Category: Europe

  • Tartan Day ’06

    It’s now the sixth day of April, 2006, where I live, so let me welcome you to Tartan Day, a day to be celebrated by Scots and those of Scot descent. Since it is Tartan Day after all, let’s start this with the tartan of my family, which is expected to play a prominent role in my pending nuptials. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Wylie family tartan.

    Next, here’s a quick look at the historical reason why April 6 has been chosen as the day of celebration.

    Me? I’ll be marking the day by donning a shirt in the famed Black Watch tartan. Too bad such noble garb will be wasted in the cube farm. Hopefully, I should have some good wedding pics for the 2007 edition of Tartan Day.

    Now, I’ll put up more Scot-related material later, but I wanted to point y’all toward the third annual Gathering of the Blogs, as Ith at Absinthe & Cookies presents a collection of bloggers planning on honoring the day. Those blogs, currently, are as follows:

    Aye, check ’em out throughout the day for what promises to be some good ol’ Scot-related blogging.

  • British Secretary Wants Geneva Review

    It is a sensible call that allows for the realities and dangers of the day.

    Britain’s Defense Secretary called Monday for a review of the Geneva Conventions, saying international rules of war needed to be revamped to reflect the threats of global terrorism.

    John Reid said the potential for groups or countries to develop or acquire weapons of mass destruction should lead to a new debate about whether pre-emptive strikes should be allowed under the rules of war.

    “The laws of the 20th century placed constraints on us all which enhanced peace and protected liberty,” Reid told an audience at the Royal United Services Institute, a security and defense think-tank in London. “We must ask ourselves whether, as the new century begins, they will do the same.”

    He suggested the Geneva Conventions — which date to 1949 — may need to be revised.

    The Geneva Conventions set standards for conduct during times of war including the treatment of prisoners and protection of civilians and journalists. They ban torture, rape, mutilation, slavery, genocide and a host of other war crimes in all conflicts. Violations are a punishable criminal offense under the national laws of countries that have signed the conventions.

    Reid did not specify what changes he thought should be made to the Geneva Conventions or other international rules of war.

    Indeed, in the half-century-plus since the beginnings of the Geneva accords, the U.S. has repeatedly faced enemies that have either ignored or not qualified for the negotiated provisions.

    As I said, Mr. Reid has issued a sensible call — hence, it must be shredded by opponents, though not on grounds of content or validity. Feel free to read the rest of the linked Associated Press piece as the shredding commences and several tiresome talking points of those against our efforts in the Iraqi theater are introduced unchallenged. This begins immediately with labelling U.S. efforts as a “so-called war on terrorism” and just snowballs from there. While the second half of the “news” piece reads as a leftist editorial, I have yet to discern any statement contrary to Mr. Reid’s general assessment on the failure of the Geneva Conventions to adequately cover either the nature of our likely enemies or the destructive power of their potential weaponry.

  • 400 years of Glory and Valour Consigned to History

    ‘Tis a sad time for the Scottish, as five legendary regiments are piped into the annals of history.

    In Basra, the sun beat down on the soldiers gathered in the dust of Shaibah camp. In Edinburgh, a light drizzle fell on the men and women lined up on parade at the top of the castle. In Glasgow, Baghdad, Omagh, Belfast, Cyprus and Canterbury, similar ceremonies were taking place. As midday struck in Scotland, the country’s old regiments slipped into history.

    Gone were the Royal Scots – almost 400 years old – the Black Watch, the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, the Royal Highland Fusiliers, the King’s Own Scottish Borderers and the Highlanders. In their place, to a flurry of pipes and drums, was the new Royal Regiment of Scotland.

    It was certainly not the first merger imposed on Scotland’s soldiery, but it has proved to be one of the most controversial. Yesterday, however, the army was putting a brave face on it.

    As the moment drew near, a large crowd had gathered around the edges of Edinburgh Castle’s Crown Square. Kenny Mackenzie, the Royal Scots’ Regimental Sergeant Major, marched smartly into the square and snapped to attention.

    “By the right, quick march,” the order came, and from around the corner came the new regimental band, belting out the tunes of the Athol Highlander and Glendaruel Highlander. Behind them, a carefully chosen cross-section of the new regiment marched into the Crown Square, wheeled right and came to a halt.

    They had been practising hard, apparently, but perhaps in keeping with the furore surrounding the merger, not all were in step. Their boots hit the cobbles like a burst of machine gun fire, rather than the single sharp report that the sergeant major was hoping for. He made them suffer by shuffling them backwards and forwards for a couple of minutes, barking out instructions until he was happy.

    Still, as Major-General Euan Loudon, the new regiment’s most senior officer was to say, change may be painful.

    “Parade will remove head dress”, RSM Mackenzie yelled, and they whipped off the old caps. Two more soldiers appeared, bearing between them a tray draped in the new regimental tartan and worked their way among the ranks, collecting the last vestiges of the old regiments. They marched out smartly, covering the abandoned hats discreetly with the tartan.

    Those remaining in the square waited. The drizzle continued. The crowd, mainly tourists interspersed with press and some military types, craned their necks to see what was going on. Nothing happened. “Where’s the general?” one soldier whispered. More drizzle fell. The onlookers began to talk among themselves.

    In Basra, the soldiers of the Royal Scots were baking in the heat. The regiment, the oldest in the British Army, is not due back until May; they had the curious experience of being consigned to history while still being called on to serve in action.

    As if there was not enough historical baggage hanging around, the Ministry of Defence had chosen the 373rd anniversary of the formation of the regiment to disband it. About 200 soldiers who were not required for patrolling stood and watched as the standard of the Royal Scots was lowered for the last time, while a lone piper played a lament.

    […]

    Back in Edinburgh, the general finally appeared, striding into the square, sleeves rolled up. The others had apparently been a little too quick off the mark.

    “Parade, general salute,” barked RSM Mackenzie and the band broke into a stirring burst of regimental music. And stopped again, just as quickly.

    The general strode up and down the lines, dishing out new caps, each bearing the hackle appropriate to what were once individual regiments, but are now mere battalions: black for the 1st Battalion (Royal Scots Borderers – the old Royal Scots and King’s Own Scottish Borderers); white for 2nd Battalion (Royal Highland Fusiliers); the famous red for the 3rd Battalion (Black Watch); blue for the 4th Battalion (Highlanders); and green for the 5th Battalion (Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders).

    The caps also bore the new insignia of the Royal Regiment, a lion rampant on a cross of St Andrew, or the crucified cat, as some wags have taken to calling it. It looked quite smart. The general stood in front of them and made his big pitch. It was, he said, a new chapter in the story of the Scottish soldier. “Change may be painful, but it has come to visit us in our day and generation,” he said, but it followed on from a glorious past.

    The article briefly tells the story of each of the regiments that are going by the wayside.

    • The Black Watch’s name came from the dark tartan its soldiers wore and from its role to “watch” the Highlands after its formation in 1725, when six companies were formed to stop fighting among the clans. The regimental motto was Nemo Me Impune Lacessit (No-one Attacks Me With Impunity).

    • The King’s Own Scottish Borderers were the local infantry battalion for the Borders, Dumfries and Galloway, and Lanarkshire. They were founded 1689 to defend Edinburgh from Jacobites and fought in every major conflict of the last 300 years including, with distinction, the Gulf in 2003.

    • The Royal Scots was the oldest Infantry Regiment of the Line in the army. It was formed in 1633 under a warrant granted by Charles I, raising a body of men for service in France. The regiment saw conflict in many theatres, both world wars and the Gulf war, and action in Northern Ireland.

    • The Royal Highland Fusiliers were formed in 1959 by the controversial amalgamation of the Royal Scots Fusiliers and the Highland Light Infantry. The regiment was awarded more than 200 battle honours, a number unsurpassed by any other unit in the British Army.

    • The Highlanders, a combat infantry regiment of about 550 men, was formed in 1994 with the amalgamation of the Queen’s Own Highlanders (Seaforth and Camerons) and The Gordon Highlanders. It was the only one with a Gaelic motto – Cuidich ‘n Righ (Aid the King).

    • The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, nicknamed the “Thin Red Line” for their actions at Balaclava, were formed in 1881 by the amalgamation of the Princess Louise’s Argyllshire Regiment and the Sutherland Highlanders. They had the army’s largest cap badge and the Glengarry as headgear.

    The new Royal Regiment has adopted the stirring and traditional “Scotland the Brave” as its regimental march (music and lyrics). Hat tip to Irish Elk via the Llama Butchers

    More on the rationale for the change can be found in this Reuters piece:

    The army says the new regiment is being forged to meet the changing needs of the 21st century, including more short-notice deployments, peacekeeping duties and the need to operate alongside allies — as with U.S forces in Iraq.

    Four of the old regiments will constitute individual battalions with the Royal Regiment, but the Royal Scots and the KOSB will be combined into one battalion over the next few months. The army is also losing three regiments in England.

    […]

    Loudon said the new super-regiment had emerged from a review of defence policy in the 1990s after the end of the Cold War. What emerged, he told Reuters in an interview, was that “we would have to be prepared to fight across a broad spectrum of operations and, of course, peace support and peacekeeping missions, and to go to these operations at quite short notice and plug in effectively with allies”.

    [Loudon] said that a legacy of the Cold War had left the army unbalanced, with a preponderance of “heavy forces that were pretty immobile,” and “light forces that had relatively light combat power”.

    “The big idea was that we would re-balance that structure into three areas of capability: light, which would be beefed up; medium, which would be created; and heavy, which would be made as mobile as we could in the future.”

    He said the traditional system where units changed locations and roles every three years or so also failed to meet these needs and meant that about 25 percent of infantry in the British Army could be unavailable for operations at any one time as they moved to new locations and retrained for new roles.

    In the Royal Regiment of Scotland, the merged Royal Scots and KSOB will constitute the 1st battalion, the Royal Highland Fusiliers the 2nd battalion, the Black Watch the 3rd battalion, The Highlanders the 4th battalion and the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders the 5th battalion.

    The Royal Scots and KOSB have traditionally worn tartan trews (trousers) rather than kilts, but the Royal Regiment of Scotland will be kilted, wearing the Black Watch, or “government” tartan.

    The battalions will, however, retain their distinctive coloured feathers behind their cap badges, known as the “hackle”, and the pipe and drum bands will keep the regimental tartans and accoutrements.

    Loudon said history and tradition were integral to the new regiment, but added: “A tradition is only relevant if its legacy, when it is handed down to the next generation of people inspires, them to soldier as their forebears have done.”

    He said the spiritual homes of the old units would remain at their old bases in Scotland in the form of regimental museums and associations covering past and present members.

    First the 49th Lone Star Armored Division, now the Scottish regiments — ah, but military history can be a cruel mistress.

    At least the new Royal Regiment will carry on with the dark but beautiful Black Watch tartan. Unfortunately, there may be insult added even to that saving grace, as the British army has recently lowered the quality standard on kilts, opening them up for the bidding of foreign contractors.

    Borders weavers Robert Noble has produced the tartan for the ceremonial kilts worn by Scottish regiments for 150 years.

    But in an effort to drive down costs, the Ministry of Defence has announced it is putting the contract to produce tartan for the amalgamated Royal Regiment of Scotland up for tender.

    It is also lowering the standards of the tartan’s quality to allow other companies producing cheaper, lower-grade cloth to compete against the expertise of Borders textile companies.

    The MoD has launched a competitive tender allowing any manufacturers to compete for the contract of 5,000 kilts, estimated to be worth £300,000, for the new regiment.

    Previously, only a few firms in Scotland could produce woven woollen cloth to the high standards required, but the MoD has lowered standards so more firms can compete at lower prices.

    Jeremy Purvis, a Borders MSP, said the MoD cost-cutting was misguided.

    “This is about the standard of cloth provided. It is an insult to the company that has been providing it for over 100 years,” he said.

    The MSP also said the MoD’s attitude and insensitivity towards the contract was a worrying reflection on attitudes towards the new Royal Regiment of Scotland. He added: “I hope very much it is not, but the way they have behaved in this incident does give that indication.

    “The kilts are clearly going to be sub-standard. Now there will be different cuts and shades on parades and it will be an embarrassment. The ceremonial Scottish wear of kilts and trews should absolutely be made in Scotland.”

    Yeah, kick ’em while their down. Don’t worry, despite poorer kilts, the Scots will bravely soldier on, creating a new regimental history.

  • Swedish Foreign Minister Resigns over Cartoon Clampdown

    The dreaded Mohammad cartoons have chalked up another victim– the job of a Swedish government minister that apparently lied about preemtively axing a web site soliciting further such drawings.

    Sweden’s foreign minister resigned Tuesday, accused of lying about shutting down a far-right Web site that solicited cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

    Foreign Minister Laila Freivalds told a news conference she could not stay in the government in the “current situation.” Prime Minister Goran Persson said Freivalds would be temporarily replaced by Deputy Prime Minister Bo Ringholm.

    Freivalds has been criticized for her role in shutting down the Web site of a far-right party that was planning to publish caricatures of Muhammad like those that led to deadly protests by Muslims worldwide.

    The site was closed Feb. 9 after a Foreign Ministry official contacted the Web hosting company, which critics said was an intrusion on the freedom of speech.

    Freivalds had told Swedish media she did not order the ministry official to contact the company. A later report from the ministry said she was involved in the decision.

    Good. Not knowing what cartoons the web site may have received and actually published, there was no legitimate reason, in my view, to justify prior restraint in this case. That the minister lied about the matter only supports the opinion that this was wrong, a strange case of governmental forcefulness boldly applied for the cause of cowardly timidity.

  • Prince Charles Calls for Tolerance in Egypt

    More naivety from our Euro friends? Apparently so, this time courtesy the British crown prince.

    Britain’s Prince Charles began his visit to Egypt on Monday urging people to bridge the gap between the Western and Islamic worlds even as his own trip to Cairo’s most renowned Islamic institution courted controversy.

    “As I’m going to say at Al-Azhar university, I find my heart is incredibly heavy from all the destruction and death that occurs,” Charles told Egypt’s state-owned satellite Nile TV channel, in an interview pre-recorded in London.

    […]

    Al-Azhar’s decided to honour Charles for his conciliatory stance during the recent controversy over cartoons satirising the Prophet Mohammed, but the move has angered some of the institution’s directors.

    “All that Prince Charles did is to say that Islam is the most widespread religion in the world and that’s a reality, not a discovery made by the prince,” Al-Azhar lecturer in Arab literature Abdel Azim al-Mataanni told AFP.

    In his interview with Nile TV, Charles touched on the broad issues of attacks carried out by Islamic extremists and the recent wave of violent Muslim and Arab protest over the cartoons satirising the Prophet Mohammed.

    “I know so well from having experienced the horror of terrorism myself, in losing my beloved great-uncle Lord Mountbatten back in 1979 when he was blown up in a terrorist bomb,” Charles said, invoking the memory of his mentor killed by the IRA.

    “I do have some understanding I think, a little, of what people go through with these horrors.”

    He pleaded for people on both sides of the Muslim-West divide to find common ground and acknowledge the shared heritage of Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

    Before mentioning Judaism, perhaps Prince Charles should look around Cairo for the apparently-fashionable swastikas. Yes, that’s a sure sign of a fertile common ground.

  • Defiant Hamas Packs Cabinet with Hardliners

    Guess what. The terrorist group-become-democratic-victors of Hamas have yet to be mollified by the rigours of leadership.

    Hamas, the militant Palestinian group, has named a government dominated by its own leadership, defying international pressure and confounding hopes that it would moderate its extremist stance.
    After other Palestinian factions refused to join a coalition, the victorious Islamist group nominated a Cabinet whose senior members have all been jailed, deported and escaped Israeli assassination. Chief among Prime Minister-designate Ismail Haniya’s 24 ministers are Dr Mahmoud al-Zahar, a hardliner, as Foreign Minister, and Said Siyam as Interior Minister. Most others are Hamas, with some pro-Islamist independents and technocrats, one woman and one Christian.
    President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to approve them but may try to delay the decision until after the Israeli general election on March 28. However, Shaul Mofaz, Israel’s Defence Minister, said that if President Abbas accepted the line-up he would “officially turn the Palestinian Authority into a terror entity”. Hamas faces a cash crisis, as EU foreign ministers met in Brussels yesterday to consider how to continue providing aid to Palestinians without endorsing what is regarded as a terrorist organisation by the EU and US.

    The article describes four of the key named figures as follows:

    Prime Minister: Ismail Haniya, 43. Imprisoned by Israelis twice

    Foreign Minister: Mahmoud al-Zahar, 55. Imprisoned once by Israelis. Survived Israeli assassination attempt but lost a son. Hardliner. Hostile to Israel and the US

    Finance Minister: Omar Abdel-Razeq, 48. Arrested twice by Israel

    Interior Minister: Said Siyam, 46. Teacher. Lost job with UN relief agency over political affiliations. Member of the Hamas’s political office in Gaza In charge of foreign relations for Hamas. Jailed four times by Israelis

    Should we be surprised that Hamas has yet to turn into a bunch of Pollyannas? No, of course not. First, they have yet to really shoulder the strain of actually trying to govern the madness that fills the Palestinian regions. They did get a taste of the “society” they’re expected to lead today, as Palestinian gunmen engaged in multiple firefights. Strangely, these violent outbursts of cordite involved no Israelis.

    Unfortunately, some of the immediate pressure of governing was alleviated from Hamas as the European Union agreed to a release of $78 million in emergency aid. Luckily, that largesse was accompanied with the oh-so-stern warning that Hamas must play nice.

    In Brussels on Monday, EU external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner handed a cheque for 64m euros to Karen AbuZayed, of the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).

    She was insistent that Hamas, which has refused to recognise Israel or renounce violence, needs to fall into line with the international community.

    Hamas immediately buckled. No, wait, they actually took the money and thumbed their nose at their naive benefactors.

    A Hamas spokesman, Salah Bardawil, said the group recognised that the PA faced economic difficulties.

    “But we will not go begging to the United States and Europe because we will not be blackmailed over our political positions,” he said.

    He said Hamas, an Islamic organisation, would seek new funding from the Islamic world.

    Ah, sweet progress toward peace. I do, however, look forward to the times when Hamas does actually try to govern the mess it has played no small part in creating. If only fools would quit enabling Hamas and actually force them to confront the consequences of their positions.

  • Belarus President Faces Challenge from Protesters

    After victory in an election that the U.S. has decidedly declared “invalid,” the president of Belarus is trying to ride out a swarm of protests.

    Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko faced a challenge to his electoral victory on Tuesday from international critics and protesters who camped out in the capital overnight accusing him of rigging the count.

    Lukashenko, in power since 1994 and criticized in the West for authoritarian Soviet-style rule, swept back into office on Monday with an official tally of 82.6 percent.

    Nearest rival Alexander Milinkevich, with 6 percent, called the poll fraudulent, a view shared widely in the West.

    About 300 protesters defied warnings by Lukashenko’s state security services and camped out in the early hours in dozens of tents in an action reminiscent of the highly organized 2004 “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine.

    Supporters brought sleeping bags, food, hot drinks and blankets to them.

    Witnesses said riot police were stationed in sidestreets near the square but there was no sign of any action against the unsanctioned rally, summoned by Milinkevich to demand a rerun of the election and denounce Lukashenko’s human rights policies.

    “We must stay here while we have the strength to do so. We must stay until victory,” Milinkevich told the rally on Monday.

    Unsurprisingly, Publius Pundit‘s Robert Mayer comes through with some of the best blogging on the region, this time providing lengthy and oft-updated coverage of the protest.

  • Brits to Withdraw 800 Troops from Iraq

    Our British allies have announced a pending reduction in forces on the ground in the Sandbox.

    The number of British troops serving in Iraq is to be cut by 800 to just over 7,000, it was announced yesterday.

    John Reid, the Defence Secretary, told the Commons that the reduction would begin when the next brigade moves to Iraq in May. He insisted that the cut was not triggered by the increase in violence.

    “It is an operational decision not a political one,” he said.

    With more than 235,000 trained members of the Iraqi security forces and 5,000 recruits joining each month, the country now had enough resources to conduct independent operations, he said.

    The announcement came as many observers believe Iraq is descending into even greater chaos with the prospect of civil war.

    Well, this certainly doesn’t sound like the course of action one would choose were one to believe the doom-and-gloom media’s prognostications of a pending civil war. One would anticipate a variety of reactions to such a situation, among them an increase in forces, a constancy of troop levels or a large-scale withdrawal, depending upon expectations and dangers. Rather, a small reduction points towards a phased handover of responsibilities, as has been predicted by the coalition leaders and appears to be the case here.

    But despite the recent sectarian violence after the dome of the Shia shrine in Samarra was destroyed, the Ministry of Defence’s analysis was that civil war was “neither imminent nor inevitable”.

    Mr Reid hinted that some of Iraq’s 18 provinces could be entirely free of foreign troops after the Joint Committee to Transfer Security Responsibility meets this month.

    He said that the occupying forces were not about to “cut and run”, insisting that their commitment was “steadfast until the job is done”.

    No, historical instances of cutting and running, be it from Viet Nam, Beirut or Somalia, are what put us in the boat we’re in today — our enemies are expecting it, playing every twist for its media value in an attempt to undermine our resolve. Indeed, it is their only hope, as they cannot withstand us militarily, nor can they deny that the Iraqi people are slowly embracing democracy and the Iraqi security forces are slowly but surely growing in competency and numbers. Time is not on the side of our enemies in Iraq, unless the defeatists among us get their way.

  • Sheehan Bails on Protesting at American Post in Europe

    And now, the much ballyhooed appearance by Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan at the gates of an American military base apparently has been axed.

    Cindy Sheehan says she will not be near Ramstein Air Base or participate in a protest march from Landstuhl to Ramstein on Saturday if she goes through with a planned trip to Europe.

    Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq and the woman who protested the war last summer outside President Bush’s ranch in Texas, said in an e-mail Wednesday to Stars and Stripes that “everything is up in the air at this point.”

    Sheehan is due to arrive in Frankfurt on Thursday. Despite uncertainty clouding Sheehan’s visit, protesters and counterprotesters still plan to gather outside Ramstein Air Base on Saturday afternoon.

    Sheehan was arrested Monday in New York City outside the U.S. mission to the United Nations when she and other protesters attempted to deliver a petition calling for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Her condition raises doubts as to whether she will make the trip to Germany and France.

    “If I am there, I won’t be anywhere near the air force base … or participate in the march,” wrote Sheehan on Wednesday. “I was brutalized in New York the other day by the NYPD (New York Police Department) and I need to go to the doctor today (Wednesday).”

    When asked why she would not protest near the air base, Sheehan replied: “I don’t want the soldiers to feel we don’t support them, and soldiers can’t redeploy themselves.”

    So, which is it, Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan? The brutality you suffered through at the unmerciful hands of the NYPD or your support of the American military personnel who, surprisingly, are not at liberty to write their own orders?

    I think that this is a case where Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan’s handlers — and that is what they are — have decided that it is best to continue to use her notoriety and name but not her presence.

    After all, Confederate Yankee‘s Bob Owens visually and clearly demonstrates that any police brutality accusations are a complete crock.

    Methinks instead that Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan’s handlers think it’s best that her image not come up in blatant contrast with the military Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan claims she supports — as will be the case in Germany.

    Please, Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan, I beg and plead that you press charges of brutality against the NYPD. Please speak truth to power, Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan, about how the New York coppers kept ya from standing up to the Man in Germany.

  • What I’m Reading Tonight

    First, here’s a somewhat interesting, though rarely insightful, look at the friction between the American media and military.

    “There’s an irony here, because when you had embedding, there was a sense that the reporting was better than ever,” says Dan Goure, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute. “But since the end of major combat operations, the relationship has really gone to hell. There is a strongly held perception in the military – particularly the Army – that the media is doing the enemy’s work. You guys are seen as the Jane Fondas of the Iraq war. And so the military attitude is, ‘why should we level with you, because you’re going to screw us.’”

    That attitude apparently goes all the way to the top: Yesterday, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said that “the steady stream of errors [by the media] all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those who hope for success in Iraq.”

    Goure says the relationship between the press and military has been bad since the time of the Vietnam War. In World War II and the Korean War, he says, the military had a sense that the press was on their side. But today, he argues, “both the military and the media have unrealistic expectations of each other,” as they have for the past 40 years. “The military expects the media to be a kind of public affairs arm, and the media expects the military to move faster and more agilely on these kinds of issues than they can. When the military is dealing with a problem, it has to go through the chain of command, there are reviews – it’s a very laborious process.”

    All of that seems pretty dead on, but then there’s the following:

    Many of the reporters I spoke to say the military’s secrecy has helped them control stories, which suggests there may not be a change in press strategy anytime soon, despite the embarrassment caused by the Tillman case. Fidell, who has crusaded for more openness on the part of the military, characterizes the situation bluntly. “At the moment,” he says, “they’re winning.”

    The media want more openness from the military, but essentially refuse to cover any positive story that they’re able to dodge. Sure, big tales like successful elections cannot be buried, but I’ll wager that I could go to CENTCOM or Defend America and find a wealth of positive news releases that have received no media play. Heck, while talking about military secrecy or hesitant forthcoming, this story doesn’t even mention the fact that it was indeed the military that broke the news on the Abu Ghraib abuse story.

    Second, Elephants in Academia takes an look at SecDef Donald Rumsfeld’s interactions with wounded American troops and the dichotomy of how this relationship is presented when drawn by an editorial cartoonist and captured by a camera (hat tip to Confederate Yankee).

    I gave writing this post a fair amount of thought for a couple of reasons. For starters, it’s about that Tom Toles Washington Post cartoon from late January, and I hate to give it any more play. And it’s about Donald Rumsfeld, and I’m aware that I’ve had more than enough to say about him recently. But I’ve decided to throw caution to the wind because I found the visual comparison between the two pictures so striking. And ultimately I hope the post is about more than Toles and Rumsfeld–it’s about the disconnect that I see between public perception of the military based on the way it is portrayed in the press and the reality of the military as I understand it. I know it’s somewhat unfair to compare a stylized drawing like a political cartoon with a photograph because of its attendent aura of verisimilitude, so I would like to start with the disclaimer that both are constructs since, of course, all photographs are shaped by the person who pushes the button and by the way the subjects deport themselves. But in this case, I think that, as in the cartoon, the construct is instructive.

    Don’t let the hedging in that intro dissuade you from what is a very intriguing read and a striking visual contrast.

    Third, here’s a so-far fascinating four-corner discussion on the abusive, oft-disgusting treatment of women by many of those of the Islamic faith (hat tip to Howie at the Jawa Report).

    A Muslim rape epidemic in sweeping over Europe — and over many other nations host to immigrants from the Islamic world. The direct connection between the rapes and Islam is irrefutable, as Muslims are significantly overrepresented among convicted rapists and rape suspects. The Muslim perpetrators themselves boast that their crime is justified since their victims were, among other things, not properly veiled.

    What is the psychology here? What is the significance of this epidemic? And how do we face it when our own feminists, with a few exceptions, are deafingly silent about it?

    I’ll admit I haven’t finished reading this lengthy piece yet but, so far, I’d say it’s safe to tuck it into the know-thy-cultural-enemy file.