CARTOON WARS UPDATE: Christopher Hitchens writes:

Please be outside the Embassy of Denmark, 3200 Whitehaven Street (off Massachusetts Avenue) between noon and 1 p.m. this Friday, Feb. 24. Quietness and calm are the necessities, plus cheerful conversation. Danish flags are good, or posters reading “Stand By Denmark” and any variation on this theme (such as “Buy Carlsberg/ Havarti/ Lego”) The response has been astonishing and I know that the Danes are appreciative. But they are an embassy and thus do not of course endorse or comment on any demonstration. Let us hope, however, to set a precedent for other cities and countries. Please pass on this message to friends and colleagues.

If you’re there, send me any pix or video!

JIM GERAGHTY writes that blogs have blown it on the ports story. Though the misconceptions seem to come from Big Media reporting, and the error correction mostly from bloggers and reader email.

At any rate, this is a perfect storm of bungled PR by the White House (which has forfeited much trust because of its excessive friendliness to the Saudis and limp response to the Cartoon Jihad, as well as general perceived laxity on homeland security and immigration), coupled with generalized anxiety about how things are going on the terrorism front. The White House should have had the facts out quickly, and should be on top of things now. It’s not too late, but there’s already considerable Congressional upset. You can respond to that sort of concern with facts, but not with a mixture of “trust us” and charges of bigotry which has been the White House’s main tactic so far.

At any rate, we just did our podcast interview with Austin Bay and Jim Dunnigan. It’ll be up in a couple of hours, but they think that the concern over this transaction is misplaced, and suggest why the Administration’s PR effort hasn’t been as good as it might.

AN INTERVIEW WITH RICHARD PERLE, who accuses the Bush Administration of “extraordinary, even foolish restraint” in disseminating documents from Saddam’s regime — Also Jack Kelly, who wasn’t overly impressed with the Intelligence Summit. Up over at The WMD Files.

JIM MILLER HAS ADVICE FOR HARVARD: “You have just effectively fired Harvard president Larry Summers. I request that you consider me as his replacement.”

TERRY HEATON has read An Army of Davids, and posts this blog review:

This is a must-read for people who follow the empowerment of everyday people through technology. It’s an easy read and filled with thoughtful questions (and a few predictions) about tomorrow. It’s the best new media book I’ve read so far.

The title paints the picture of big media (Goliath) now facing an army of Davids, which brought to mind Gordon Borrell’s analogy of the deer having guns. What do you do when you’re facing an army of Davids? Get into the slingshot business.

Heh. Indeed.

GRAND ROUNDS IS UP.

AUSTIN BAY looks at more captured Al Qaeda documents.

VARIOUS READER QUESTIONS ON AN ARMY OF DAVIDS, ANSWERED:

Why can’t I get a copy yet?

Its official publication date is March 7. Some people are writing about it, but they’re either people who got advance copies from the publisher, or who bought copies (or had friends buy them) at my Washington, DC book-signing last week. Otherwise, it’s not out yet — I just got my author’s copies yesterday.

Should I ask for it at bookstores?

Sure! It can’t hurt. Ordering it from Amazon or BarnesandNoble.com is fine (and preorders are actually advantageous), but brick-and-mortar sales are good, too.

How do I get it autographed?

As several readers suggested in response to an earlier post, I’ll be putting up an address where you can send a stamped, self-addressed envelope; I’ll return an autographed bookplate. It’s much easier than sending the entire book. I’ll even put what you want in the autograph, pretty much, so long as it’s not something like “To my master, Satan” — I’ve already promised that one to Frank J.

Why should I buy your book?

Aside from the obvious reason — to make me money — I think it offers an interesting and coherent take on what’s going on in the world. It’s true that if you read this blog and my other stuff, you’ve already been exposed to that in a way, but it comes across rather differently in book form than in disconnected bits here and there, which is how it comes across on the blog, etc. In fact, when I was writing the book I was surprised at how coherent it became, and how many disconnected bits turned out to fit together. I hope you’ll think so, too. In the meantime, you can read what these folks have to say.

REPORTS THAT YAHOO! won’t allow “Allah” in email addresses are apparently erroneous. The Yahoo! address that Pete Blackwell used to send me this link contained “allah.”

UPDATE: According to this story in The Register, the Allah ban was real, but short-lived. Thanks to reader Clay Young for the link.

“A DUBIOUS VICTORY FOR THE POLITICALLY CORRECT:” Alan Dershowitz on the Larry Summers affair.

STRATEGYPAGE:

An American magazine, “Imaging Notes”, recently published satellite photos, taken by commercial satellites, showing heretofore secret Chinese military installations. Of most interest were the coastal tunnels for Chinese submarines to operate from. Such tunnels were long rumored, and their existence denied by the Chinese. But there they are. An excellent way for subs to avoid air attack.

The companies that provide commercial satellite photos will usually abide by requests from nations to not distribute photos of certain areas, or not provide high resolution photos of some areas. But as more operators are out there selling their photos, competitive pressures have made it possible to get just about whatever you want. It’s a whole new world, and anyone can get a detailed satellite view of it.

It’s turning into space reconnaissance for the Army of Davids. . . .

MAX BOOT:

The Pentagon has reacted to the post-9/11 world by enlarging the Special Operations Command and placing greater emphasis on language and cultural education. It’s not enough, but it’s a beginning — and it’s more than the State Department has done so far. The Foreign Service remains trapped in a framework straight out of the 19th century, producing diplomats whose primary skill is liaison work with other diplomats. That leaves Foggy Bottom woefully ill-equipped to deal with two particularly pressing challenges: public diplomacy and nation-building.

As usual, read the whole thing.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL editorializes in favor of the port deal, and there’s more discussion over at On Tap.

UPDATE: Lileks has a new Screed posted, and is stunned by the political ineptitude on display: “It’s one thing for an Administration to misjudge how a particular decision will be received; it’s another entirely to misjudge an issue that cuts to the core of the Administration’s core strength.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: We’re going to have Austin Bay and Jim Dunnigan on tonight’s podcast, talking about this, but here’s what Dunnigan just emailed: “UAE is one of our best allies over there, and no fan of al Qaeda. Stiffing them on the port deal will only hurt us.”

BIOWAR FOR DUMMIES: How hard is it to build your own weapon of mass destruction? Paul Boutin takes a (hands-on) look. I’d say it’s more reason to build up our quick-response capabilities, as suggested by Ray Kurzweil and Bill Frist.

IS EUROPE holding women back?

I MEANT TO COMMENT on David Irving’s conviction for Holocaust denial yesterday, but got distracted and forgot. Mickey Kaus, however, has it about right. I should also note that this further exacerbates the “censorship envy” of the radical Muslims — with European countries happy to punish some speech that is regarded as beyond the pale, the discussion has shifted from whether censorship should exist at all to when it should be justified. This is yet another reason why a general rule in favor of free speech is actually better for ensuring social peace than a set of rules prohibiting offensiveness.

WILL VIDEO KILL THE BLOGOSPHERE STAR?

I do think that video is a trend.

MALIK SHABAZZ AUDITIONS FOR THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS: Michelle Malkin has video.

TED FRANK attended a speech by Justice Scalia and reports that it was rather different from the picture drawn by the AP report:

In a speech of about 40 minutes (the web-cast should be available later this week), he laid out when it was and wasn’t appropriate to use foreign law in American jurisprudence, and pointed out the contradictions and selective use of foreign law in recent Supreme Court opinions. He then took questions from the audience of over 100. . . . Naturally, the only AP coverage of the speech focused on the LaRouche heckler, and (without mentioning his affiliation) made him out to be a censored hero rather than a cult member who’s pulled similar stunts at Kerry and Nader events. This is sure to make the Supreme Court all the more welcoming of tv cameras.

Though at least then we could watch the video for ourselves.

UPDATE: Reader Andrew Centofani emails:

I have to second what Ted Frank wrote. I listened to the audio live on my lunch break (via C-Span radio here in the District), was pretty impressed with Scalia’s talk and thought he handed the LaRouche’ite questioner very well. The questioner came across as someone who thought he was brilliant and witty but was sadly mistaken. Scalia suffered his foolishness for about a minute then politely pounded him into the ground. Great stuff.

Let’s hear it for disintermediation.

MORE: Eugene Volokh writes: “Is it just me, or is the AP being fundamentally unserious here? . . . This is the Associated Press, an organization that’s supposed to be dedicated to conveying the important news of the day.”

DR. SANITY has thoughts on the Larry Summers affair.

SOMETHING TO LOOK FORWARD TO: “Men in their fifties are more satisfied with their sex lives than men in their thirties and forties, recording similar levels to 20-29 year-olds, according to a survey published in the February issue of BJU International.”

MARK GLASER raises dark suspicions about how iTunes picks its featured podcasts. When the Glenn and Helen show was featured last week, it came via somebody from Apple emailing me and asking if I’d add an image tag so that they could feature it. No sub rosa commercial considerations involved, as far as I can tell.

ERIC S. RAYMOND:

Americans have never really understood ideological warfare. Our gut-level assumption is that everybody in the world really wants the same comfortable material success we have. We use “extremist” as a negative epithetic. Even the few fanatics and revolutionary idealists we have, whatever their political flavor, expect everybody else to behave like a bourgeois.

We don’t expect ideas to matter — or, when they do, we expect them to matter only because people have been flipped into a vulnerable mode by repression or poverty. Thus all our divagation about the “root causes” of Islamic terrorism, as if the terrorists’ very clear and very ideological account of their own theory and motivations is somehow not to be believed.

By contrast, ideological and memetic warfare has been a favored tactic for all of America’s three great adversaries of the last hundred years — Nazis, Communists, and Islamists.

Read the whole thing.

TOM MAGUIRE has further thoughts on Kelo and its coverage in the press.