If There’s A War With Iran, It’ll Be The Dems And The MSM Who Caused It

If There’s A War With Iran, It’ll Be The Dems And The MSM Who

Caused It

Thought For The Day

iran-military-parade2.jpg

A little over a year ago, George Bush and the Administration began the campaign to stop Iran from killing any more Americans in Iraq. They began to make it clear to Iran that if they didn’t stop killing our troops we would attack them. However, seconds after George Bush signaled this threat in his State of The Union Address, the MSM and Democrat Party began a feverish campaign to convince Iran that we would not attack. Their underlying strategy was to convince the American people that Iran was innocent and that George Bush merely wanted to start another war for implicitly nefarious reasons that they were never able to articulate. So they ramped up a massive media campaign to eliminate any public support for this possible war, a war the administration didn’t even want to wage, but whose specter it needed in order to avoid bloodshed and bring peace to Iraq. The Dems and MSM have been doing everything they can to remove any fear from Iran that this war will ever happen. They have been quite succesful. So now Iran does not sufficiently fear it, and has no reason to back down. So, ironically, the only way to solve the situation in Iraq, and to stop Iran from making nuclear weapons, may be to start a war with them, a war that could have been avoided if the Democrats had followed Diplomacy 101 and allowed us to maintain a credible threat of war. But that would’ve been far too politically inconvenient for them, I suppose. I guess we’ll see if all the unnecessary bloodshed they have caused and continue to cause, isn’t.

Protecting John Doe

Golden Rule of Islam

Golden Rule of Islam

Golden rule of Islam is: ” If you deliver infidels to Allah, Allah will deliver houris to you.”

Thus the only pillar of Islam is killing and delivering infidels to Allah or in other words, carrying out violent Jihad against all infidel unless they submit to Islam. That is what our prophet Mo preached and practiced and that is what our greatest scholars preached.

Greatest Muslim scholars of recent times were Syed Qutub, Dr. Salah Serea and Mohammed Abed Al-Salem. They all preached Violent Jihad and the golden rule of Islam.

SYED QUTUB
Our great leader Syed Qutub wrote one of Islam’s greatest books “sign posts” which is the heart beat of real Muslims. All true Muslims of today and their leaders like Shaikh Osama and Shaik Zawahiri swear by this book.

Syed Qutub wrote in his book:

“Demolish all governments and organizations that are established by man. The return of Allah’s kingdom can only be established with a sword. Absolute rebellion is a must against anything on earth that conflicts with Islam and to destroy it with great power”.

9/11 action by our mujahids was one such rebellious act .

DR. SALAH SEREA
Another great Muslim leader and a follower of Imam Taymmia was Dr. Salah Serea, the father of Islamic Liberation Movement ( Hezb e Tehrir). Dr Serea wrote the following pearls of truth:

“Islamic leaders of today are people of prayers. They have built mosques. They have reinforced fasting and prayer and do whatever it takes to have the appearance of good Muslims. Meanwhile they carefully keep true Islam which is “violent Jihad” from the hearts of Muslims. All these Muslims are infidels and any one who stand behind them or supports them is an infidel “

MOHAMMED ABED AL-SALEM
This true mujahid wrote the book “The missing Commitments”. This book is the by -laws of world-wide Jihadi movement and is a must read for all Muslims aspiring to copulate with with houris after death.

The book emphasizes that violent Jihad and slaughtering infidels was the “true Islam” preached and practiced by our great prophet .

He wrote “bloodshed is the only way Islam can again be spread and established. Fundamentalist Islamic authority must be established in every nation of the world with the help of sword”.

JIHAD SUPERSEDES PRAYER, FASTING AND CHARITY:
In his book Abed Al-Salem condemned the religious rituals practised by Muslims such as fasting prayer and Haj. He wrote that these activities keep Muslims so busy that they forget the real call of Allah , the the violent jihad and slaughter of infidels to spread and establish Islam.

KILLING INFIDELS IS EVERY Muslim’S RESPONSIBILITY:
Abed Al – Salem wrote that killing is the big difference between true Allah’s religion of Islam and all other religions. Before Islam, Allah dealt with infidels with fire, floods earthquakes. However after establishing Islam Allah transferred this responsibility of dealing with infidels to Muslim umma. Our prophet established Islam with violent jihad and set example for us. After him the early Muslims used sword to spread Islam .

MULLAHS PREACHING IslamIC RITUALS ONLY ARE INFIDELS:
My dear brothers and sisters in Islam. These mullahs emphasizing prayers instead of jihad are infidels like the above Islamic scholars declare with religious authority. They are actually paid agents of the jews , hindus and right wing Christians whose orders are to keep Muslims busy in religious rituals. They are brainwashing you that these silly rituals will earn you paradise and houries. On the contrary, these rituals will earn you hell fire. Here is what Allah said for those who ignore the only pillar of Islam which is “fighting for Allah”.
 

    9.38: Believers, What is the matter with you, when you are asked to go forth and fight for Allah’s cause (slaughtering infidels) you cling to the earth (staying home)? Unless you fight, Allah will punish you with a painful doom (Allah does not give a rat’s behind whether you prayed fasted or performed Haj)

How is it possible that violent jihad which is prescribed for Muslims in 164 ayas of Quran including ayas which guarantee paradise to those who kill and get killed for Allah is not a pillar of Islam? If one does not think that the following ayas do not cofirm that Jihad is the only pillar of Islam , he needs to have his head examined.
 

    Q 8.65: 008.065: “O Prophet! rouse the Believers to the fight”.

    Q 9.111 “Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is binding on Him”.

    Q 9.123: “Fight the unbelievers around you and let them find harshness in you”.

    Q4:84 “Fight in Allah’s Cause. Incite the believers to fight with you”

    Q 2:216 “Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims), even if you dislike it”.

    Q 47:4 “Smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding them”.

    Q 8.12 “Smite infidels on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.”

THE SO CALLED PILLARS OF Islam WERE PLANTED BY THE ENEMY

The so called ” pillars of Islam” were planted by our enemies to weaken and de-ball the Muslim umma.

SALAT

How can salat ( namaz), the very awkward ass-up ancient sabean
practice be a pillar of Islam? There is not a single aya in Quran which describes this ridiculous time wasting perpetual ritual ? As a matter of fact ass –up posture can attract evil and can be outright dangerous. . An attractive woman with a shapely behind in a prostrating position with her ass pointing to heaven can be very provocative for any healthy male (could that be the reason women are not allowed to lead prayers) .In such a posture , a woman can be a sitting duck for a rapist who can approach her from behind. Similarly a good looking prostrating youth with his cute behind perched up in the air can be very inviting and lustful for a mullah with homosexual tendencies. Is it surprising that pedophilia is so common among mullahs of the mosques in Islamic countries?

HAJ

How can the pagan custom of shaving heads and circum- ambulating half naked around an ancient temple be a pillar of Islam? How can requiring grown ups to throw stones on imaginary spooks like little kids be a tenet of a rational religion? How can dropping your pants and underpants , wrapping yourself with a white bedsheet and running in circles please a sane God?

Haj is not a pillar of Islam, it is a big con job to steal poor Muslim umma’s money , concocted by infidels of Saudi Arabia.

FASTING

Fasting is the worst of the lot. It is the sadistic practice of self immolation through starvation, dehydration and abstaining from sex . Daily starvation and dehydration not only weakens and sickens the body it slowly weakens the brain and takes away it’s faculty of reasoning. Why do you think homeless people who starve often become dysfunctional, retarded and delusional and end up begging on the roadsides. Why do you think all very Islamic Quran toting countries without oil income are poverty stricken and always need help and charity from non Muslim industrial countries to survive? Why do you think that few million Jews have gotten over 150 noble prizes in sciences and 1.5 billion Muslims did not get any ( the two science noble prize winners with Muslim names were non practicing secularists)

Fasting is a curse on Muslims . It is actually a Jewish conspiracy to sicken and mentally weaken the Muslim umma and they have been very successful.

ZAKAT

That leaves charity which is a universally practiced activity and is common to all cultures and is not considered a pillar of any religion.

BONUS CLAUSE IN THE GOLDEN RULE

Although Allah has guaranteed paradise and 72 houris for mujahids and killers of infidels, there is catch. You have to wait for this orgy until after the judgment day. There is however a bonus clause. If you die for Allah and become a shaheed you can start copulating right after death. This bonus clause is a bonanza for young horny Muslims and attracts thousands of them worldwide for suicide bombings and various jihadi missions.

GOLDEN RULE WAS APPLIED EVEN TO THE PROPHET

Allah is very fair in his affairs. Even his dearest and the top prophet Mo was not exempted from this golden rule of Islam.

In Mecca when Mohammed had not yet fought any jihad or killed any infidels Allah had not guaranteed him paradise . Here are two verses regarding his doubtful fate at that stage.
 

    Q 17.54: “Your Lord will have mercy on you or he will punish you. We have not sent thee (O Muhammad) as a warden over them”.

    Q 46.9 Say “I know not what shall be done with me or with you”.

PROPHET MO STILL WAITING FOR HIS HOURIS

Although prophet Mo qualified to get paradise by his jihadi activities and cutting many infidel heads later in Madina, he did not have his head cut by an infidel and thus could not achieve “shahadat”. His head was intact on his shoulders until the end and was safely resting on the thighs of his gorgeous teenage wife Ayesha when he died. Actually the odds of that happening were high since Ayesha’s thighs were often the resting place for his head even when she was menstruating..
 

    Bukhari ;Volume 1, Book 6, Number 296:
    Narrated ‘Aisha:
    “The Prophet used to recite Qur’an with his head on my lap while I was in menses”.

Prophet Mo slept with his face between Ayesha’s warm naked thighs in winters.
 

    Abu Dawood Book 1, Number 0270:
    Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
    “One night he entered (upon me) while I was menstruating. He felt pain from cold. And he said: Come near me. I said: I am menstruating. He said: Uncover your thighs. I, therefore, uncovered both of my thighs. Then he put his cheek and chest on my thighs and I lent upon he until he became warm and slept”.

Fred Thompson on the Rule of Law and Scooter Libby

Fred Thompson on the Rule of Law and Scooter

Libby

Clarice Feldman
In his recent speech on the rule of law, Fred Thompson discussed the treatment Chief Justice Roberts received during the nomination process, the Department of Justice’s handling of the Berger case, and the injustice of the proceedings against Scooter Libby.
Here’s a sample:

In our system all citizens are guaranteed equal protection.  And when we appropriate unlimited resources and give unlimited power and direct it all toward one individual, there had better be extraordinary circumstances.  There were none here.  Just a case of public officials without the courage to do the right thing and stop this farce before it began.  In no other prosecutor’s office in the country would a case like this one have been brought.

Incidentally, this was shortly after Sandy Berger, the National Security Advisor to President Bill Clinton, received a slap on the wrist by the Justice Department for lying about and then confessing that he stole and destroyed what we think were classified documents. We’ll never know, because he destroyed them.  But we do know that he didn’t want the 9-11 Commission to see them.  But nobody was clamoring for his head.  Back to Libby.

I have called for a pardon for Scooter Libby.  When you rectify an injustice using the provisions of the law, just as when you reverse an erroneous court decision, you are not disregarding the rule of law, you are enforcing and protecting it.

He is not the only one noting that the case against Scooter is related to the failure of will and inability to fight the entrenched bureaucracy  by key administration officials who did not/could not  stop what they knew was a farcical proceeding. Brian Carney reviews the case and agrees that a pardon now is necessary to undo a great wrong:

The modern American government is a vast and largely self-sustaining bureaucracy. That bureaucracy acts, first and foremost, in its own interest, and not necessarily in the interests of its putative but temporary political bosses. The CIA, its intelligence having been challenged, sold out the White House on the sixteen words-even though that intelligence would later be upheld. The State Department, faced with the knowledge that one of its own was responsible for the Valerie Wilson leak, preferred keeping the White House in the dark to revealing what it knew. The Justice Department did what prosecutors do when ordered to investigate, which is to charge people with crimes.
In other words, the Republican party’s alleged “full control” of government prior to the 2006 midterm elections was more myth than reality. The Bush administration lost control of the Wilson story almost from the beginning, and while on a number of occasions it failed to exercise the control available to it, it was also denied the opportunity to control its fate by entrenched interests that no elected administration can ever fully master without the consent of the bureaucracy that supposedly serves it.
The President, however, does still hold one trump card, left in the hands of the chief executive by the founding fathers. The only unchecked power held by any single person in the federal government is the power to grant a pardon. That power is nothing more than the authority to restore personal liberty to another person-that is, to release a man or woman from the grip of the state.

The Missing Context in Media Reporting on Iraq

The Missing Context in Media Reporting on Iraq

By Gerd Schroeder

The US mainstream media are failing to provide the public the context it needs to accurately understand both the successes of our progress in Iraq. They do this either purposely or through incompetence and/or lack of intellect.  I know many members of the media, and none of them lack intellect or are incompetent. 
I came to this harsh conclusion after studying the ongoing Brookings Institution Report titled “IRAQ INDEX Tracking Reconstruction and Security in Post-Saddam Iraq” for several months. The Brookings Institution is a left-of-center think tank, led by Bill Clinton’s close friend Strobe Talbott.  But its information in the Iraq Index is generally accurate and reliable.  The information mainly comes from the US Military and other US governmental agencies’ official statistics. It is updated at least weekly to provide in one place the most up to date information on the war that I have been able to find.  Two small examples will suffice to show how neglect of context creates a misleading public impression.
ISF Casualties
The Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) includes military, police, special police, Iraqi National Guard, and border police. From early-2005 to mid-2006 the hot topic for marking progress in the war was how many ISF were being trained and employed.  However, in mid-2006 this media reporting trend almost wholly dried up, and the biggest critic of ISF training progress in Congress, Senator Biden, stopped beating the drum.  Why?  Look at the data on page 32 of the Index. 
In July-August 2006, the number of deployed ISF jumped from 269,600 up to 298,000.  The previous months had experienced much smaller growth, but July/August 2006 experienced a 10.6% jump in ISF.  The numbers jumped again in September by almost 10,000 to 307,800.  October rose 4000, and November rose almost 11,000.  In essence, the critics of the war lost their talking point, and shifted instead toward troop withdrawal as the idea to be pushed. 
There is more ISF good news.
For almost 3 years we have heard the critics of the war talk about the high ISF deaths. The information is just raw data; close analysis of the average numbers killed month to month as a percentage of total ISF force strength shows a consistent downward trend.  Up to January 2005, records of the number of ISF killed to total force strength are hard to find because of the lack of accurate numbers killed month to month.  But, since January 2005 the ratios are clear.  In January 2005, 0.86 died per 1000 ISF.  In June and July 2005 the ratio jumped to 1.75 per 1000 ISF, a high water mark for ISF deaths.  However, from July 2005 until January 2007, the ratio of ISF killed per 1000 has steadily dropped to a low of 0.28 killed per 1000 ISF.  There is a current up-trend from that 0.28/1000 ratio to 0. 9/1000 in April 2007.  The average from January 2005 to April 2007 is 0.79 killed per 1000 ISF. 
To put the ISF deaths into a clearer perspective The FBI reported that in 2005, 67 police officers were killed by accident while on duty and 55 by hostile acts in 2005, for a total of 132 police officers out of 673,146 law enforcement officers in the United States in 2005.   After dividing 132 officers killed by 12 months (to make the comparison on the same basis), 0.016 police officers died in America per month per 1000 police in 2005.  Granted 0.79 ISF killed compared to 0.016 US police officers killed is a wide margin; it is roughly 50 times more dangerous to be serving in the ISF than in an average American police department, including all the rural and suburban areas with comparatively low police casualties. This is an honest, fair comparison that you will not see from the media in their war reporting.  Further, the downward trend of the ratio puts the situation in Iraq in a whole new light.  The overall trend is good news.  
Electrical development, production, and distribution
On this subject I have a little inside information because of my service as the US Liaison to the Musiab Power Station in Iraq in 2004.   The background of the power situation in Iraq must be discussed to understand the analysis. 
Critics of Iraqi reconstruction like to point to the lack of sufficient power supply in Iraq as a failing of reconstruction.  But it is not a simple matter of just megawatts produced post-Saddam compared to before the régime changed.  Hang with me, it will be worth it.
Before 2003, one of Saddam’s mechanisms for controlling the government and population was the power supply.  While the power grid in Baghdad may have appeared to be distributed fairly, this was not the case.  Almost every day in May 2003, patrols in Baghdad would find several people dead, lying under power transformers.  These hapless souls died attempting to hook insufficient high gauge wire directly into the transformers, and from there into their homes.  Driving through the neighborhoods one could see literally thousands of these types of wires hung over the roads, going into homes.  Critics of the war would have us believe that everyone in Baghdad had power, 24 hours a day in the pre-war days.  This was not the case.  While Iraq had the capacity to power all of Baghdad, Saddam did not allow this.  Saddam gave power only to those loyal to him. 
There is no clear evidence to show how many people of the 6+ million in Baghdad had power, but from my experience I estimate that less than 1 million people had power in their homes.  Of course this doesn’t include government buildings and industry. 
Another dirty little secret is that in Iraq the Sunnis had the electrical power, but the rest of the country, in the Kurdish north and the Shiite south, had very little electricity at all.  Iraqi Ministry of Power officials told me that outside of Baghdad, electricity was scarce in pre-war Iraq.  This was due to Saddam’s control measures and lack of capacity to produce or distribute power to the countryside.  Before the war, Iraq had less than 50% of the needed capacity.
The 6 million people in Baghdad received 63% of the power.  That means that out of 25 million people in Iraq 24% of the population got 63% of the power, even though Saddam did not allow all 6 million people in Baghdad to have power.  Adjusted to my estimate that only a million or so favored residences received reliable power, the percentage changes to 4% of the population consuming 63% of the power. The 19 million Iraqis living outside Baghdad shared only 37% of the power capacity.
Capacity is a misleading benchmark.  A country may have the capacity, but what they actually produce is the true indicator of welfare.  Actual distribution of power is the real benchmark.  While capacity pre-war was 3958 megawatts (Page 37), this was the case only if the power plants operated at 100%.  No power plant operates at 100% anywhere, due to required maintenance.  At any one time only 50% of the power capacity is being generated and distributed.  Given those facts, pre-war Iraq only produced about 2400 megawatts of power at any one time.  This less than half of what it needed pre-war or what is now needed. 
How much power does Iraq need?  1 Megawatt is sufficient to power 400 homes in a developing country like Iraq.  If we assume that each household has 10 people (which is very high) that means that there are at least 2.5 million households in Iraq.  So Iraq needs to produce 6250 megawatts of power, 24/7 for just residential use.  Factor in government and industry one could easily increase that estimate by 25%, for a total need of 7812 megawatts. 
Pre-war Iraq had 4 large power plants.  Each plant could produce 1200 megawatts of power at 100%.  That is a pre-war capacity total of 4800 megawatts at 100%.  Operating at 50% of that number, the output is reduced to 2400 megawatts.  So at the time of the war, Iraq could only reliably distribute 30% of the total needed power.  That 30% number is very close to the percentage of the Sunni minority in Iraq.  Once one adds in the government and industrial needs, it is easy to see why the Kurds and the southern Shiites got very little power.  I don’t think that is a coincidence. 
How do I know these numbers?  I saw the records.  The records showed that the power plant at Musiab only produced an average of 550 megawatts of power per day in any given month.  If all four major power plants in Iraq averaged the same numbers, then the output in pre-war Iraq was only 2200 megawatts distributed.
The Coalition goal is to get generated distributed power to 6000 megawatts (MW) by July 2007.  That is well short of the estimated need of 7812 megawatts but still far closer than the 2400 megawatts that Saddam produced pre-war.  Currently, Iraq distributes 4000 MW.  When compared to the 2400 MW that Saddam distributed, that is a 67% increase in distribution, in less than 5 years. 
A 67% increase in power distribution is impressive by any measure.  While it is still 2000 MW short of the intended goal of 6000 MW it is still an impressive feat.  Yet, oddly this progress is not reported on.  In fact, the numbers do not seem to be analyzed by the media at all.  Is this a simple oversight or a deliberate misleading by the media and war critics? 
These are two examples our many of how the available information is not analyzed and reported.  There are many more.  Things like water treatment, sewer, potable water, schools, free press, communications, bridges, economy, and farming are some of the other good news progress that is not reported.  There are certainly some other examples that would show disappointing trends or lack of progress,  but the media has been doing a good job of reporting on those negative aspects.  I just thought that since the media was only doing half of the fair and accurate part I would pick up their slack in a very small way to show that there is significant, unreported good news. 
The Military’s and Government’s responsibilities                
If the media are not going to fairly and accurately report the news coming out of Iraq, then the military and government have to step up to the plate somehow.  But because the media controls most of our information outlets, it is difficult. Conservative talk radio, satellite TV, and the Internet are three ways to bypass the media. War blogs and conservative news sites can go a long way in getting the good new out.  The Pentagon has a news channel, called The Pentagon Channel. In theory, satellite and cable providers could carry it, though of course critics would cry foul.
Yet the military has decided to crackdown on the very war blogs that get good information to the public.  While operational security is the #1 priority in our information operations, the military needs to ensure that good news continues to flow through outlets that are supportive of our war rather then squelching them with, what may be, well-intentioned, but very damaging limits on accurate information flowing to the public.  Commanders need to ensure that they maintain operational security while not inhibiting the critical information that war bloggers send out, getting real information about the war to the public.   
The President
Lastly, whenever the President campaigns to gain support for the war and explains the facts to the public, support for the war goes up. He should do much more of this.  I am not talking about one or two speeches, I am talking about three and four week campaigns, with speeches made several times a day, across the whole country.  A campaign that is as well thought-out, and as vigorously executed as any political campaign for elected office. 
Our men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan are putting in 18-hour days, seven days a week, for 15 months.  No vacations, no holidays, no weekends off.  I think that the President owes them his full effort in doing his part to proclaim the real progress that is being achieved.  Vague statements of progress are not sufficient.  An information campaign is what is needed.   It is time to cowboy up.
Accurate, meaningful information that spans the full spectrum of subjects, including good news as well as bad, is critical to the American people getting a true picture of the war.  If the information is slanted too far one way as it is now, the consequence will not just be defeat of the US, but could lead to mass murder and instability throughout the Middle East, Africa and the world at large.  That does not mean that it will happen, but an American defeat would have a chilling effect on our allies and embolden our enemies.
The flip side of that argument is that only good news reporting will inevitably lead to laziness and complacency that would cause America to not see the mistakes that have been made in the war; and so, not pursue any correction for the mistakes.
It is a balance that will not be reached via unbiased reporting.  It is reached by the left and right pulling against each other to reach equilibrium.  The moderates accomplish nothing; they sit and watch.  We need the left to motivate the right to make progress as much as the left needs us to motivate them in the same way.  The problem lies not with the media’s left of center standing.  The problem lies with the lack of effort on the part of the right of center people to counter the left.  This is how balance is found.  The right needs to cowboy up and counter the media.   
Gerd Schroeder is a Major in the US Army.  He has served in Iraq and Afghanistan.  He does not speak for the US Army or the Department of Defense.

The Missing Context in Media Reporting on Iraq

The Missing Context in Media Reporting on Iraq

By Gerd Schroeder

The US mainstream media are failing to provide the public the context it needs to accurately understand both the successes of our progress in Iraq. They do this either purposely or through incompetence and/or lack of intellect.  I know many members of the media, and none of them lack intellect or are incompetent. 
I came to this harsh conclusion after studying the ongoing Brookings Institution Report titled “IRAQ INDEX Tracking Reconstruction and Security in Post-Saddam Iraq” for several months. The Brookings Institution is a left-of-center think tank, led by Bill Clinton’s close friend Strobe Talbott.  But its information in the Iraq Index is generally accurate and reliable.  The information mainly comes from the US Military and other US governmental agencies’ official statistics. It is updated at least weekly to provide in one place the most up to date information on the war that I have been able to find.  Two small examples will suffice to show how neglect of context creates a misleading public impression.
ISF Casualties
The Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) includes military, police, special police, Iraqi National Guard, and border police. From early-2005 to mid-2006 the hot topic for marking progress in the war was how many ISF were being trained and employed.  However, in mid-2006 this media reporting trend almost wholly dried up, and the biggest critic of ISF training progress in Congress, Senator Biden, stopped beating the drum.  Why?  Look at the data on page 32 of the Index. 
In July-August 2006, the number of deployed ISF jumped from 269,600 up to 298,000.  The previous months had experienced much smaller growth, but July/August 2006 experienced a 10.6% jump in ISF.  The numbers jumped again in September by almost 10,000 to 307,800.  October rose 4000, and November rose almost 11,000.  In essence, the critics of the war lost their talking point, and shifted instead toward troop withdrawal as the idea to be pushed. 
There is more ISF good news.
For almost 3 years we have heard the critics of the war talk about the high ISF deaths. The information is just raw data; close analysis of the average numbers killed month to month as a percentage of total ISF force strength shows a consistent downward trend.  Up to January 2005, records of the number of ISF killed to total force strength are hard to find because of the lack of accurate numbers killed month to month.  But, since January 2005 the ratios are clear.  In January 2005, 0.86 died per 1000 ISF.  In June and July 2005 the ratio jumped to 1.75 per 1000 ISF, a high water mark for ISF deaths.  However, from July 2005 until January 2007, the ratio of ISF killed per 1000 has steadily dropped to a low of 0.28 killed per 1000 ISF.  There is a current up-trend from that 0.28/1000 ratio to 0. 9/1000 in April 2007.  The average from January 2005 to April 2007 is 0.79 killed per 1000 ISF. 
To put the ISF deaths into a clearer perspective The FBI reported that in 2005, 67 police officers were killed by accident while on duty and 55 by hostile acts in 2005, for a total of 132 police officers out of 673,146 law enforcement officers in the United States in 2005.   After dividing 132 officers killed by 12 months (to make the comparison on the same basis), 0.016 police officers died in America per month per 1000 police in 2005.  Granted 0.79 ISF killed compared to 0.016 US police officers killed is a wide margin; it is roughly 50 times more dangerous to be serving in the ISF than in an average American police department, including all the rural and suburban areas with comparatively low police casualties. This is an honest, fair comparison that you will not see from the media in their war reporting.  Further, the downward trend of the ratio puts the situation in Iraq in a whole new light.  The overall trend is good news.  
Electrical development, production, and distribution
On this subject I have a little inside information because of my service as the US Liaison to the Musiab Power Station in Iraq in 2004.   The background of the power situation in Iraq must be discussed to understand the analysis. 
Critics of Iraqi reconstruction like to point to the lack of sufficient power supply in Iraq as a failing of reconstruction.  But it is not a simple matter of just megawatts produced post-Saddam compared to before the régime changed.  Hang with me, it will be worth it.
Before 2003, one of Saddam’s mechanisms for controlling the government and population was the power supply.  While the power grid in Baghdad may have appeared to be distributed fairly, this was not the case.  Almost every day in May 2003, patrols in Baghdad would find several people dead, lying under power transformers.  These hapless souls died attempting to hook insufficient high gauge wire directly into the transformers, and from there into their homes.  Driving through the neighborhoods one could see literally thousands of these types of wires hung over the roads, going into homes.  Critics of the war would have us believe that everyone in Baghdad had power, 24 hours a day in the pre-war days.  This was not the case.  While Iraq had the capacity to power all of Baghdad, Saddam did not allow this.  Saddam gave power only to those loyal to him. 
There is no clear evidence to show how many people of the 6+ million in Baghdad had power, but from my experience I estimate that less than 1 million people had power in their homes.  Of course this doesn’t include government buildings and industry. 
Another dirty little secret is that in Iraq the Sunnis had the electrical power, but the rest of the country, in the Kurdish north and the Shiite south, had very little electricity at all.  Iraqi Ministry of Power officials told me that outside of Baghdad, electricity was scarce in pre-war Iraq.  This was due to Saddam’s control measures and lack of capacity to produce or distribute power to the countryside.  Before the war, Iraq had less than 50% of the needed capacity.
The 6 million people in Baghdad received 63% of the power.  That means that out of 25 million people in Iraq 24% of the population got 63% of the power, even though Saddam did not allow all 6 million people in Baghdad to have power.  Adjusted to my estimate that only a million or so favored residences received reliable power, the percentage changes to 4% of the population consuming 63% of the power. The 19 million Iraqis living outside Baghdad shared only 37% of the power capacity.
Capacity is a misleading benchmark.  A country may have the capacity, but what they actually produce is the true indicator of welfare.  Actual distribution of power is the real benchmark.  While capacity pre-war was 3958 megawatts (Page 37), this was the case only if the power plants operated at 100%.  No power plant operates at 100% anywhere, due to required maintenance.  At any one time only 50% of the power capacity is being generated and distributed.  Given those facts, pre-war Iraq only produced about 2400 megawatts of power at any one time.  This less than half of what it needed pre-war or what is now needed. 
How much power does Iraq need?  1 Megawatt is sufficient to power 400 homes in a developing country like Iraq.  If we assume that each household has 10 people (which is very high) that means that there are at least 2.5 million households in Iraq.  So Iraq needs to produce 6250 megawatts of power, 24/7 for just residential use.  Factor in government and industry one could easily increase that estimate by 25%, for a total need of 7812 megawatts. 
Pre-war Iraq had 4 large power plants.  Each plant could produce 1200 megawatts of power at 100%.  That is a pre-war capacity total of 4800 megawatts at 100%.  Operating at 50% of that number, the output is reduced to 2400 megawatts.  So at the time of the war, Iraq could only reliably distribute 30% of the total needed power.  That 30% number is very close to the percentage of the Sunni minority in Iraq.  Once one adds in the government and industrial needs, it is easy to see why the Kurds and the southern Shiites got very little power.  I don’t think that is a coincidence. 
How do I know these numbers?  I saw the records.  The records showed that the power plant at Musiab only produced an average of 550 megawatts of power per day in any given month.  If all four major power plants in Iraq averaged the same numbers, then the output in pre-war Iraq was only 2200 megawatts distributed.
The Coalition goal is to get generated distributed power to 6000 megawatts (MW) by July 2007.  That is well short of the estimated need of 7812 megawatts but still far closer than the 2400 megawatts that Saddam produced pre-war.  Currently, Iraq distributes 4000 MW.  When compared to the 2400 MW that Saddam distributed, that is a 67% increase in distribution, in less than 5 years. 
A 67% increase in power distribution is impressive by any measure.  While it is still 2000 MW short of the intended goal of 6000 MW it is still an impressive feat.  Yet, oddly this progress is not reported on.  In fact, the numbers do not seem to be analyzed by the media at all.  Is this a simple oversight or a deliberate misleading by the media and war critics? 
These are two examples our many of how the available information is not analyzed and reported.  There are many more.  Things like water treatment, sewer, potable water, schools, free press, communications, bridges, economy, and farming are some of the other good news progress that is not reported.  There are certainly some other examples that would show disappointing trends or lack of progress,  but the media has been doing a good job of reporting on those negative aspects.  I just thought that since the media was only doing half of the fair and accurate part I would pick up their slack in a very small way to show that there is significant, unreported good news. 
The Military’s and Government’s responsibilities                
If the media are not going to fairly and accurately report the news coming out of Iraq, then the military and government have to step up to the plate somehow.  But because the media controls most of our information outlets, it is difficult. Conservative talk radio, satellite TV, and the Internet are three ways to bypass the media. War blogs and conservative news sites can go a long way in getting the good new out.  The Pentagon has a news channel, called The Pentagon Channel. In theory, satellite and cable providers could carry it, though of course critics would cry foul.
Yet the military has decided to crackdown on the very war blogs that get good information to the public.  While operational security is the #1 priority in our information operations, the military needs to ensure that good news continues to flow through outlets that are supportive of our war rather then squelching them with, what may be, well-intentioned, but very damaging limits on accurate information flowing to the public.  Commanders need to ensure that they maintain operational security while not inhibiting the critical information that war bloggers send out, getting real information about the war to the public.   
The President
Lastly, whenever the President campaigns to gain support for the war and explains the facts to the public, support for the war goes up. He should do much more of this.  I am not talking about one or two speeches, I am talking about three and four week campaigns, with speeches made several times a day, across the whole country.  A campaign that is as well thought-out, and as vigorously executed as any political campaign for elected office. 
Our men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan are putting in 18-hour days, seven days a week, for 15 months.  No vacations, no holidays, no weekends off.  I think that the President owes them his full effort in doing his part to proclaim the real progress that is being achieved.  Vague statements of progress are not sufficient.  An information campaign is what is needed.   It is time to cowboy up.
Accurate, meaningful information that spans the full spectrum of subjects, including good news as well as bad, is critical to the American people getting a true picture of the war.  If the information is slanted too far one way as it is now, the consequence will not just be defeat of the US, but could lead to mass murder and instability throughout the Middle East, Africa and the world at large.  That does not mean that it will happen, but an American defeat would have a chilling effect on our allies and embolden our enemies.
The flip side of that argument is that only good news reporting will inevitably lead to laziness and complacency that would cause America to not see the mistakes that have been made in the war; and so, not pursue any correction for the mistakes.
It is a balance that will not be reached via unbiased reporting.  It is reached by the left and right pulling against each other to reach equilibrium.  The moderates accomplish nothing; they sit and watch.  We need the left to motivate the right to make progress as much as the left needs us to motivate them in the same way.  The problem lies not with the media’s left of center standing.  The problem lies with the lack of effort on the part of the right of center people to counter the left.  This is how balance is found.  The right needs to cowboy up and counter the media.   
Gerd Schroeder is a Major in the US Army.  He has served in Iraq and Afghanistan.  He does not speak for the US Army or the Department of Defense.

Detoxifying DDT

Detoxifying DDT
By Bill Steigerwald
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 14, 2007

You missed the Africa Malaria Day celebration on April 25, didn’t you? Perfectly understandable. Unless you’re headed for a three-week safari in Kenya, malaria doesn’t appear on our modern radar screens.

But for the poorest, hottest corners of the planet, malaria remains a scourge for which there is no vaccine. The incapacitating disease, caused by a parasite transmitted from humans to humans by mosquitoes, afflicts from 350 million to 500 million people a year in Asia, Africa and South America. More than 80 percent are in rural Africa.

Every year malaria kills at least 1 million humans — nearly 3,000 a day, mostly the very young or pregnant. The real figure could be 2.5 million annual deaths. No one knows for sure.

Despite these daunting statistics, the global war against malaria may finally be taking a turn for the better. The same miracle weapon that we and most of Europe employed to rid ourselves of malaria half a century ago — the pesticide DDT — is starting to be used more widely in Africa.

DDT isn’t foolproof but works wonders. Lightly sprayed twice a year on the inside walls of living quarters, it’s like Kryptonite to the mosquitoes that carry malaria. In 1945 when India began using DDT, it had 800,000 malaria deaths a year; by 1960, it had a few thousand.

Other malarial hells were not so lucky. In the early 1970s environmentalists spooked by Rachel Carson’s book “Silent Spring” successfully lobbied the federal government to outlaw DDT in the United States because it allegedly was killing off American eagles and was a cancer threat to humans.

It’s turned out that DDT is virtually harmless to man, bird or beast. But that didn’t help Africa’s malaria sufferers, who for 30 years were deprived of DDT because Western relief aid was often contingent on recipient countries not using DDT. Most poor countries that needed it most stopped using it or never got it. Tens of millions died.

Fast-forward to the early 2000s. People in the West — including The New York Times — came to their senses about bringing back DDT. Some even realized how hypocritical and immoral it was for rich First Worlders to deny poor Third Worlders access to the same pesticide that had made the West malaria-free.

A mini-miracle occurred last year when the World Health Organization reversed its 30-year anti-DDT policy and re-integrated DDT into its heretofore hapless and largely ineffective anti-malaria program.

Environmentalists are still outraged. But DDT remains the cheapest and most effective pesticide for house spraying, which is why countries like South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda are already applying DDT to fight malaria or trying to get the money to do so.

Malaria now is a fashionable but worthy blip on Western radar screens. But DDT obviously still has a radioactive politically incorrect stigma attached to it.

For example, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, bless its namesakes, has spent at least $1 billion fighting malaria in Africa. Much of that money goes to organizations that then disburse the money to existing national anti-malaria programs that employ DDT spraying, but the foundation itself is conspicuously shy about publicly supporting DDT use.

Last December, as part of a global strategy to fight malaria, the foundation committed $83.5 million for things like bed netting, vaccine research and malaria awareness. Not a dime was specifically set aside for DDT or its application. In fact, the letters D-D-T — which barely exist on the gatesfoundation.org website — didn’t appear on the foundation’s press release.

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers