UK Riots: Young Yobs Back on Streets Despite David Cameron's Pledge

At Telegraph UK (via Theo Spark).

Prime Minister David Cameron Vows Crackdown on Rioters

Cameron wants to go after street thug anonymity, "Social Media, and Facemasks, Are Targets After British Riots." The full text of the prime minister's speech at BBC, "Riots: David Cameron's Commons statement in full."



Social media's not the problem. And amazingly, some folks are still debating the causes of the rioting, as if sheer hooliganism and evil needed further explanation. More at London's Daily Mail, "Unmask the thugs! Looters will no longer be able to cover up, says PM as he also promises a crackdown on social media AND cash for the rioters' victims."

America as Less Than No. 1

I've been thinking about this. I find myself losing my normal optimism on America, which is extremely unlike me.



See Danial Henniger, at Wall Street Journal:

The U.S. is far from finished. The private economy—from the biggest corporations to innumerable dreamers launching start-ups—is fit and eager. But make no mistake: The U.S. has taken a hard hit to its 65-year status as the world's pre-eminent nation.

RTWT.



I'll have more on this topic in upcoming posts.

More Mark Steyn Mania!

At Pundit & Pundette, "After Great Britain."



And at American Glob, "VIDEO: Mark Steyn Explains the UK Riots and More On Hannity."



BONUS: I've meant to post on Melanie Phillips as well, but Blazing Cat Fur beat me to it: "Melanie Phillips on the UK Riots."

U.S. Debt Downgrade Leaves China in a Bind

At Los Angeles Times:

The Chinese government has built what is now the world's second-largest economy in part by keeping its currency cheap in order to subsidize exports. To do that, it has bought gobs of U.S. Treasury bills and other securities. Any big move on China's part to unload its $1.2-trillion-plus trove of American debt would only result in a self-inflicted wound: sinking the value of the dollar further and eroding the value of its own reserves.



For the moment, at least, the economic and political consequences of dumping dollars are likely to keep Beijing from taking any such drastic action.



"There really isn't a better choice than U.S. Treasury bonds," wrote Huang Yiping, professor of economics at Beijing's Peking University, in a commentary published Monday in the influential financial magazine Caixin. "The basic requirements for foreign reserves are safety, stability in value and liquidity. Although U.S. Treasury bonds might not meet the first two criteria right now, the problem is still that we do not have a better choice."

Killed U.S. Navy SEAL Team Was on Rescue Mission to Help Army Rangers Pinned Down by Insurgents

At ABC News, "SEALs on Rescue Mission Killed in Afghan Crash."

RELATED: At Los Angeles Times, "Afghanistan Chopper Downing Raises Concerns Over U.S.":

The downing of an American helicopter full of elite troops deepened concerns among some Afghans that it might symbolize an erosion of U.S. power at an uncertain crossroads in the nearly 10-year-old war.



In the rugged district of Wardak province where the U.S. Chinook helicopter crashed early Saturday, apparently after being struck by a rocket-propelled grenade, NATO and Afghan forces engaged in daylong skirmishes with suspected Taliban fighters, according to Afghan officials.



Wardak Police Chief Abdul Qayuum Baqizoi said there had been Taliban casualties in Sunday's fighting, but he did not know how many. Western military officials said only that the area was being secured.



The Taliban claimed responsibility for downing the helicopter within hours of the crash. Following confirmation from U.S. officials that the 30 American troops killed had included 22 members of the Navy SEALs, the Islamic movement reacted with jubilation.



"We killed America's most elite forces; we achieved one of our biggest goals," Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said Sunday in a telephone interview. "This shows that our efforts are unstoppable."

Taliban Shoot Down U.S. Copter in Afghanistan

At Los Angeles Times, "31 U.S. troops, 7 Afghans killed in Taliban attack on NATO helicopter."

In a rare event, Taliban insurgents shoot down a Chinook helicopter with a rocket-propelled grenade near Kabul. It's the largest single-incident loss of military lives since the war's start.

And at New York Times, "31 Americans Killed as Taliban Shoot Down a Copter." (Via Memeorandum.)

U.S. Urges Citizens to Leave Syria Immediately

At Jerusalem Post:

State Department warns that given the "ongoing uncertainty and volatility" American citizens are urged to leave immediately while transportation is still available.

See also New York Times, "Broadcasting Hama Ruins, Syria Says It Has Ended Revolt."

Reactions to Fjordman's Coming Out

Peder Jensen, a.k.a., Fjordman, is covered at New York Times, "Blogger Cited by Norway Killer Comes Forward to Denounce Him."

Folks might want to read Gates of Vienna, "The Forced Resignation of Fjordman."

Also, Andrew Bostom, at Big Peace, "Fjordman, Fairness, And The Brevik Mass Murderer."

Added: At Blazing Cat Fur, "Breaking! Fjordman A Jew...or at least part Jew... or he looks kinda Jew..."

More Than 12 Million Facing Starvation in Somalia

This just makes me sad. Forget politics and political science theory. I wish we could do something.

At Los Angeles Times, "Somalia famine spreads to 3 new regions, U.N. says":

Reporting from Johannesburg, South Africa

advertisement

With hunger in the Horn of Africa dramatically worsening, the United Nations on Wednesday added three more regions of Somalia to the list of areas it says are stricken by famine.

More than 12 million people are facing starvation, with children particularly vulnerable. The U.N. last month declared that two regions of Somalia were suffering from famine, and it said Wednesday that the famine was likely to spread across most of Somalia in coming months, as well as parts of Kenya, Uganda and Ethiopia.

Somalia is struggling with its worst drought in 60 years, and 3.7 million Somalis are in crisis, mainly in the south — creating Africa's most serious hunger crisis in two decades. Refugee camps in the capital, Mogadishu, are now affected as well, U.N. agencies said.

Shocking images of those suffering have resulted in an increase in aid in the last two weeks, after donors' earlier sluggish response, but violence in the south of the country has limited humanitarian agencies' access.

The U.N. is seeking to raise $1 billion to address the crisis.

I'm researching relief agencies, by the way. I'll make a contribution, but so much gets wasted on overhead and corruption I'm wary. More on that later.

U.S. Debts Tops Size of Entire Economy

See IBD, "An Unwelcome Debt Milestone."

With $14.5 trillion in total debt, we're already in deep trouble. Where will we be in 2021, 10 years from now, when total federal debt is expected to reach as high as $28 trillion and GDP is (generously, in our view) expected to reach $23.8 trillion? Then, by conservative estimates, our debt-to-GDP ratio will be close to 120%.

In short, debt will be a permanent millstone around the neck of the once-vibrant U.S. economy.

Somalis Starve as Shabab Islamists Bar Escape From Famine

This really bothers me, at NYT, "Somalis Waste Away as Insurgents Block Escape From Famine." The picture here was on the cover of today's hard copy edition.

Readers know I've expressed reservations against humanitarian intervention, especially since Libya really wasn't. But I'm not reflexively opposed to the use of military power to guarantee food shipments. Almost twenty years ago President George H.W. Bush sent U.S. forces to Somalia to protect delivery of humanitarian aid. We all know how that turned out, but we didn't go in right in the first place, didn't have enough men and heavy armor on the ground, and President Bill Clinton got cold feet after we sustained casualties. If we were ever to do something like that again, we'd be best to go in without the U.N. or our NATO allies. Leave it to American forces, who've been engaged in two decades of counterinsurgency warfare since the early 1990s. The experience is cumulative. We could do a better and more effective job of relief today, and frankly, it could do some good. The Horn of Africa is right next to Pakistan and Yemen as the top location of festering Islamist war against the West.

Every morning, emaciated parents with emaciated children stagger into Banadir Hospital, a shell of a building with floors that stink of diesel fuel because that is all the nurses have to fight off the flies. Babies are dying because of the lack of equipment and medicine. Some get hooked up to adult-size intravenous drips — pediatric versions are hard to find — and their compromised bodies cannot handle the volume of fluid.

Most parents do not have money for medicine, so entire families sit on old-fashioned cholera beds, with basketball-size holes cut out of the middle, taking turns going to the bathroom as diarrhea streams out of them.

“This is worse than 1992,” said Dr. Lul Mohamed, Banadir’s head of pediatrics, referring to Somalia’s last famine. “Back then, at least we had some help.”

In any case, more at New York Times, "Off Media Radar, Famine Garners Few Donations," and "How to Help Victims of the East Africa Famine."

Chronic Misperception and U.S.-Iraq Conflict

A powerful and very interesting study from Charles Duelfer and Stephen Benedict Dyson, at International Security, "Chronic Misperception and International Conflict: The U.S.-Iraq Experience."

Some may recall that Duelfer led the Iraq Survey Group investigating Iraq's WMD programs, which issued a report, "Comprehensive Revised Report with Addendums on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction." And check the criticism of Duelfer from Christopher Carson, "What Charles Duelfer Missed."

Opinions are pretty much set in stone on the causes of war with Iraq. That said, the Duelfer and Dyson study at International Security is valuable for its perspective on the dyadic dynamics of U.S.-Iraq conflict. Theories of misperception delve into the psychological biases of decision-making. There's an outstanding theoretical discussion at the essay, and that alone is worth taking a few minutes. From the U.S. perspective, the main problem was an essentially irreversible enemy image of Iraq's Saddam Hussein, an image that over time became resistant to new stimuli that might have provided better information on Iraqi intentions and capabilities. But perhaps even more interesting is Saddam's own failures of misperception, and how these virtually guaranteed a U.S. military response. Here's this from the study:

As deputy head of the UNSCOM inspections from 1993 to 2000, and again as the chief investigator into Saddam’s WMD programs after the 2003 invasion Duelfer had a unique opportunity to develop an understanding of how the Iraqis viewed UN weapons inspections and resolutions. During one of the first inspections, while Iraq was still surrounded by the massive forces used to expel it from Kuwait, UNSCOM staff was blocked and various materials were secreted away. This blatant obstruction of the UN inspectors was reported to the Security Council and, after debate among its fifteen members, the council dispatched the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Hans Blix, and the head of the UNSCOM inspection team, Rolf Ekeus, to Baghdad to resolve this dispute over access afforded under the UN cease-fire resolution.

This response—the dispatch of two Swedish diplomats—was seen by Saddam as indicating a weakness of will in the Security Council. He had violated the terms of the cease-fire resolution, and the response was neither regime threatening nor even punitive in nature. The weak response communicated a lesson that shaped Saddam’s attitude toward the UN process. The Security Council would not recommence the war to enforce compliance with disarmament requirements, in spite of whatever some members may have said at the time. Saddam came to regard the UN process not as one wherein he would be obligated to comply categorically, but as one of testing and bargaining. He would give up what he had to give up to convince the Security Council to lift its UN sanctions, but no more.

Over time, Saddam and senior Iraqis came to find the broader UN process vexing and confusing. The collective Security Council position as codiªed in its resolutions seemed straightforward: sanctions would remain in place until Iraq satisfied weapons inspectors that all of Iraq’s WMD capabilities had been eliminated and monitoring systems were put in place to detect any attempts to reconstitute them in the future. Very different messages were sent from individual council members, however. During the Bill Clinton administration, public comments by the president and by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stated that Washington’s policy was containment of Saddam with an eventual goal of regime change. Albright, in a speech at Georgetown University in March 1997, responded to a question on lifting sanctions by not ing not that Saddam could have them lifted if he complied with UN resolutions, but that “a dialogue” would be possible with a “successor regime.”

To the Iraqis, Albright’s statement seemed to contradict Security Council resolutions. Containment depended on a permanent retention of sanctions, but the resolutions contained the provision that if and when Iraq satisfied weapons inspectors, then sanctions would be lifted. Saddam and senior Iraqis therefore questioned whether Washington would ever agree to lift sanctions, even if Iraq could satisfy the inspectors. They put this paradox to senior UNSCOM staff as well as to officials of Security Council member nations such as France, Great Britain, and Russia, and received assorted and contradictory opinions in return ...

The full study is at the link.

The Budget Crisis and American Power

From George Melloan, at Wall Street Journal:

Ronald Reagan famously said that no nation has ever been attacked because it was too strong, but that maxim is often forgotten. This seems to be the case now, as both the White House and some residual isolationists on the right propose measures to withdraw the U.S. from its global security commitments.

Barack Obama's performance as commander in chief leaves much to be desired. A skillful tactician doesn't aid a tenacious enemy (the Taliban) by announcing a timetable for quitting the field. He doesn't enter a war (Libya) and then withdraw as if he were sitting down after throwing out the first baseball. He doesn't damage his credibility by issuing unpersuasive threats (Iran). He doesn't diss a long-time strategic ally (Israel). He doesn't make concessions to "reset" relations with Russia and get nothing in return. And so forth.

America's foreign policy hawks are rightly critical of such conduct. Fearful that the president's uncertain trumpet will embolden enemies and distance friends, they deplore the planned troop drawdown in Afghanistan and other measures to reduce the U.S. military's forward presence. They argue correctly that the U.S. has been the primary architect of a global order that has fostered free commerce and political and social advances of great benefit to the U.S. and the world at large.

But there is one big problem: The U.S. is busted. That's not primarily because of its foreign policy engagements, which have been a good investment. It is mainly because America's political leaders have overburdened the productive sector with social obligations that cannot be fulfilled.

Sadly, when budgets are stretched, U.S. politicians usually don't menace entitlements, which buy votes. Instead they look to cut military and foreign policy expenditures. The consequences are often dire.

RTWT.

Norway Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg: 'We Will Not Be Intimidated'

At BBC, "Norway will stand firm, says PM Jens Stoltenber."

Also, at The Independent UK, "Norway to form independent commission to probe attacks":

Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg vowed today that Norway will fight back against the twin terror attacks with "more democracy" and said an independent commission is being formed to investigate the massacre and to help survivors and relatives.

Norwegians will defend themselves by showing they are not afraid of violence and by participating more broadly in politics, he told reporters.

"It's absolutely possible to have an open, democratic, inclusive society, and at the same time have security measures and not be naive," he said.

Stoltenberg underlined his commitment to openness, defending freedom of thought even if includes extremist views such as those held by the 32-year-old Norwegian who confessed to Friday's bomb blast at government headquarters and to the shooting massacre at a Labor Party youth camp hours later. At least 76 people were killed.

"We have to be very clear to distinguish between extreme views, opinions — that's completely legal, legitimate to have. What is not legitimate is to try to implement those extreme views by using violence," he said.

"I think what we have seen is that there is going to be one Norway before and one Norway after July 22," he said. "But I hope and also believe that the Norway we will see after will be more open, a more tolerant society than what we had before."

He later announced the independent commission, saying "it is important to be able to clear up all questions about the attack in order to learn from what happened."

East Africa Famine

Go straight away to this photo essay at The Atlantic, "Famine in East Africa."

And at Christian Science Monitor, "International groups accelerate effort to relieve East Africa's famine."

"Pro-Al Qaeda Islamists" are preventing food aid from reaching the starving. Naturally.

Lawrence Summers on the Euro Crisis

At Der Spiegel, "'It Was Always Understood the European System Would Evolve'":

SPIEGEL: It seems a currency union across borders without a fiscal union cannot work. Do we have to steer toward a United States of Europe in order for the euro to survive?

Summers: No. Surely, the common currency has been insufficiently supported by common political approaches. But we will learn over time from the European experience what elements have to be common in order to make the system work.

SPIEGEL: Has the response of European leaders to the crisis so far been too dogmatic and bureaucratic?

Summers: There is no politician who will ignore the laws of physics when building a bridge. But there is a tendency in politics in every country to suppose that the laws of economics are flexible and can be adjusted to political necessity. At some points this belief has led to a lack of focus on economic realities in Europe.

SPIEGEL: Can you cite an example?

Summers: In retrospect, it is clear that a currency union requires more attention to the fiscal policies of the member countries than was provided. More central capacities to address issues in the financial system are required. But it was always understood that the European system would evolve through events and that is what is happening right now.

SPIEGEL: Many European observers are particularly disappointed with the euro crisis management of German Chancellor Angela Merkel. She was dubbed "Madame Non" because she refused bailouts for a long time before finally relenting. On the other hand, she was under considerable pressure at home because Germans largely oppose the bailouts. Is there a way out of that dilemma?

Summers: The art of economic policy making is reconciling the political and the technical or arithmetic imperatives. You cannot move forward in democratic nations without sufficient political support, and all the political support in the world will not repeal the laws of economic arithmetic. But we ask our political leaders not simply to take the preferences of their citizenry as a given, but to help guide those preferences in response to necessity.

Keep reading. Summers discusses the debt ceiling debate in the U.S., and suggests it's mostly politics (default would be surprising) and taxes are too low. Of course, he was until recently a top economic adviser to President Obama. And according to Elizabeth Drew's recent piece at New York Review, folks like Summers bailed because Obama adopted a too conservative approach on deficits. Figures.

Just Awful: Progressives Ecstatic Over Anders Behring Breivik Alleged Ties to Right-Wing Extremism

I had a brief Twitter exchange yesterday with Ruwayda Mustafah and Hena Zuberi. As information on Oslo's terrorism was still coming in --- and reports were going back and forth over a possible Islamist connection --- Mustafah tweeted: "@HenaZuberi @hindhassanmany Oh so there's still hope for bigots?" That's a dead link to @hindhassanmany, but Hena Zuberi was also going on about how bigoted it was to even consider Islamist jihad as the movement behind yesterday's attacks.

And now here's progressive Leah McElrath on Twitter, cheering a New York Times report that links to a video manifesto credited to Anders Behring Breivik, which as later uploaded to YouTube. And notice McElrath's good night tweet:

Well, that actually wasn't McElrath's last tweet. She took time to block JoannaOC in Minneapolis, who called her out for distributing progressive propaganda. McElrath gets angry for being called out, and claims she's saving lives. JoannaOC is trying to focus on the miracle of life and God's grace of survival. Leah McElrath is spreading left-wing propaganda and hate.

In any case, here's the main story at New York Times, "Right-Wing Extremist Charged in Norway" (via Memeorandum). Also trending today is James Fallows' attack on Jennifer Rubin, "The Washington Post Owes the World an Apology for this Item."

Michelle Malkin responds, "No, James Fallows, the Washington Post doesn’t owe “the world” an apology":

The death toll has risen to a staggering 90-plus in the Norway massacre.

It is evil in its most unfathomable depths. There are now reports of a possible second gunman/accomplice, according to CBS News and VOA. Howie at the Jawa Report says it well: “As a Christian I have to say I condemn his actions in the strongest terms. In fact the only praise I’ve seen of the attacks were not by Christians. This is cold blooded murder and no true follower of Christ could do such a thing. We pray for the victims, their families and for those who are injured to recover.” Here is a beautiful prayer for the people of Norway.

Here in America, many on the Left have reserved their greatest outrage not for the perpetrators of the crime, but for conservatives who — like many counterterrorism watchers and mainstream media outlets around the world — initially raised the entirely reasonable possibility that the gunman was a jihadist and who pointed to recent, specific death threats and plots against Norway and Norwegian government officials by Islamic militant groups and individuals.

Those initial assessments were wrong. I was wrong. As I noted yesterday and will reiterate again today for the reading comprehension-challenged:

…the context and timing most definitely suggested jihad and there should be no apology for reading the signs and connecting several large, obvious dots.

Unlike those who speculated that the Giffords’ shooter was a Tea Party activist and held onto the assumption even after it was disproved, I will not continue to insist that jihadists bear blame for this heinous attack if it turns out they played no role.

I will continue to be vigilant in thoroughly covering the global jihadist threat — and in condemning this heinous attack in Norway whoever is responsible.
Prayers for all the innocents. Standing with Norway.

Over at the Washington Post, Jennifer Rubin yesterday afternoon published a blog post mentioning some of the same information I brought to light yesterday morning as the news of the terrifying attacks broke — namely, that bloodthirsty Norwegian-based Muslim cleric Mullah Krekar was founder of Ansar Al-Islam and that jihadists have implanted themselves in every corner of the globe. She goes on to argue for continued, vigilant war against the global jihadists who remain at centuries-old, systemic war with us.

Atlantic editor James Fallows — in a prominent rant — is now clamoring for the Post to “apologize to the world” for Rubin’s post and fumes that the post has not been updated. There may be any number of reasons for her not updating yet and being offline — family obligations, Sabbath, etc. I’m pretty sure the reason is NOT that she’s purposely ignoring or misleading her readers or intentionally insulting/smearing “the world,” as Fallows seems to suggest. (In a similar meme, Twitter libs somehow have accused me of “falling silent” about the Norway horror despite the constant updating of my blog post throughout the day and night, in addition to day-and-night-long tweets as news developed.)

Check Michelle's blog for all the links. I wanted to quote at length. I linked yesterday to Jawa Report and The Other McCain, both of whom continued updating with reports on where the evidence was leading. In contrast, people like Charles Johnson used the attacks to score points on political enemies, posting a series of blogs attacking Pamela Geller and other counter-jihad bloggers, alleging their responsibility for terrorism in Norway. In fact, Anders Behring Breivik had no clear ideological agenda, and didn't appear to be an ideological or religious extremist.

I'll update with more, but I want to reiterate one of Michelle's key points:

Unlike those who speculated that the Giffords’ shooter was a Tea Party activist and held onto the assumption even after it was disproved, I will not continue to insist that jihadists bear blame for this heinous attack if it turns out they played no role.

I will continue to be vigilant in thoroughly covering the global jihadist threat — and in condemning this heinous attack in Norway whoever is responsible.

And that's the vital difference. Conservatives are anti-terror, no matter the source. Progressives are anti-conservative and turn a blind eye to terrorism unless it comes from the right.

That's evil and gets more people killed.

VIDEO: Terrorist Attack in Oslo, Norway

A report at New York Times, "Big Blasts at Government Buildings in Oslo; 1 Dead."

And Michelle has a big report, "Terror blast in Oslo – “massive vehicle bomb;” Update: Norway had taken action against jihadi cleric who threatened to kill politicians."

Added: At The Other McCain, "BREAKING: Explosions Blast Government Buildings in Norway; Terrorism Suspected UPDATE: Video Shows Damage in Oslo UPDATE: Two Explosions, ABC Says."

Also video at BBC, "Oslo: Bomb blast near Norway prime minister's office."

9:35am PST: A Memeorandum thread is here.

11:00am PST: At Pajamas Media, "First hints of Islamic connection in Oslo attack." And at Outside the Beltway, "Oslo Bomb Blast and Shooting Spree: Al Qaeda Suspected."

11:30am PST: Another video:

And at Astute Bloggers, "OSLO JIHADTERROR? UPDATE: 7 DEAD; BLAST FOLLOWED BY SHOOTING ATTACK NORTH OF OSLO."

News of the World vs. WikiLeaks

From Bret Stephens, at Wall Street Journal:

It's probably inevitable that this column will be read in some quarters as shilling for Rupert Murdoch. Not at all: I have nothing but contempt for the hack journalism practiced by some of the Murdoch titles. But my contempt goes double for the self-appointed media paragons who saw little amiss with Mr. Assange and those who made common cause with him, and who now hypocritically talk about decency and standards. Their day of reckoning is yet to come.