How is winning a war--the most dominant news story of the last 5 years--relegated to Section B? The Iraqi Upturn Don't look now, but the U.S.-backed government and army may be winning the war. Sunday, June 1, 2008; B06 THERE'S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the ...

Ralph Peters takes the defeatists like Obama and Clinton to task with the facts of war and then concludes: . . . If we nonetheless quit Iraq in 2009, the defeated remnants of al Qaeda will be able to declare victory, after all. The organization will be able to re-launch itself as the great Muslim victor over the Great Satan. We'll have thrown away a potentially decisive triumph and revived the fortunes of the fanatics who brought us 9/11. And the above only detailed the defeat of al Qaeda. Far more is happening in Iraq, all of it good: Muqtada al-Sadr and his thugs have suffered a series of lopsided defeats; Muqtada's hiding in Iran, afraid to return; ...

Of course, it would take a non-British born (Pakistani) bishop of the Church of England to point out the obvious: Bishop says collapse of Christianity is wrecking British society - and Islam is filling the void By Sean Poulter and Niall Firth Last updated at 10:17 AM on 29th May 2008 Accusation: Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali claims radical Islam is filling the moral vacuum left by the decline in Christian virtues The collapse of Christianity has wrecked British society, a leading Church of England bishop declared yesterday. It has destroyed family life and left the country defenceless against the rise of radical Islam in a moral and spiritual vacuum. In a lacerating attack on liberal values, the Right Reverend Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, said the country was mired in a doctrine of 'endless self-indulgence' that had brought an explosion in public violence and binge-drinking. In a blow to Gordon Brown, he mocked the 'scramblings and scratchings' of politicians who try to cast new British values such as respect and tolerance. The Pakistani-born bishop dated the downfall of Christianity from the 'social and sexual revolution' of the 1960s. He said Church leaders had capitulated to Marxist revolutionary thinking and quoted an academic who blames the loss of 'faith and piety among women' for the steep decline in Christian worship. Dr Nazir-Ali said the ' newfangled and insecurely founded' doctrine of multiculturalism has left immigrant communities 'segregated, living parallel lives'. Christian values of human dignity, equality and freedom could be lost as the way is left open for the advance of brands of Islam that do not respect Western values. The Bishopric of Rochester is one of the ten most powerful positions in the Church of England.

It took the CIA director himself to say it in black and white, but the Washington Post is reporting that al Qaeda has been defeated in Iraq: U.S. Cites Big Gains Against Al-Qaeda Group Is Facing Setbacks Globally, CIA Chief Says By Joby Warrick Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, May 30, 2008; A01 Less than a year after his agency warned of new threats from a resurgent al-Qaeda, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden now portrays the terrorist movement as essentially defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and on the defensive throughout much of the rest of the world, including in its presumed haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. In a strikingly upbeat assessment, the CIA chief cited major gains against al-Qaeda's allies in the Middle East and an increasingly successful campaign to destabilize the group's core leadership. While cautioning that al-Qaeda remains a serious threat, Hayden said Osama bin Laden is losing the battle for hearts and minds in the Islamic world and has largely forfeited his ability to exploit the Iraq war to recruit adherents. Two years ago, a CIA study concluded that the U.S.-led war had become a propaganda and marketing bonanza for al-Qaeda, generating cash donations and legions of volunteers. All that has changed, Hayden said in an interview with The Washington Post this week that coincided with the start of his third year at the helm of the CIA. "On balance, we are doing pretty well," he said, ticking down a list of accomplishments: "Near strategic defeat of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Near strategic defeat for al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. Significant setbacks for al-Qaeda globally -- and here I'm going to use the word 'ideologically' -- as a lot of the Islamic world pushes back on their form of Islam," he said. The sense of shifting tides in the terrorism fight is shared by a number of terrorism experts, though some caution that it is too early to tell whether the gains are permanent. Some credit Hayden and other U.S. intelligence leaders for going on the offensive against al-Qaeda in the area along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, where the tempo of Predator strikes has dramatically increased from previous years. But analysts say the United States has caught some breaks in the past year, benefiting from improved conditions in Iraq, as well as strategic blunders by al-Qaeda that have cut into its support base. "One of the lessons we can draw from the past two years is that al-Qaeda is its own worst enemy," said Robert Grenier, a former top CIA counterterrorism official who is now managing director of Kroll, a risk consulting firm. "Where they have succeeded initially, they very quickly discredit themselves." Others warned that al-Qaeda remains capable of catastrophic attacks and may be even more determined to stage a major strike to prove its relevance. "Al-Qaeda's obituary has been written far too often in the past few years for anyone to declare victory," said Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University. "I agree that there has been progress. But we're indisputably up against a very resilient and implacable enemy."

The facts reveal that the answer to that question is a resounding "Yes!" From Powerline: On the stump, Barack Obama usually concludes his comments on Iraq by saying, "and it hasn't made us safer." It is an article of faith on the left that nothing the Bush administration has done has enhanced our security, and, on the contrary, its various alleged blunders have only contributed to the number of jihadists who want to attack us. Empirically, however, it seems beyond dispute that something has made us safer since 2001. Over the course of the Bush administration, successful attacks on the United States and its interests overseas have dwindled to virtually nothing. Some perspective here is required. While most Americans may not have been paying attention, a considerable number of terrorist attacks on America and American interests abroad were launched from the 1980s forward, too many of which were successful. What follows is a partial history: 1988 February: Marine Corps Lt. Colonel Higgens, Chief of the U.N. Truce Force, was kidnapped and murdered by Hezbollah. December: Pan Am flight 103 from London to New York was blown up over Scotland, killing 270 people, including 35 from Syracuse University and a number of American military personnel. 1991 November: American University in Beirut bombed. 1993 January: A Pakistani terrorist opened fire outside CIA headquarters, killing two agents and wounding three. February: World Trade Center bombed, killing six and injuring more than 1,000. 1995 January: Operation Bojinka, Osama bin Laden's plan to blow up 12 airliners over the Pacific Ocean, discovered. November: Five Americans killed in attack on a U.S. Army office in Saudi Arabia. 1996 June: Truck bomb at Khobar Towers kills 19 American servicemen and injures 240. June: Terrorist opens fire at top of Empire State Building, killing one. 1997 February: Palestinian opens fire at top of Empire State Building, killing one and wounding more than a dozen. November: Terrorists murder four American oil company employees in Pakistan. 1998 January: U.S. Embassy in Peru bombed. August: Simultaneous bomb attacks on U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed more than 300 people and injured over 5,000. 1999 October: Egypt Air flight 990 crashed off the coast of Massachusetts, killing 100 Americans among the more than 200 on board; the pilot yelled "Allahu Akbar!" as he steered the airplane into the ocean. 2000 October: A suicide boat exploded next to the U.S.S. Cole, killing 17 American sailors and injuring 39. 2001 September: Terrorists with four hijacked airplanes kill around 3,000 Americans in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. December: Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber," tries to blow up a transatlantic flight, but is stopped by passengers. The September 11 attack was a propaganda triumph for al Qaeda, celebrated by a dismaying number of Muslims around the world. Everyone expected that it would draw more Muslims to bin Laden's cause and that more such attacks would follow. In fact, though, what happened was quite different: the pace of successful jihadist attacks against the United States slowed, decelerated further after the onset of the Iraq war, and has now dwindled to essentially zero. Here is the record: 2002 October: Diplomat Laurence Foley murdered in Jordan, in an operation planned, directed and financed by Zarqawi in Iraq, perhaps with the complicity of Saddam's government. 2003 May: Suicide bombers killed 10 Americans, and killed and wounded many others, at housing compounds for westerners in Saudi Arabia. October: More bombings of United States housing compounds in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killed 26 and injured 160. 2004 There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad. 2005 There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad. 2006 There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad. 2007 There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad. 2008 So far, there have been no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad.

'Sorry love, Unwanted fathers go in the yellow bags.' In yet another move which demonstrates that Britain is no longer great, Parliament declared fathers to be irrelevant. Fathers aren't needed say MPs: Commons decides IVF babies can do without a male role model By James Chapman 21st May 2008 Fathers were last night effectively declared an irrelevance in modern Britain. The requirement for fertility doctors to consider a child's need for a male role model before giving women IVF treatment was scrapped by MPs. In a free vote, they swept away the rule despite impassioned pleas that the Government plan would "drive another nail into the coffin of the traditional family". Labour rebels said it would send entirely the wrong signal to society as Britain faces a crisis in responsible parenting. The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, had warned it would remove the father from the heart of the family. He accused the Government of putting the interests of "consumers" who want to become parents before the welfare of children. But in the Commons, ministers won support for the legislation. Voting was 292 to 217, a majority of 75. In a second vote, a Tory attempt to underline the need for a father or "male role model" was rejected by 290 votes to 222, a majority of 68. Three senior Conservatives - Shadow Chancellor George Osborne, Cabinet Office spokesman Francis Maude and justice spokesman Nick Herbert, who is openly gay - were the only members of the shadow Cabinet to back the Government. Mr Osborne's vote will cause most surprise, since it reveals a split with party leader David Cameron on the issue. Three Cabinet ministers - Culture Secretary Andy Burnham, Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly and Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy - voted against the Government. It emerged later that Mr Burnham, a rare champion of marriage on the Labour front bench, felt so strongly that he scrapped a visit to the Cannes film festival to be in the Commons. Mr Cameron also voted for keeping the "father" requirement, while Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg were against. The Government argued that the law as it stood discriminated against single women and lesbian couples - although both these groups can already get fertility treatment on the Health Service. From now on, doctors will have to consider only a child's need for "supportive parenting". In a highly-charged three-hour debate, former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, who led the revolt against the plans, said it was essential to recognise the importance to a developing child of a father figure. "Taking it away will be as though we are saying that this is not an issue, that fathers are not important," he added. The Government's emphasis on "supportive parenting" sends a message to society that "fathers are less important than mothers", he warned.

For the last 10 years, Maggie Gallagher has been one of the clearest thinkers and writers on the topic of marriage. Her seminal work, The Abolition of Marriage, is an irrefutable defense of traditional marriage. Today, she writes that the California Supreme Court has tossed a big, fat hand grenade into the marriage debate. CALIFORNIA'S EPIC BATTLE FOR MARRIAGE AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY By Maggie Gallagher Tue May 20, 7:57 PM ET They say we are tired of culture wars. Tell that to the California Supreme Court, which didn't sound tired at all when it lobbed a big, fat hand grenade into the marriage debate. Ideas have consequences. And the California court ...

Nechirvan Barzani, prime minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq, reports on the tremendous progress in Iraq. From today's Wall Street Journal: We Are Making Progress in Iraq By NECHIRVAN BARZANI May 20, 2008; Page A21 While the media offers mostly images of violence, and many Americans have grown weary of the war in Iraq, I bring hopeful news to Washington this week as I meet with the administration and members of Congress. Since 2003, we have built the Kurdistan Region as a model for democracy and a gateway for development for all of Iraq. We are willing partners in this transition toward an Iraqi government that is representative of all its people. Through our peshmerga ...

(Michael Ramirez Cartoons at IBD Editorials)

Thanks to antics like her trip to Syria, this site began as Impeach Reid and Pelosi dot com. In contrast to her warm reception in Syria a year ago, Gateway Pundit reports that "Crazy Aunt Nan" got a chilly reception in Baghdad this week: "Poor antiwar Nancy Pelosi was left stranded in Baghdad for 24 hours before the Iraqi Prime Minister made it back to Baghdad to meet with her. TIME Magazine reported: Pelosi is something of a nonentity to average Iraqis. If they know who she is at all, she is generally seen as an antiwar caricature figure, someone whose views on U.S. troop withdrawals are widely considered unrealistic. Pelosi has said ...