W Bush's policies... 'Obama's election as the US president shows the American people's demand for essential changes...Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki was quoted as saying... Gholam-Ali Hadad-Adel - senior advisor to Iran's supreme leader - said the victory of the slogan of 'change' is the admission of the American people to the failure of Bush's policies.

The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood? Pretty pleased about the prospect of change:

I don't really expect radical jihadists to not murder Christian converts. I mean, it'd be nice if there wasn't a wave of beheadings in Somalia or if fathers and teenage girls weren't being killed in Britain. But I understand that you can't really go around giving people freedom of religion - what if they exercise it? But is it really too much to ask people not to ethnically cleanse Iraq?

Several months ago I reported that Iraq was turning into the Islamic Republic of Iraq , as Christianity is clearly under attack there. Today a new report comes out showing that the situation for Iraqi Christians has gotten even worse.... Christians flee Iraqi city after killings, threats, officials say... At least 900 Christian families have fled Mosul in the past week, terrified by a series of killings and threats by Muslim extremists ordering them to convert to Islam or face possible death, officials said Saturday.

And the fate of Christians who don't get out is exactly what you think it is:

One grey-haired woman understands more than most the fear that has gripped Iraq's beleaguered Christian community over the past month. Her brother, Bashar al-Hazim, was among the first to be murdered in a wave of targeted killings that has forced more than 2,000 Christian families to flee the northern city of Mosul. Masked gunmen walked up to Mr Hashim as he stood with his two children outside their house in the east-side of Mosul in late September. They demanded to see his identity card, confirmed he was Christian and executed the 41-year-old on the spot... "We're peaceful people. When my brother was executed he had no enemies. Why was he killed? He was not a member of a party. There was no reason except for being Christian," the woman, dressed in a black gown, said.

If this "convert or die" thing seems familiar, it's because the exact same thing is happening in the Punjab province of Pakistan right now. In Kabul, on the other hand, they're not even going through the motions of coercing conversions. They're just outright massacring Christians. Why? Probably because of something Israel did.

References:
* Muslims behead Christian convert from Islam in Somalia [Spencer]
* Islamists killed my husband because he had converted to Christianity – widow [Scotsman]
* Imam's daughter in hiding after her conversion to Christianity sparked death threats [Mail Online]
* Iraqi Christians Told to Convert, pay Jizyah or Die [IsraPundit]
* Pakistani Christians told to convert or die [Spero]
* 'We are killed because we are Christians' [Times Online]
* Taliban Agents Stalking Christians In Kabul [MR]

Previously:
* Underwhelming Global Outrage As Iran Enforces New "You Convert From Islam, You Die" Law
* Bush's Pilgrimage To Bethlehem Presents Ripe Opportunity For Irony, Frustration
* Another Day, Another Blisteringly Stupid Article About Evangelical Christianity From A Sophisticated Liberal (Plus: Messianic Christianity Got Jews The Balfour Declaration)

They made her dad watch while they ran her down with hungry dogs and then shot her:

A 17-year-old Pakistani girl was mauled by dogs and shot to death in front of him over a land dispute... Ibrahim Solangi, 28, has been in custody ever since Taslim's death... [he is also] her first cousin.... Taslim's father said he was locked up in his home and forced to watch from a window as dogs chased her and then mauled her when she fell down exhausted. She then was shot, he said... Zameer Hussain Solangi, the girl's father-in-law, claimed Monday that his son confessed to the killing under police torture and that the allegation regarding the dogs was "baseless." He said a tribal council later declared the dead woman an adulterer and compensated the husband with her jewelry.

Oh - well if a tribal council gave him her jewelry, then obviously it's just a big misunderstanding. Notice that the debate is over whether the victim was an adulterer and not over whether, say, we should use vicious dogs to hunt down adulterous women and then shoot them. See also: Somalia, where a sharia court just punished a woman by burying her to her neck and bludgeoning her to death in front of thousands of people in one of the city's main squares.

If I was this Pakistani guy, though, I'd be kind of upset that all I got was my murdered wife's jewelry. This other Pakistani guy - a 62-year old - not only got away with killing his wife. He also got the tribal council to award him three prepubescent girls from the family of the adulterous man - the man's 10 year old girl, plus two of the man's nieces. Plus 20 buffaloes:

A man who killed his second wife for allegedly having an illicit relationship with another received impunity... [the illegal tribal court] has also ordered the other party who allegedly had the relationship... to hand over three girls together with 20 buffaloes as compensation... Police arrested the killer but soon released him and have respected the decision of the Jirga. According to the information received, Mr. Sher Dil Jatoi, 62 years old, killed his second wife in an honour killing... The decision said Sher Dil Jatoi was the victim of honour and innocent in killing his second wife... "as Shahoo Jatoi developed the illicit relationship... [he] was order to compensate Sher Dil by handing over his three minor daughers". Since Shahoo has only one girl, a 10-year-old daughter, the Jirga decided that the brothers Mr. Miro Jatoi and Mr. Khanan Jatoi should give their daughters of ages between 13 and 11 years to Sher Dil. Besides, it also ordered Shahoo's family to deliver 20 buffaloes.

Or you could just let someone rape your wife and force her to become a suicide bomber. But come on - dogs? That's just primitive.

References:
* Pakistani Man Claims Teen Daughter Mauled by Dogs, Shot to Death in 'Honor Killing' [Fox News]
* Pakistan: Honor Killer Awarded 10, 11, 13-Year-Old Girls in Marriage From man who had "Illicit" Relationship With his Wife..... [Zippers]
* Love, blackmail and rape – how al-Qaeda grooms women as ‘perfect weapons’ [Times Online]
* Woman stoned to death for adultery after Somali court ruling [AFP]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You're An American Woman Talking With A Guy In Saudi Arabia, You Might Have To Be Arrested And Beaten
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You're A Female Student Who Tries To Have Coffee With Your Professor, He Might Have To Be Lashed To Pieces (Also: If Your Man Is Neurotic And Impotent, You Might Have To Die)
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Great News! Islam Has Nothing To Do With Honor Killings.

Daaammmnnn:

Despite being shot twice during an ambush in Afghanistan, an SAS soldier lashed himself to the front of his patrol vehicle so he wouldn't be left behind if he passed out from loss of blood and kept on fighting... Suffering from serious upper body wounds, the soldier struggled on to the front of his SAS long range patrol vehicle (LRPV) and, under heavy fire, used a rope to attach himself firmly between the vehicle's bull bar and radiator. Once he was secured... he picked up his rifle and resumed firing at the enemy... SAS troops and their special forces comrades from the Commando Regiment are well aware of the slow and painful death that awaits them if they are captured by the Taliban.

By "slow and painful death" they mean "getting skinned alive on webcam by Taliban savages." Make sure you click through through to rest of the article, if only for the line "emptying several magazines as volleys of enemy rounds and rocket propelled grenades rained down around him."

References:
* Aussie Soldier shot twice, ties himself to vehicle and continues fighting [Rantburg]
* BBC Reporter Upset At Marine For Underplaying Kinder, Gentler Side Of Taliban Lunatics Who Wanted To Skin British Soldiers Alive [MR]

Previously:
* Circumspect Decorum Still Alive In Some Parts Of Britain The Anglo World [Video]
* Australian Muslim: Nice Country You've Got Here. Be A Real Shame If Anything Happened To It
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Aussie Singer Beccy Cole Goes Viral. Ditto For Aussie Cleric's "No Head Scarves = Women Are Asking For Rape" Comments.

They just got done murdering Gayle Williams...

Aid worker Gayle Williams, from the Christian charity Serve Afghanistan, was killed in the capital Kabul. Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said she was shot because she was teaching her religion. "This woman came to Afghanistan to teach Christianity to the people of Afghanistan," he said. "Our (leaders) issued a decree to kill this woman. This morning our people killed her in Kabul." Two gunmen on a motorbike targeted the 34-year-old as she walked to work alone at about 8am local time. "She was a person who always loved the Afghans and was dedicated to serving those who are disabled," Serve Afghanistan said in a statement.

... so now apparently they've got some time on their hands:

Kabul's Christian community is on high alert amid claims that their congregations are under surveillance by Taliban agents after Monday's killing of Gayle Williams, the Christian charity worker shot dead in the street on her way to work. Afghan intelligence officials have warned Christians they may be followed home from church. Investigators close to the murder inquiry said yesterday they were considering the possibility that Ms Williams knew her killers... regular churchgoer in the same neighbourhood said his staff had been warned not to walk outside because of threats against Christians. He said: "All of us are having to be careful about what we do, where we go and what we say."

Maybe the Pope can arrange a high-level meeting with Sunni leaders to hash this out. You're saying no?

References:
* British Aid Worker Killed In Kabul [Sky News]
* Christians in Kabul are warned: you are being watched by Taliban agents [Independent]
* Meeting between Pope and supreme Sunni imam cancelled [Hot Air]

Previously:
* President Of Israel Vs. Archbishop of Canterbury On Modern Democratic Culture
* Great News - Nuclear Armed Islamic Country With Notoriously Unreliable Safeguards Now Going Bankrupt
* Afghan Student's Death Sentence For Women's Rights Blasphemy Reduced... To 20 Years In Prison

How merciful:

An appeals court today overturned a death sentence for a student convicted of blasphemy but sentenced him instead to 20 years in prison. The 24-year-old student, Parwiz Kambakhsh, ran afoul of Afghan authorities last year when he circulated an article about the rights of women under Islam after downloading it from the Internet... Kambakhsh's supporters have said the case should be thrown out because the previous trial was held in secret and he was denied legal representation - an occurrence that is not uncommon in Afghan courts.

Yeah, that's why it should be thrown out. A country where fathers sell their daughters into sexual slavery to cover loans and gambling debts, where marriages between 40 year old men and 11 year old girls are literally picturesque, where honor killings are practically a norm - and that's why the verdict should be thrown out. Luckily we've been assured by experts that the harsh treatment of women in Afghanistan has everything to do with Afghan culture and nothing to do with political Islam:

Not sure how I missed this. A few weeks ago Supna Zaidi published an article pushing back against apologists who ignore the role that radical Islamic theology plays in honor killings:

What kind of an ideology causes a man to show no remorse for murdering his own daughter, but rants and raves at being served ham sandwiches while in prison? The media picked up the story quickly and asked, "Is Islam to blame?" On CNN, Zuhdi Jasser, of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, tried to paint Rashad as a backward cultural aberration, stating: It [the honor killing of Sandela] has nothing to do with Islam. This is a tribal, medieval mentality that is seen in tribes in Pakistan and India, and often is not even seen in Islamic communities. It’s basically part of the ignorance of the tribal community. On Fox News, Irshad Manji, on the other hand, stated that these killings are often done in the name of Allah and compared them to honor killings in the last century in Italy, which were carried out by Catholics. She notes that these killings are often done with the name of "Allah dripping from their lips."

It's true that Pakistani Muslims leave something to be desired when it comes to not marrying off 9 year old girls to 45 year old men and then killing them at 17. And the Afghanis most definitely jail rape victims for decades at a time. Asian immigrants are also the ones who are behind the wave of honor killings in Britain - and in the US:

In the Atlanta suburb of Jonesboro last month, a Pakistani immigrant allegedly strangled his 25-year-old daughter with a bungee cord because she was determined to end her arranged marriage and had gotten involved with a new man. According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Sandeela Kanwal's father, Chaudhry Rashid, "told police he is Muslim and that extramarital affairs and divorce are against his religion [and] that's why he killed her." ... In Upstate New York a few weeks earlier, Waheed Allah Mohammad, an immigrant from Afghanistan, was charged with attempted murder after repeatedly stabbing his 19-year-old sister. The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle reported that Mohammad was "infuriated because his younger sister was ... [a] bad Muslim girl."

The Pakistanis and Afghanis who are doing the killing certainly seem to think that their actions have something to do with Islam. And I'm not sure how "Pakistani culture" accounts for the Iraqi father who stamped on, suffocated and then stabbed his 17 year old daughter. Or the Israeli-Arab brother who shot his sister and then the whole family celebrated. Or the Palestinian father who murdered his 24 year old daughter by tying her up and burying her alive. Or the Jordanian brother who drowned his sister after other family members viciously beat her. Etc etc.

Then again - maybe those are all just really, really unfortunate coincidences.

References:
* Does Islam Justify Honor Killings? [PJ Media]
* Married at 9, slain by parents at 17 [News.com.au]
* The Afghan women jailed for being victims of rape [The Independent]
* Study alleges 'honour killings' conspiracy [Telegraph]
* 'Honor' killing comes to the US [Boston Globe]
* 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love' [Guardian]
* Attempted honor killing: Brother shoots sister - then family celebrates [Hot Air]
* Gazan woman slain by father over family honor; father and brothers arrested [Ma'an]
* Buried Alive [Mick Hartley]
* Jordanian Man Charged in Honor Killing of Sister [Fox News]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - You're Too Dirty To Walk On Saudi Arabia's Sidewalks
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Hamas Wants You To Blow Yourself Up Next To Israeli Tanks
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Israeli Arab Girl Victim of Honor Killing

Luckily there's no record of Pakistan ever participating in a nuclear black market. Otherwise this would be cause for genuine concern:

The government is urgently seeking $10 billion from its diaspora to avoid defaulting on its debts that are dragging the country towards insolvency. Pakistan's newly-appointed financial chief, Shaukat Tareen, who is in Washington on a mission to persuade international groups to stump up billions of dollars to bolster Pakistan's fast depleting foreign reserves, has said that a fund will be set up for expatriate investors to buy stocks... Pakistan is facing multiple crises as the country's security forces battle pro-Taliban militants in the tribal areas near the Afghan border and its financial indicators have plummeted.

Here's an article from a few weeks ago titled "The 'Talibanization' of Pakistan's biggest city". Happy Tuesday.

References:
* Travel To Pakistan, Sell The Bomb To Crazies, Win Fame And Fortune [MR]
* Pakistan seeks $10bn from expats to avoid bankruptcy [Telegraph]
* The 'Talibanization' of Pakistan's biggest city [MSNBC]

Previously:
* Global Outcry As Pakistan Pounds Terrorist Strongholds In Assassination Response
* Israeli-Pakistani Relations? Probably a Good Idea.
* Pakistan Reluctant to Accept Israeli Disaster Aid, Just Like US State Department

Remember that bittersweet rescue mission where British soldiers strapped themselves to an Apache to get to a fallen comrade? They didn't manage to save his life, but they got to him before the Taliban did. Some people would imagine that the op should be emphasized as a source of pride for the British public. Some people would beg to differ:

Presenter Lyse Doucet’s astonishing statement comes as an Apache gunship hero revealed the fanatics aim to capture a British soldier and skin him alive on the internet. Military Cross winner Ed Macy — whose book Apache is serialised in The Sun from today — tells how an intelligence officer gave details of the Taliban butchers’ sick plan. It made Army Air Corps Warrant Officer Macy and his comrades even more determined to rescue a mortally wounded Marine from a Taliban stronghold — which they did with four soldiers strapped to the outside of two Apaches. But BBC World News correspondent Doucet claimed the public also want to seeing the kinder side of the Afghan extremists. Asked what was missing in media coverage, she said: “It may sound odd but the humanity of the Taliban, because they are a wide, very diverse group of people.”.

Revelatory, what some people choose to care about. Because there's probably a case to be made that this story should be about the nature of the enemy that the West is fighting:

But Macy recalls in his book how the room fell silent when the intelligence officer briefed him and his comrades after chilling Taliban radio messages were intercepted. He writes: “She said, ‘The Taliban have a new plan for what they’ll do if they capture a British soldier. They intend to set up a webcam for a live internet broadcast and then skin him alive’.”

Sure it's misguided and crass - but at least it's not unsophisticated.

References:
* Video: Royal Marines strap themselves to Apache’s wings to rescue comrade [Hot Air]
* No humanity for 'evil' Taliban [The Sun]

Previously:
* BBC, CBS Now Just Making Stuff Up About Israeli Military
* The BBC Lies
* BBC Misleads in Article, Clarifies in Sidebar, Regarding Israeli Settlements

Hate to be the bearer of bad news folks, but it's over:

British troops are to scale back attacks on the Taliban after killing 7,000 insurgents in two years of conflict, defence sources said last week... The paratroopers’ commanders hope they can cut the deaths, which they fear are a boost for the Taliban when fighters recruited from the local population are killed, as the dead insurgent’s family then feels a debt of honour to take up arms against British soldiers... "We aim to scale back our response to incidents to avoid getting sucked into a cycle of violence among local tribesmen," said one officer. "This way we aim to continue the process of reducing the Taliban’s influence in Helmand."

The traditional way to reduce an enemy army's influence has been to kill its soldiers. Interesting to see that's passe. Good to know.

References:
* Army has killed 7,000 Taliban [Telegraph]

Previously:
* We're Going To Miss Westminster Abbey - "Modesty" Preventing Muslims Doctors And Nurses From Scrubbing Up (Also: Aussie Universities Under Pressure To Accommodate Muslim Students, Segregate Women)
* We're Going To Miss Westminster Abbey - MI5 Suspects 4,000 Potential Terrorists In Over 200 Cells In Britain (Plus: AQ Recruiting Children For Next Terrorist Attack)
* We're Going To Miss Westminster Abbey - Blair "Rolled Over" On Saudi Weapons Corruption Because They Threatened "Another 7/7" (Plus: Saudis Buying Their Way Into The State Department Through Georgetown)

Just kidding, obviously. If you're a country that's not Israel, this is what you get to do when terrorists invade your capital city and murder your powerful politicians:

Pakistani artillery and helicopter gunships pounded militant positions Sunday close to the Afghan border, an extremist stronghold where a rebel leader blamed for the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto is believed to be hiding, officials and witnesses said. The strikes came after authorities said they had arrested a 15-year-old boy alleged to have been involved in the Dec. 27 slaying of Bhutto, an opposition leader critical of rising Islamic extremism in the country... Two civilians were killed and five others wounded in the attacks near the border close to the towns of Lhada and Makin in South Waziristan, said Fazal Subhan, a Makin resident. However, military spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said there were no reports of casualties in the operations.

If you're Israel, of course, the options you have in similar situations are a little more limited. Probably for totally understandable reasons that have nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

References:
* Pakistan pounds militant strongholds [JPost]
* International Media: "But Saadat is a Grandfather!" Also, BBC Tells Demonstrable Lie About Past Kidnappings, Makes Up Conspiracy Theory, and Says "Foreigners mostly live harmoniously among the Palestinian population" [MR]

Previously:
* Islamic World Explodes Into Riots As Fatah Targets Hamas Mosques, Imams
* Global Outcry As Palestinians Kill 13 Year Old Palestinian Boy
* World Just Fine With Israeli Utlimatum To Palestinian-Based Terrorists: Surrender Or Die

Cross-posted to:
* Israpundit

The 2007 UNICEF photo of the year:

The image hardly fits our idea of the happy couple's wedding picture - but this haunting photograph taken in Afghanistan graphically captures life for millions of girls given in marriage while under age. It shows Mohammed, 40, with his new 11-year-old wife, Ghulam. Taken by US photographer Stephanie Sinclair, it was named Unicef Photo of the Year yesterday. Some 60million girls worldwide are married while still under age, according to the children's rights agency.

At least he married the poor girl. In Iran, the growing industry of sharia-approved "temporary marriages" allows girls as young as nine to be enslaved, raped, and then dumped back into brothels. Why as young as nine and not eight or ten? We're obviously not Islamic scholars, but if we had to take a guess...

Incidentally, we were trying to Google a story about how Iran's clerics exploit temporary marriage to score underage girls when they travel around the country. We know it's out there but we didn't find it. Instead we came across this 2000 New York Times story about how temporary marriages are a progressive measure being pushed by "odd mix of feminists, clerics and officials". Title of the story? "Love Finds A Way". Really. At least now we know how to be sophisticated about this charming cultural practice.

References:
* Under-age marriage picture wins UNICEF prize [Metro UK]
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Iran Has Legal Slavery And Rape Of Prepubescent Girls. They Call It "Temporary Marriage". [MR]
* Criticism of Muhammad: Aisha [Wikipedia]
* Love Finds a Way in Iran: 'Temporary Marriage' [NYT]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You're A Maid In Saudi Arabia, You Might Have To Be Tortured And Mutilated
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - John McCain Responds To Code Pink's "We Should Surrender To The Most Vicious Sexists On The Planet" Platform [Videos]
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - You're Too Dirty To Walk On Saudi Arabia's Sidewalks

They're literally too dumb to run an insurgency right:

Along with the rise in Taliban--and to some extent, al Qaeda violence--has come a sharp increase in the number of insurgents killed by Coalition (mostly American and Australian) troops and Afghan security forces. The Afghan diplomat said about 3,500 Taliban have been killed this year, and several top commanders captured. There's been a major tactical shift recently in how the Taliban insurgency attacks Coalition forces. Of course, IEDs and suicide bombings are up 20 percent over last year's 5,388 total, but there have also been a number of large-scale engagements waged against allied patrols that wind up resulting in high enemy losses. It seems anathema to the usual tactics of an insurgency, where small hit-and-run attacks prove most effective at driving government forces and their allies out of the fight. And it speaks to a growing trend of military incompetence within a Taliban depleted of its experienced, native-born fighters...

The New York Times reported on October 29 that the foreign fighters "are not only bolstering the ranks of the insurgency. They are more violent, uncontrollable and extreme than their locally bred allies." But a top American commander based in Kandahar--where the Taliban movement was born--explained that from his perspective the foreign fighter influx is actually a sign of weakness. The high body count is a result of "ineptitude" he said, and stems from the fighters' lack of experience and training.

The New York Times combined ideological bias with banal and shallow ignorance to get an anti-jihadist storyline exactly backwards? The hell you say. At least the Democrats will have something to point to when they start pushing for a withdrawal from Afghanistan.

References:
* Taliban Bench Warmers [Weekly Standard]

Previously:
* Taliban-Era Photos Prove That Brutal Islamist Repression Of Sexuality Not So Successful, Kind Of Surreal
* British Intelligence: Iran Giving Bombs To The Taliban
* Mere Rhetoric: Breaking: US Rolling Up AQ In Iraq and Afghanistan?

You know what's so unjust about the way that conservatives approach feminist activists these days? The conservatives actually expect them to choose a side. How unsophisticated is that?

Actually, this "we oppose everything" liberal activism is starting to get a little tired. You can be for robust US military force used in the interest of liberating women and gays from the yoke of political Islam or you can be against it. You obviously can't be for both - but more importantly, you really can't be for neither. Opposing the only force currently working to free women and gays from sharia oppression is functionally equivalent to supporting their oppressors. "Both sides are wrong" is the height of shallowness - yes of course everyone is wrong in some way. But not everyone is equally wrong or bad. The question to ask someone who opposes the side that is better is: why do you choose to care about that and not this far more problematic thing?

This is from earlier this year, but it's a pretty decent illustration of how even the most minor attempts to help women are met with hysterical opposition by those whose hearts and minds we're constantly told we should be trying to win:

Anyway, Code Pink. defaced a Marine recruitment center last week. Gateway Pundit has the story along with a bunch of pictures attesting to the things that these people choose to care about.

References:
* Change in Pakistani Rape Law Angers Muslims [GlobalCop / YouTube]
* Code Pink Defaces US Marine Recruiter's Office in Berkeley [Gateway Pundit]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - If You Watch Men On TV In Saudi Arabia Your Husband Will Divorce You
* Feminism in the Muslim World
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Feminism Sweeps Pakistan

Cross-posted to:
* The Astute Bloggers

They're not Iranian nuclear bombs yet. But does anyone doubt that they'll give them to terrorists as soon as they can? And in the meantime, the Brits are quite sure that the non-nuclear weapons getting to the Taliban are courtesy of Tehran:

British military intelligence officers and the U.S. commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan say Iran is supplying Taliban fighters with weaponry. U.S. Army General Dan McNeill, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, said more than 50 roadside bombs and timers were discovered by British special forces last month crossing the border in trucks from Iran to Afghanistan, The Daily Telegraph reported Thursday. He said the discovery is evidence that Iran's Quds Revolutionary Guards are providing active support to Taliban militants. "I cannot see how it is possible for at least the Iranian military, probably the Quds force, to not have known of this convoy," McNeill said.

We actually don't believe this story. Leftists explained to us that this is all part of Bush's Zionist neocon rush to war. You know - all those Zionist neocons who control British intelligence.

References:
* Hamas Victory - Now Can We Start Worrying About Iran? [MR]
* NATO: Iran's Quds giving bombs to Taliban [UPI]

Previously:
* Jimmy Carter: Iran Is Nothing To Worry About
* No New Sanctions On Iran. Sophistication On Display.
* Bill Richardson: Ahmadinejad Is Nothing To Worry About, We Should Engage Iran

Cross-posted to:
* The Astute Bloggers

In 2001 Mullah Omar's bodyguard explained the macabre delight that the Taliban took in creatively torturing Afghanis who tried to extract even the smallest pleasures from life:

Basically any form of pleasure was outlawed," Mr Hassani said, "and if we found people doing any of these things we would beat them with staves soaked in water - like a knife cutting through meat - until the room ran with their blood or their spines snapped. Then we would leave them with no food or water in rooms filled with insects until they died. We always tried to do different things: we would put some of them standing on their heads to sleep, hang others upside down with their legs tied together. We would stretch the arms out of others and nail them to posts like crucifixions. Sometimes we would throw bread to them to make them crawl. Then I would write the report to our commanding officer so he could see how innovative we had been.

Repressing human sexuality is pretty much the definition of an impossible totalitarian project. The more brutal the repression, the more it guarantees symptomatic and sometimes pathological outbursts. Sometimes the rebellions happen as surreptitiously and normally as possible - Iran's gay and straight underground clubs are probably good examples of this. But other times the repression is so severe that sexuality gets expressed in only the angriest and most brutal ways - ergo the epidemics of homosexual and heterosexual rape during the Muslim-led anti-Soviet war. And in between, you get expressions of sexuality that go from the stubborn to the surreal.

After the jump - where these photos came from, how they got published, and the European left's oh-so-predictable reaction.

Somehow we missed this when it happened last week. But it's such a perfect addition to the collection that we just had to add it:

Meanwhile, in Israel, there's the Free Hugs campaign:

We were going to make fun of this because it seems like a bunch of naive peaceniks, but honestly they just seem really nice and good-hearted. Plus, even we can't bring ourselves to actually blog against hugs.

References:
* Fatwa Issued Over Pakistan Minister's Embrace of Foreign Man

Previously:
* If You're Mentally Ill In Pakistan, You Might Have To Die
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Feminism Sweeps Pakistan
* Israeli-Pakistani Relations? Probably a Good Idea.

Well this kind of sucks:

Hannah Arendt very famously wrote about the Nazi banality of evil, where everyday practices and thoughtlessness add up to the singular horror of the Holocaust. We've got some problems with that thesis, but one way or another that's certainly not what we're increasingly dealing with in the Muslim world. This is religious insanity being used as a positive justification for everyday atrocities, which end up in spectacular acts of terrorism.

And it's spreading.

References:
* Man with home-built Kaaba sentenced to death

Previously:
* JPost Catches Up With the Blogosphere: Iran Really Evil
* Could They Be More Evil?
* Palestinians Commit Several War Crimes in Just a Few Hours. Instead of Reporting That, Reuters Publishes Gripping Tale of Glorious Palestinian Martyrdom (and We're Not Even Exaggerating About That...)

Cross-posted to:
* The Astute Bloggers

Most of the academic blogs that we follow are really, really pissed about Indoctrination U (ok, all of the academic blogs that we follow...) FrontPage has an extensive transcript of a roundtable that David Horowitz participated in:

He might have added a few lines about the even more pervasive day to day dynamics of liberal academic groupthink - casual one-liners about President Bush's intelligence, knowing smirks about Christians, faux outrage about imagined Israeli atrocities, and a general disregard for any human rights violations not committed by US troops. For instance, we get at least one email a week about some dark Rovian plot to invade Pakistan and enslave its sweet and innocent natives. These sweet and innocent natives:

Charming.

References:
* Political Indoctrination and Harassment on Campus: Is there a Problem? [FrontPage]
* Pakistani tribal elders demand girl as payment for poker debt [Hot Air]

Previously:
* Hey Gals, Check It Out - You're Destroying Indonesia With Your Skimpy Clothing and Your Premarital Sex
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Bikini Rally Outside Australian Mosques
* Hey Gals, Check This Out - Ahmadinejad Secretly A Pervert?

Don't get us wrong. It's definitely progress that rape is not always and in every case a woman's fault now:

We're just unimpressed by this being called anything but what it is: a centuries-overdue correction to a pathologically sexist theo-juridical practice. We've been known to say that there are parts of the Islamic world that are mired in the 9th century. That's actually inaccurate when it comes to the way that fundamentalist Muslim countries treat women: the Judeo-Christian West was NEVER this bad. There were never laws grounded in the Bible that presumed women to be more at fault for rape then men. The Gospels were never mobilized as an excuse for rape the way that the Koran de facto is in places like Pakistan. So yeah, this is progress in the most literal sense. But it's difficult to call it progressive - no matter how hard Western feminist groups try to argue that the European Enlightenment is the real threat to women.

The sad thing is that women in Pakistan would be mired in their third-class existence even if Musharraf managed to strongarm the parliament to repeal all the sick, anti-women laws that they have on their books. Egypt, for instance, has more or less formal legal equality - and women still hide behind their veils. You'll even hear Egyptians saying that behind those veils, women are just as well-groomed and carefully made up as their Western counterparts. In other words, in everything but day to day public behavior, women in the West and women in Egypt are presumably equal. But it's precisely that public, quotidian existence that reflects and makes all the difference: it's the sense of life that matters. Gut-check: how many decades or centuries away are we from women in most (all?) of the Muslim and Arab world being able to make something like this, produced by two Israeli girls and posted to YouTube on Tuesday:

It's meaningless and silly and fun. And that's the point. Here's the original video that Tasha and Dishka put together, which is one of the most popular videos on YouTube ever:

Our original, pre-YouTube-on-MR post about this video is here. The title is "Joyful Israeli Girls A Stark Contrast To Girls In Arab And Muslim World", which is, well, true.

Previously: Bahraini Women's Rights Activist Dismantles Religious Zealots, Saudi Arabia Discovers Women Need To Eat Food, West: Female Fighter Pilots, Islam: Women's Private Parts Are Dirty

For the last couple of years, you've been seeing anti-Israel journalists awkwardly inserting "blitz" both as a verb and a noun) into stories about Israel. It's kind of cute - anyone who complains about it seems like they're overreacting, but the implication is quite clear. The essence of plausible deniability:

Here's the beauty of it. Right after the attack, Hamas explicitly and officially issued a statement calling for the eradication of Israel. But the Israelis are the ones who deserve to be compared to Nazis.

It's probably just very strong anti-Zionism. The seeming obsession for Nazism and Jews probably has nothing in any way to do with Nazism. Or Jews.