NOW HERE’S AN ANTITERRORISM BILL I could really support.

MORE NAILS IN THE COFFIN OF ANTIWAR CREDIBILITY:

France, Germany, Russia, Belgium and Canada are not on the side of peace or morality or the Iraqi people. The pictures from the streets of Baghdad make that plain. But we are on the side of TotalFinaElf. Twice in recent columns, Diane Francis has mentioned, almost en passant, a curious little fact:

The Western oil company with the closest ties to the late Saddam is France’s TotalFinaElf. That’s not the curious fact, that’s just business as usual in the Fifth Republic. This is the curious fact: As Diane wrote in February and again last week, “Total’s biggest shareholder is Montreal’s Paul Desmarais, whose youngest son is married to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s daughter.”

Let’s see if I’ve got this straight: TotalFinaElf’s largest shareholder is a subsidiary of Montreal’s Power Corp, whose co-chief executive is Jean Chrétien’s son-in-law, Andre Desmarais. Mr. Desmarais’ brother, Paul Desmarais Jr., sits on the Total board.

For months, the anti-war crowd has insisted that “it’s all about oil,” that the only reason the Iraqi people were being “liberated” was so that the second biggest oil reserves in the world could be annexed in perpetuity by Dick Cheney and Halliburton and the rest of Bush’s Texas oilpatch gang. Instead, it turns out that, if it is all about oil, then the principal North American beneficiary of the continued enslavement of the Iraqi people is the family of the Canadian Prime Minister — that’s to say, his daughter, France Chrétien, and his grandchildren.

Perhaps the new Iraqi government will investigate Chirac, Chretien, and Putin for complicity in crimes against humanity? And I wonder if the folks who marched for “peace” will feel bad about being the tools of Big Oil? [ Yeah, but it’s French Big Oil — Ed. Well, it’s okay then.]

IRAQIS DEMONSTRATING AT THE WHITE HOUSE: Orin Kerr reports:

As I came closer, I realized that it was a string of about twenty cars, mostly filled with Arab-looking men holding large flags. My initial thought: probably another antiwar protest. (The intersection of H and 16th Street has become a favorite spot for antiwar protesters in the last few weeks.) But as I walked towards the cars, I realized this was something very different: the flags the men were waving were U.S. flags, plus an occasional pre-1991 Iraqi flag, and the men were yelling things like “Saddam is gone!” and “No more tyranny!” Yes, they were loudly celebrating the downfall of Saddam Hussein , and had smiles on their faces a mile wide. It was a remarkable sight, and I was happy to stop by the side of the road and cheer them on for a few minutes.

Things will return to normal around the White House by tomorrow. International ANSWER is convening near the White House at noon to protest the war in Iraq; their website describes the war as a “horrific unprovoked attack on Iraq [that] must be understood as one of the extreme terrorist acts of modern times.” I guess somebody forgot to explain that to the Iraqis who were celebrating last night.

ANSWER — ever ready to add another rivet to the chains of tyranny!

THE ‘PEACE MOVEMENT’ didn’t get the oceans of civilian blood it wanted, and William Saletan notes that this poses a dilemma:

Some argued that war was always immoral; others argued that this war was hasty or unjust. All agreed that the immorality of war was based on the immorality of killing. Now that Baghdad has fallen, here’s my question to peaceniks: Are you against killing, or are you against war? Because what happened in Iraq suggests you may have to choose.

Every death is a tragedy, of course — except that to a lot of “peace” activists it seems that only deaths at American hands count. It’s entirely possible that fewer Iraqis have died in the last three weeks of war than in many previous three-week periods of Saddam’s reign. And now the killing by Saddam’s thugs is over for good. If we had had “peace” it would have continued indefinitely.

Of course, some have already chosen:

“The prison in question was inspected by my team in Jan. 1998. It appeared to be a prison for children – toddlers up to pre-adolescents – whose only crime was to be the offspring of those who have spoken out politically against the regime of Saddam Hussein. It was a horrific scene. Actually I’m not going to describe what I saw there because what I saw was so horrible that it can be used by those who would want to promote war with Iraq, and right now I’m waging peace.”

And they dare call the U.S. military “baby killers?”

UPDATE: Daniel Drezner writes:

My suspicion is that most of the committed anti-war types loathe American power so much that they’ll choose to keep their hands clean.

I will beg to differ.

Me too.

FISKING HANS BLIX almost seems too easy. But shooting fish in a barrel has its pleasures.

CNN EASON JORDAN UPDATE: Several people have sent this link to a transcript of Jordan from back when Hussein was still in power:

BOB GARFIELD: I’m sure you have seen Franklin Foer’s article in The New Republic which charges that the Western press is appeasing the Iraqi regime in order to maintain its visas — to be there reporting should a war ultimately break out. What’s your take on that?

EASON JORDAN: The writer clearly doesn’t have a clear understanding of the realities on the ground because CNN has demonstrated again and again that it has a spine; that it’s prepared to be forthright; is forthright in its reporting.

Let’s hear more about those “realities on the ground.”

UPDATE: Here’s a link to the Foer piece. It’s pretty damning stuff even without the more recent admission.

That said, I think that Jordan deserves at least some credit for admitting the mistake now. The real question is, what will CNN do where other thugocracies are concerned? Is suck-up-for-access still the general approach, or have they learned something?

ANOTHER UPDATE: Is it a “journalistic Enron scandal?” Oh, no. I think it’s much bigger than that.

Matt Welch writes:

The embarrassing Peter Arnett interview on Iraq TV was just a brief public glimpse on what has been a nasty little private “secret” for years — that “news bureaus” in Baghdad and other totalitarian capitals (Havana, to name one) are actually propaganda huts, churning out what CNN producers call “sanctions coverage” (pieces on the awful humanitarian toll of international economic sanctions), while refusing to report the awful truth. It is possible, though intensely difficult, to do honest journalism in such circumstances. But with this column, I think we have the final proof that CNN will not be the news organization to rise to that challenge. Shame.

Shame, indeed.

ERIC ALTERMAN deserves credit for saying forthrightly what a lot of other people should be admitting:

I WAS WRONG

Paul Wolfowitz thought U.S. forces would be greeted as liberators in Iraq. I did not. His prediction in this case, was correct. I was wrong. (And not for the last time, I’m guessing.)

He strikes a somewhat less gracious tone in the rest of the post, but still, let’s give credit where credit is due.

On the radio (I think it was CBS radio news) I heard a correspondent from Mosul say that an Iraqi there asked him if America was there for freedom, or for the oil. What do you think? he asked. “If you stay,” responded the Iraqi, “you’re here for freedom. If you leave, it’s just for the oil.”

Interesting perspective.

UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan identifies more laudable candor.

HERE’S A REPORT on Knoxville band JagStar’s tour entertaining the troops in the ‘stans and the Gulf. Very interesting stuff. How many bands get to dine with Afghan generals — and then be de-wormed afterward?

CHIRAC AND SCHROEDER ON THE DEFENSIVE:

Chirac and Schroeder were both on the defensive today after television broadcasts showed jubilant Iraqi citizens welcoming U.S. soldiers and Marines to Baghdad.

Political opponents and media critics said the Iraqis’ reaction lent legitimacy to the war. They called on Chirac and Schroeder to put the war behind them and focus on repairing severely strained relations with the United States.

Meanwhile, in Washington today, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that France had “created a big problem” with such moves as holding up aid to Turkey from the NATO alliance, and that a reconsideration of NATO decision-making structures might be advisable.

“I think we need to look very carefully at where France is benefiting from a one-way street, where they benefit and don’t contribute,” Wolfowitz said. He accused France of failing to acknowledge the help that NATO was giving a European Union peacekeeping mission in Macedonia.

Paul Wolfowitz? Is he any relation to that Paul Wolifivitz guy the BBC keeps talking about?

WHAT THE NEWS MEDIA DIDN’T TELL YOU ABOUT SADDAM before the war, even though they knew it:

I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein’s regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely.

Maybe, you know, it’s not worth the moral compromises involved in reporting from a dictator’s capital, if you’re not able to tell the truth.

MICKEY KAUS’S GEARBOX FEATURE IS BACK, with observations on why front-wheel drive is like bad sex, and rear-wheel drive is like good sex.

“THE ALLIES GOT IT SO RIGHT,” writes John Keegan, “How did the pundits get it so wrong?”

Yet perfectly sensible people, who surely know better, clutter up their minds with such irrelevant factors as “the Arab street”, “international opinion”, the anti-war movement at home, votes in the UN and so on. They then predict that “American success is not certain”, “this could be a long and bitter war” and “the spectre of Vietnam looms over George W Bush”.

If they were employed by the City editor, or the sports desk, they would have been given their cards three wars ago.

Yes, but there are standards in sportswriting. I have some related comments over at GlennReynolds.com.

THE INSTAWIFE’S FILM PREMIERE went very well last night — there was an overflow crowd, the documentary looked good on the big screen, and everyone seemed quite pleased.

They also showed a trailer for Rod Roddenberry’s forthcoming documentary, Trek Nation,. (You can see a shorter trailer by following that link.) Rod is Gene’s son, and his film, which is being made with a Knoxville production company, is about the influence of Star Trek culture worldwide. He was there at the screening last night, and said that he hopes to interview some Klingons in Iraq (no, really) once things settle down.

UPDATE: A Knoxville production company? Well, yes. Knoxville is the fourth or fifth biggest center of cable-tv production in the country, with lots of stuff for Nickelodeon, Court TV, TNN, Discovery, etc. being done here. Roddenberry saw some MTV promos done by Atmosphere Pictures and then got in touch with them. As for Klingons in Iraq, Robin Goodfellow emails:

I don’t doubt there are klingons in Iraq, I remember several years ago being somewhat shocked while reading a usenet post in one of the star-trek newsgroups from someone in Rwanda explaining how television schedules were returning to normal after the refugees were returning and that meant he could
watch Star Trek: DS9 again. That was something of an eye opening for me of the depth and breadth of the global village.

Yep. And I sold a couple of Mobius Dick CDs to Iraqis back in 2000. I wonder who bought ’em, and how they’re doing now?

OKAY, ONE MORE: Jim Bennett writes:

They once imagined that they had constructed a stronghold from which to defy America. Now that illusion is gone, blasted away along with Saddam’s bunker by some well-placed JDAMs. Their dreams of dominion and defiance shattered by the Anglo-American war effort, they now struggle to retrieve as much as possible of their old vision, and wonder how to rebuild among the ruins.

Not the Iraqis. The Europeanists.

Call it “the Dream Palace of the Europeans.” And read it all.

AZIZ POONAWALLA WRITES:

The images we all saw on television worldwide yesterday will be in our world history books as one of the defining moments of the 21st century. Alongside those of 9-11, yin and yang. I was and still am opposed to war on Iraq – not the idea of war per se, but like Howard Dean, by the route to which we justified and pursued war. But winning the war was never in doubt and my heart is is full of satisfaction at seeing the statues of Saddam fall at last.

I am however quite disappointed by the attitude of many who oppose the war – who seem to have a grudging attitude towards the liberation. IRAQ IS FREE. Regardless of your politics, your principles, your attitudes – this must be the shared event that we all celebrate.

I want to see Iraq a peaceful, free and prosperous place. It wasn’t going to be that any time soon without the war. Now it can be — but “can” isn’t the same as “will.”

What worries me is that there are still people — who when agitating for “peace” pretended to have the Iraqis’ interests at heart — who would like to see Iraq descend into the depths again just so they can blame Bush and vindicate themselves. And they’re not all in France.

MICKEY KAUS says that it’s bad to forecast light blogging, because it drives down traffic. I guess if I got, you know, paid for traffic I’d care about that. . . . (Just one dollar per pageview, that’s all I ask!)

But blogging will be light later, as I’m off to the local premier of my wife’s documentary film, Six. The trailer’s not up on the website yet, though there are a couple of news stories that excerpt the film on the site. Feel free to order a copy — it makes a perfect wedding, wake, or bar mitzvah present. [A “wake” present? –Ed. Why not?]

HOW MANY MESSAGES CAN YOU FIND IN THIS PICTURE?

(Via reader Richard Heddleson, who says he found it via a link in a comment at Buzzmachine).

SEAN PENN: Peace activist with a concealed weapon!

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER OBSERVES:

The sight of them panicked Cassandras here in the United States who were quick to predict that the evidence of any armed resistance meant that we were in for a long guerrilla war. But the Vietnam analogy was absurd. It was not the people of southern Iraq who harassed our troops on the drive to Baghdad but the regime’s shock troops. These “irregulars” were not insurgents; they were counterinsurgents. They did not represent the people they used as human shields; they ruthlessly repressed them.

Most of these enforcers were Sunnis from northern tribes, alien to the Shiite population they ruled. In the secret police prison in Basra, seven of the 16 officers were surnamed Tikriti, i.e., they came from Tikrit, Hussein’s hometown in Sunni north-central Iraq. They were not guerrillas, Mao’s “fish swimming in the sea of the people.” They were aliens who survived by torturing the locals and, when the British liberators arrived, by shooting civilians in the back. Rooting out these Baath thugs in the middle of a war was difficult, but as soon as the local population became convinced that the regime was finished, the thugs were finished too.

I predict that the Vietnam analogy will remain popular, though, with people nostalgic for a war where America lost.

A READER EMAILS:

Current spin, from Abu Dhabi TV: the Iraqis are jubilent not at the demise of Hussein’s regine, but at the end of the US-led UN sanctions which have caused many more deaths than Saddam ever did.

Well, that may be the spin, but it doesn’t explain the whole kicking-Saddam’s-statue-in-the-head bit, does it? And another reader has his doubts:

While I’m sure some Iraqis need food, most of ones I have seen on TV could use a little exercise. Looking at all the well-fed and the over-fed dancing in the street, it seems our embargo wasn’t working as well as “peace” prostesters claimed.

Yeah, it wasn’t a lean-and-hungry looking crowd. But, of course, if you buy the “sanctions were genocide” argument, then George W. Bush is a hero while Kofi Annan is a murderer.

Hey, I guess that explains all those pictures of Bush I saw Iraqis kissing yesterday.

UPDATE: I guess it explains why Iraqis were attacking and looting French and German cultural centers, too! They’re just glad those murderous Franco-German backed years of sanctions are over!

SPIDER ROBINSON, who I generally like, wrote an essay on the war that I thought was particularly dumb. I decided that it wasn’t worth Fisking, but Thomas James felt differently.

HERE’S AN INTERESTING SURVEY of responses to yesterday’s Saddam statue-toppling. Some people are distinctly unhappy.

EAMONN FITZGERALD REPORTS ON ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA IN GERMANY, which he says is reaching Goebbelsian levels.

THE RAVE ACT, which was rather sneakily inserted into unrelated legislation, is up for a vote in Congress today.

Joe Biden is behind this.

FEMALE WARRIORS: I hope we’ll see more items like this and this.

But I really hope that people in Arab countries will see them. Is Al Jazeera reporting that the Iraqis got their butts kicked, in part, by women? I can’t help but think that the psychological impact of that would be dramatic, and largely positive.

Slate, meanwhile, has a discussion on women in combat underway, while Phil Carter weighs in with some observations.