Daniel in Brookline

The liberals were right: our civil liberties are slowly disappearing now that George Bush is president.

Of course most of the liberals not only seem to approve of these infringements on our freedoms -- they initiate them...

President Bush isn’t a fascist, and I can prove it.

We’ve seen what American bookstores and publications and universities do when confronted with real fascists: they knuckle under. You might not be able to find those Danish cartoons anyplace respectable, but you’ll sure find lots of anti-Bush stuff.

According to the Associated Press, Carroll had a brief interview on Baghdad television Thursday morning, saying she “was treated well, but I don’t know why I was kidnapped.”

“They never hit me. They never even threatened to hit me,” said Carroll, who was wearing a light green Islamic headscarf and a gray Arabic robe.

“I’m just happy to be free. I want to be with my family,” she was heard to say under the Arabic voiceover. “I felt I was not free. It was difficult because I didn’t know what would happen to me.”

Carroll arrived at the Ramstein Air Base in southwestern Germany on Saturday from Balad Air Base in Baghdad. She strongly disavowed statements she had made during captivity in Iraq and shortly after her release, saying she had been repeatedly threatened.

In a video recorded before she was freed and posted by her captors on an Islamist Web site, Carroll spoke out against the U.S. military presence. On Saturday, she said the recording was made under duress.

"During my last night in captivity, my captors forced me to participate in a propaganda video. They told me I would be released if I cooperated. I was living in a threatening environment, under their control, and wanted to go home alive. So I agreed," she said in a statement.

"Things that I was forced to say while captive are now being taken by some as an accurate reflection of my personal views. They are not."

...

In the statement, Carroll also disavowed an interview she gave to the Iraqi Islamic Party, a Sunni Arab organization in whose offices she was dropped off upon her release. She said the party had promised her the interview would not be aired "and broke their word."

"At any rate, fearing retribution from my captors, I did not speak freely. Out of fear, I said I wasn't threatened. In fact, I was threatened many times," she said. "Also, at least two false statements about me have been widely aired: One — that I refused to travel and cooperate with the U.S. military, and two — that I refused to discuss my captivity with U.S. officials. Again, neither statement is true."

Jill Carroll will not be the last Westerner to be kidnapped in Iraq, but she may be the last one released. Kidnapping is the only real way the insurgents can get airtime these days, which is why Jihadi propaganda comes with kneeling captives at their feet. Releasing Carroll was an experiment, one that failed from the insurgency's point of view. Carroll was released and immediately disavowed statements she made in captivity. The insurgents were exposed as a cheap propagandists, and their message was blurred in the celebration surrounding Carroll's return home. Killing a hostage makes a far more drastic statement than releasing one does, which is precisely why we're unlikely to see any more hostages released.

Victory and Disappointment for Kadima; The Pensioners Astounded [Us]; Shas and Lieberman Are The Big Winners;
The Likud Crumbles
With 99.5% of the votes counted, the results are: Kadima - 28 seats; Labor - 20 seats; Shas - 13; Lieberman - 12; Likud - 11; Pensioners - 7. Netanyahu: "I will not resign". Olmert: "A majority for the disengagement plan".

After an election season full of surprising developments, the citizens of Israel awake this morning to an entirely different political landscape from the familiar one of years past.

From counting 99.5% of the voters' ballots, it seems that the Kadima party has won 28 [Knesset] seats, and on the party's head, Ehud Olmert, the mission will apparently fall to form a new coalition government. The Labor party won 20 seats and is the second-largest...

Elections to the 17th Knesset were held on March 28, 2006, with voter turnout of 63.2%.

With 99.5 percent of the votes counted, Kadima has won 28 seats, Labor 20, Shas 13, Yisrael Beiteinu 12, Likud 11, National Union-National Religious Party 9, Gil (pensioners) 7, United Torah Judaism 6, Meretz 4, United Arab List/Arab Renewal 4, Hadash 3, and National Democratic Assembly 3.
The members of the 17th Knesset will be sworn in on April 17.

It's interesting, but not heartening, to compare these fragmented election results, in the context of low voter turnout, to the crystal clear Palestinian election results. A people who knows what it wants has a big advantage over a people who is unclear. And when the former wants destruction of the latter, things become scary.

Hatzofeh says that the election results, "constitute a very serious blow to the Right," and warns that, "These elections are liable to bring about additional expulsions." Thus, the editors believe that, "There should be no doubts; we are heading into a difficult period."

"Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, and still yet if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you, and only a precarious chance for survival. - There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

In their paper, called "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy," the bias of authors John J. Mearsheimer of Harvard University, and Stephen M. Walt of the University of Chicago is so apparent that it discredits the entire work.

It is a document rife with innuendoes and inaccuracies. Even a cursory revue of the paper reveals sloppy scholarship. The list of errors, misstatements, and faulty logic that run throughout this paper is long and disturbing. One of their underlying assumptions, stated by the authors in a footnote on the very first page, is an excellent example of the carelessness that characterizes the paper: "The mere existence of the [Israel] lobby suggests that unconditional support for Israel is not in the American national interest. If it was [sic], one would not need an organized special interest group to bring it about." The circular reasoning of their argument is incoherent on its face, lacking both logic and common sense.
In a democratic system like ours, the broad spectrum of opinion that defines our way of life demands that we continually discuss and dispute the various positions upon which policy is decided. When we disagree on an issue, we attempt to convince each other of the justification for our position. It is precisely because of this that organizations are created to champion diverse positions. They help to clarify the complex issues that face law and policymakers every day. In this case, the opening assumption of their paper is flawed and misguided.

In fact, the whole paper is full of errors, large and small. A matter as simple as Israel's current population is incorrectly stated at 6,276,883. The number is precise but inaccurate. Israel's population recently reached eight million, a fact that was reported extensively in the press, and could have been verified with very little effort...

“Anyone who declares war on Israel declares war on the European Union.” [said] Hans-Gert Poettering, German member of the European Parliament and chairman of the Group of the European People’s Party and European Democrats, the largest in the 732-strong EP. Poettering made the opening remarks Tuesday at a workshop on “The role of textbooks in the Middle East conflict” hosted by MEP Jana Hybaskova.

Let’s consider a single possibility: how to deal with a new attack on an American target. The simplest and most effective method of meeting such an eventuality would be a people’s militia. This is a word that has been tarnished in recent years, so it’s best to emphasize that what is meant is how the term is used in the Constitution: the people assembled for the purpose of the defense of the public liberty. The threat to the United States is effectively universal; the response should be as well.

. . .

At this point, victims of a disaster are supposed to sit and wait until FEMA shows up with its laptops and forms in triplicate. We saw how well this worked in New Orleans. Suppose instead we had one house in each neighborhood with a supply of atropine and potassium iodide, and people trained to use it? (The first of these is a specific against many types of nerve gas, the second a preventive medicine to stop radioactive isotopes from settling in the thyroid. Both are extremely simple to use, requiring little in the way of medical training.)

The armed units of such a militia would keep order and prevent terrorists from taking advantage of a strike. Medical units would carry out preventive treatment and first aid, evacuation units would either get people away from the scene or persuade them to remain in their homes, whichever response was appropriate, while acting as sources of legitimate information.

(Many people in this country already own suitable rescue vehicles; they’re called pickups and SUVs.)

One of the few heartening things about 9/11 was watching people appear from all across the country to aid and assist the city of New York. Firemen, policemen, and ordinary people got into their cars and drove sometimes thousands of miles, simply to lend a hand. That is the response we’d be looking to harness. There is nothing more American than this, and the fact that no effort has been made to take advantage of it is difficult to fathom. Consider what the Katrina farce would have been like with such an organization in place.

. . .

Of course, it won’t happen. It is straightforward, it’s workable, and it utilizes the American traditions of competence, community, and initiative. But it’s also against the spirit of the age, the rebirth of Big Government, the drift toward centralization and bureaucracy. In this paradigm, the U.S. citizenry is viewed not as a resource, as a reservoir of talent, ability, and good will, but as part of the problem, to be cajoled, hoodwinked, and manipulated into doing what the bureaucrats think is necessary. The results can be seen in Louisiana.

Amnon’s “aliya” began when he snuck across the border from Gaza nearly eight years ago. Formally “Ayman” from Khan Yunis, 28-year-old Amnon Itzhak Shahar left his Palestinian past in the Gaza refugee camp where he grew up. He converted to Judaism three years ago, and now looks forward to strengthening Israel against the “terrorists in the territories.”

A vocal supporter of the Likud party, Shahar is featured in the party’s upcoming promotional broadcasts lauding the tough stance it advocates for Israel against the Palestinians. He is hoping to sway Israeli voters to vote Likud - “the only party strong enough,” he says, “to deal with the Palestinians.”

“From the time I was a little boy, I remember everyone would always call out to kill Israelis… that they are three-legged monsters that should be killed so we [Palestinians] could reclaim our grandparents’ lands,” he says.

Shahar traces the flight from his Palestinian and Muslim identity back to the early age of six, when he received a candy from an Israeli soldier operating near his home.

He suffered frequent beatings at the hands of his father and school teachers for questioning the gap between what he was told about Israelis and what he perceived for himself.

Shahar recalls the zealous hatred which his family, neighbors and peers expressed for Israelis, but says that fire never burned in him. Showing reservation when teachers led his class in cries for the destruction of Israel, he recalls the fierce punishments he received when he did not participate. His parents regularly expressed their shame over him.

When Shahar first ventured into Israel at age 11, joining his father at work at a construction site in Rishon Lezion, he relates, “I remember looking for that third leg that Israelis were supposed to have and not seeing it. I was confused.”

Israelis at the construction site treated him kindly, he recalls; he yearned to go back again. At age 13, Shahar left school and returned to Rishon Lezion, where he spent several years residing and working illegally. Shahar says that while he severed contact with his family back in Khan Yunis, in Rishon Lezion he forged a connection and was “adopted” by the family who purchased one of the houses he worked on. He recalls joining the family for his first Pessah Seder and being mesmerized by the holiday and its story.

“I wanted that holiday to be mine. It is something amazing,” he says.

When he turned 19, Israeli authorities arrived at the construction site where he worked and deported him back into Gaza. In a Palestinian court he admitted wanting to be an Israeli, and was thrown into a local prison where, while incarcerated, Shahar says he suffered repeated abuse.

“I was hung upside down,” he recalls. “They threw hot water on me and gave me electric shocks.”

At the end of his six-month sentence, the court placed him under house arrest at his parents’ home. Shortly after, his “shamed” parents kicked him out into the street. “They were embarrassed by me,” he explains.

Several months later, after scraping by and sleeping on the streets of Khan Yunis, Shahar eventually saved up enough money and crossed back into Israel, returning to work at another Rishon Lezion construction site. A heightened number of terrorist attacks at the time saw Israeli police out in droves, and within a few weeks Shahar was arrested again. At his trial, he expressed to the presiding judge his desire to become an Israeli citizen. Moved by his story, she aided in launching his naturalization process.

He claims Palestinians need to be controlled with an iron fist because, he says, any concessions they are given will be met with the same type of Kassam rocket barrages that have hit the areas surrounding Gaza since the pullout.

“All they want is to kill Israelis, that’s what they are constantly told. They cannot be trusted,” Shahar maintains.

. . .

He opposes the notion of a Palestinian state, which he claims would turn into a terrorist hotbed. Israel must assume control over the entire population, Shahar says.

“The Palestinians need to be controlled,” he repeats. “Israeli forces should enter the territories and clean them up.”

. . .

The Palestinians need to be afraid of Israel, Shahar believes. “They call an Israeli premier who doesn’t do anything ‘a barking dog that doesn’t bite.’ We need to bring a dog that will both bark and bite. They need to be taught a lesson on acting up against Israel.”

Following the violation of agreements by the Palestinian Authority, IDF units entered Jericho on Tuesday, March 14, 2006, to rearrest the terrorists responsible for assassinating Israeli minister Rehavam Ze'evi, as well as other senior terrorists being held in the local PA prison. The prisoners surrendered after a 10-hour siege of the prison.

American and British inspectors, who had been monitoring the implementation of the agreements reached between Israel and the PA on the incarceration of the terrorists, had left the city after the PA violated the agreements and declared its intention to release the murderers. Israel decided to take action only after the terrorists were no longer under the supervision of the international inspectors. The Israeli operation in Jericho was meant solely to ensure that the murderers of an Israeli minister remain behind bars.

In October 2001, terrorists of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) shot to death tourism minister Rehavam Ze'evi as he left his room in a Jerusalem hotel. The murderers were then harbored by Yasser Arafat in his command compound in Ramallah. During Operation Defensive Shield in April 2002, IDF units surrounded the compound and demanded the assassins be brought to justice. Through the mediation of US President George W. Bush, an arrangement was reached whereby US and British wardens would take responsibility for the imprisonment of the murderers in an isolated Palestinian prison facility. The arrangement was approved by Israel's cabinet on April 28, 2002, and the terrorists were transferred to the PA's Jericho prison.

Israel would have preferred to continue this arrangement, but could no longer do so after the American and British wardens were forced to leave the prison. The international monitors could no longer fulfill their functions due to a dangerous deterioration of their personal security and continued Palestinian violations of the agreement. As British Foreign Secretary Straw stated following the IDF operation: "The UK and the US have repeatedly raised our concerns over the security of our monitors with the Palestinian Authority and urged them to meet their obligations under the Ramallah agreement. Unfortunately, there has been no improvement. The Palestinian Authority has consistently failed to meet its obligations."

Public statements by Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas left no doubt that the murderers' release was imminent. Following the Palestinian parliamentary elections in January, Meshaal repeatedly and publicly demanded that the PFLP terrorists held in Jericho be set free. In addition, Abbas said in an interview to Israel's Channel 10 on February 24 that he had no objection to the murderers' release. These statements by the most senior Palestinian leadership indicated clearly that, following the forced departure of the international wardens, the release of Ze'evi's assassins was about to occur.

It is important to note that Israel made every effort to avoid casualties during the operation, which was planned and carried out with the sole purpose of assuring the continued incarceration of terrorist murderers. At all stages of the operation, care was taken to reduce the risks to bystanders and the prison inmates were allowed to surrender with their safety ensured, even though by doing so, Israel increased the vulnerability of it own forces.

The operation was concluded as soon as the objective was achieved. The willingness of Ze'evi's assassins to surrender to Israeli forces, and their being taken into Israeli custody unharmed, demonstrates how Israel's intentions were clearly understood by all the relevant parties, including the terrorists.

March 8, 2006

His Excellency
Mahmoud Abbas
President, Palestinian Authority
Ramallah

Mr. President:

The Palestinian Authority has never fully complied with basic provision of the agreement that established the US and UK Jericho Monitoring Mission. While the six detainees - Fuad Shobaki, Ahmad Sa’adat, Iyad Gholmi, Hamdi Qur’an, Majdi Rmawi, and Basel al-Asmar - are held in continuous custody at the Jericho Prison, the Palestinian Authority has consistently failed to comply with core prevision of the Jericho monitoring arrangement regarding visitors, cell searches, telephone access and correspondence. Furthermore, the Palestinian Authority has failed to provide secure conditions for the US and US personnel working gat the Jericho Prison. Repeated demarches by our governments to the highest levels of the Palestinian Authority have not resulted in improved compliance with the Jericho monitoring arrangements. The pending handover of governmental power to a political party that has repeatedly called for the release of the Jericho detainees also calls into question the political sustainability of the monitoring mission.

If the Palestinian Authority would like the US and UK to continue their involvement with the monitoring mission, conditions at the Jericho Prison must be brought into full compliance with the Jericho monitoring arrangements. Alternatively, the Palestinian Authority can come to a new arrangement with the Government of Israel regarding the disposition of the six detainees. Likewise, adequate measures must be put in place to assure the security of the US and UK personnel working at the prison. Regrettably, if the Palestinian Authority does [not] into come into full compliance with the Jericho monitoring arrangement and make substantive improvements to the security of the US and UK personnel working at the prison, or come to a new agreement with the Government of Israel, we will have to terminate our involvement with the Jericho monitoring arrangements and withdraw our monitors with immediate effect.

I hope you understand our concerns and the seriousness with which we take this matter.

Signed by

Jacob Walles (US Consul General)
John Jenkins (UK Consul General)

All Palestinian factions called on businesses and schools to close after Ahmed Saadat gave himself up after troops stormed his jail in Jericho.

The West Bank raid began when UK and US monitors left the Palestinian-run prison complaining about lax security.

Gunmen have released all 11 of the foreigners kidnapped in retaliation.

Two French citizens and a South Korean journalist had been held hostage by Palestinian gunmen overnight, but they have now been handed over to Palestinian police.

The authorities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip remain on high alert fearing further anti-Western violence, a day after the British Council cultural centre in Gaza City was set ablaze.

The military said Tuesday's prison raid was necessary because several militants had been about to be freed by the Palestinian authorities.

Mr Saadat has been in Palestinian custody since early in 2002 - and was moved to Jericho under international supervision in a deal to lift Israel's siege of Yasser Arafat's Muqataa compound in Ramallah in May of that year.

The following month the Palestinian High Court ordered his release, saying there was no evidence to link him to the Zeevi assassination.

He was elected to parliament earlier this year, and both Mr Abbas and the militant election victors, Hamas, had spoken of releasing him soon.

Abbas cut short a European trip and called the raid an "unforgivable crime" and "an insult to the Palestinian people" as he toured the demolished complex.

Hamas Leader Khaled Mashaal said on Friday [Feb. 24] that the new Hamas-led Palestinian parliament would release the assassins of former tourism minister Rehavam Ze'evi from the Jerico jail where they have been incarcerated for the past four years. . . .

Asked about Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz's warnings against any moves to release the murderers, Mashaal said, "Israel always threatens and makes assurances, but it does not scare us. We will do what our people need whether it angers Israel or not."

Not missing a beat to curry favor with his constituents, desperate politician Mahmoud Abbas has called the Israeli raid on the Jericho prison an "unforgivable crime." Hyperventilating a bit there, are we, Mahmoud? Now let's see... Hamas says they are about to free a group of terrorists from that prison, including Ahmed Saadat (secretary general of the notorious PFLP), then the British and American monitors leave the premises, fearing for their own safety, and the Israelis are supposed to do what? Sit on their rear ends? Negotiate with Mahmoud Abbas - a lame duck who was never more than a figurehead in the first place and is now a joke? Talk to Hamas who doesn't even recognize their existence and are terrorists themselves? Let's get serious. Even if this weren't in the midst of an Israeli electoral campaign, the result would be obvious. The people who should really be playing close attention to this are the Iranians - and I would imagine they are. Because it is an example of how the Israelis take action when their interests are threatened. They'll do it again.

The most striking event of the past week was the — how shall I put it? — transitioning of the murderers of Israeli MK Rehavam Ze’evi from a Palestinian prison in Jericho, from which they were about to be sprung, into Israeli custody, where they belong. It’s an interesting story on many levels — the strikingly abrupt departure by the British and American monitors who finally lost patience with the refusal of the Palestinian Authority to uphold its obligation to protect them; the hissy fit thrown by Mahmoud Abbas, which was chutzpadik even for him (accusing the Brits and Americans of reneging on a deal he’d been reneging on since it was inked); the remarkably good timing of the IDF action from the point of view of Olmert’s Kadima party (which begs the question whether the monitors’ departure really was quite as strikingly abrupt as it seemed from the outside); the candy-ass response of the murderers’ PFLP buddies back in the territories (running around grabbing foreigners, making dopey comments to the media, releasing the foreigners and then fading instantly back into the woodwork); the non-response of Hamas to the PFLP mayhem (perhaps an homage to the uselessness of the Fatah police in the days when it was Hamasniks running amok), and more.

One psywar operation played upon the popular dread of an asuang, or vampire.... When a Huk patrol came along the trail, the ambushers silently snatched the last man of the patrol.... They punctured his neck with two holes, vampire-fashion, held the body up by the heels, drained it of blood, and put the corpse back on the trail. When the Huks returned to look for the missing man and found their bloodless comrade, every member of the patrol believed that the asuang had got him and that one of them would be next.... When daylight came, the whole Huk squadron moved out of the vicinity.

Leafing through history, one realizes that it is possible to write an account of warfare without mentioning a single weapons system other than the human mind. The reader can try to expunge from the tale all reference to the human heart, but in vain: for man is at the center of warfare. His will is its ultimate prize; his broken body its ultimate currency. In that light the "deprogramming" efforts of the Australian Federal Police in the dingy corners of the world are simply a return of warfare to its roots. The jihadis want our souls; the rule in warfare is that we will want theirs.

I want to be able to read the New York Times or watch CNN, or listen to NPR and be able to trust what they're telling me. Since I can't do that, since the media is no longer fulfilling their basic function, I have to blog, and I have to read blogs. It pisses me off, because I had better things to do this decade than be my own news service.

I don't like having to read transcripts of press conferences because I can't trust the media to even write down what was said correctly. I don't like having to spend hours finding real experts on the web to analyze how this or that media expert has distorted the facts. I don't like having to pore through the blogs of journalists, soldiers and Iraqi citizens so I can get some inkling of how things are really going, without the hype. Even though I do it, I don't even like having to download the Brookings report once/month in order to see what the numbers say about how the war is going.

But I have to do all that, because its the only way I can truly be an informed citizen.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that most of all, I blame the media for being incompetent.

I'M NOT SURPRISED AT THIS DEVELOPMENT: "The Bush administration, seeking to limit leaks of classified information, has launched initiatives targeting journalists and their possible government sources."

Members of the press are, for the most part, appalled. But having made a big deal of leaks and their alleged harm to National Security in the Plame case, they're in a poor position to complain. Bill Keller's outrage is particularly out of place, and his suggestion that the Bush Administration is "declaring war at home on the values it professes to be promoting abroad" is just a political sound-bite, and not a particularly good one. There's not even a right of journalists to protect leakers under the U.S. Constitution, despite journalists' representations, and doing so has hardly been a slogan on the war on terror. The tendency of the press to conflate its own desire for guild-like special privileges with the protections of the First Amendment is one of the reasons for its decline in trust and popularity.

Dubai, 1 March (AKI) - Emirates airlines, which have bought the naming rights to Arsenal’s new stadium, and whose logo appears on the team’s shirts, have slammed a decision by the top-flight English football club to sign a sponsorship deal to promote tourism to Israel. The two-year 350,000 British pounds (around 610,000 dollars) agreement will involve promoting Israel on LCD billboards around the pitch of Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium in London, news reports said.

The club said it had cleared the deal with officials in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), whose national airline bought the rights to name the new stadium for around three million pounds (around 5.2 million dollars) a year. But a spokesman for the airlines has denied this. He told the Dubai-based daily Khaleej Times that the deal with Israel is “unfortunate, and we are obviously not happy.”

“We will do our best to persuade Arsenal to not renew its deal with Israel,” said the spokesman, who was not identified.

A number of people were lightly injured in the incident, while others suffered from shock.

Shortly thereafter hundreds of Nazareth residents arrived at the scene while chanting “death to Jews” and attacked the Jewish man, beating him severely and slamming his head in the ground.

One suspect was able to escape.

Arab MK Mohammad Barakeh (Hadash) said the throwing of detonators inside the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth is “an attack by a group of Jewish terrorists from the extreme Right.”

“This act proves that terror groups of settlers and the extreme Right feel free to commit their crimes in the occupied territories and against the Arab population in Israel. The government and the police must capture these groups and stop treating them with kid gloves,” Barakeh said.

Arab MK Azmi Bishara (National Democratic Assembly) called the attack on the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth a “vile act.”

“This was a religious or nationalist attack, which in this country both are the same,” Bishara said.

“Such creatures (attackers) grow here due to the racist atmosphere and culture in Israeli society. We ask that police act with restraint in light of the demonstrations by the city’s residents.”

NO WAR IN THE STREETS

By RALPH PETERS - In Iraq

March 1, 2006 -- The reporting out of Baghdad continues to be hysterical and dishonest. There is no civil war in the streets. None. Period.

Terrorism, yes. Civil war, no. Clear enough?

Yesterday, I crisscrossed Baghdad, visiting communities on both banks of the Tigris and logging at least 25 miles on the streets. With the weekend curfew lifted, I saw traffic jams, booming business — and everyday life in abundance.

Yes, there were bombings yesterday. The terrorists won't give up on their dream of sectional strife, and know they can count on allies in the media as long as they keep the images of carnage coming. They'll keep on bombing. But Baghdad isn't London during the Blitz, and certainly not New York on 9/11.

It's more like a city suffering a minor, but deadly epidemic. As in an epidemic, no one knows who will be stricken. Rich or poor, soldier or civilian, Iraqi or foreigner. But life goes on. No one's fleeing the Black Death — or the plague of terror.

And the people here have been impressed that their government reacted effectively to last week's strife, that their soldiers and police brought order to the streets. The transition is working.

Most Iraqis want better government, better lives — and democracy. It is contagious, after all. Come on over. Talk to them. Watch them risk their lives every day to work with us or with their government to build their own future.

Oh, the attacks will continue. They're even predictable, if not always preventable. Driving through Baghdad's Kerada Peninsula District, my humvee passed long gas lines as people waited to fill their tanks in the wake of the curfew. I commented to the officer giving me a lift that the dense lines of cars and packed gas stations offered great targets to the terrorists. An hour later, one was hit with a car bomb.

The bombing made headlines (and a news photographer just happened to be on the scene). Here in Baghdad, it just made the average Iraqis hate the terrorists even more.

You are being lied to. By elements in the media determined that Iraq must fail. Just give 'em the Bronx cheer.

I'm trying. I've been trying all week. The other day, I drove another 30 miles or so on the streets and alleys of Baghdad. I'm looking for the civil war that The New York Times declared. And I just can't find it.

Maybe actually being on the ground in Iraq prevents me from seeing it. Perhaps the view's clearer from Manhattan. It could be that my background as an intelligence officer didn't give me the right skills.

And riding around with the U.S. Army, looking at things first-hand, is certainly a technique to which The New York Times wouldn't stoop in such an hour of crisis.

Let me tell you what I saw anyway...