The al Qaeda caucus

**This is a ridiculously long bloviating rant, done while completely sober. You won't be blamed for clicking off to a Paris Hilton site along the way**

Last we heard from the bearded recluse he was waxing wistfully about our coming defeat:

But I plan to speak about the repeated errors your President Bush has committed in comments on the results of your polls that show an overwhelming majority of you want the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. But he (Bush) has opposed this wish and said that withdrawing troops sends the wrong message to opponents, that it is better to fight them (bin Laden's followers) on their land than their fighting us (Americans) on our land.

That was in January 2006 when he was somewhat alive, a fact now in question (again) based on Zawahiri's latest tape released today (probably to coincide with the upcoming resolution), which pledged allegiance to Mullah Omar. After calling Bush a drunk loser the Z-man cut to the chase:

These traitors in Iraq and Afghanistan must face their inevitable fate, and face up to the inescapable facts. America - which was transformed from the “Great Satan” into the “Closest Ally” - is about to depart and abandon them, just as it abandoned their like in Vietnam.

Surely that sent a few self-indulgent tingles of joy down the anti-war spine, but not to be outdone, here's our exalted Speaker:

“There is no end in sight,” said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California. “The American people have lost faith in President Bush’s course of action in Iraq and they are demanding a new course of action.”

She speaks for all of us, but kudos to her spirit of bipartisanship for refraining to call him a drunk loser. Courage.

Nothing new here AC, so why the rant? Well, sometimes it just boils out. Ms. Pelosi and friends continue to be of the deluded mind that we have viable options in this fight, as if we can just pick up our stuff and go, leaving the Jihadis to their worldwide celebration. You may call that melodramatic, but if it comes across that way here imagine how it will come off to people around the world. If this is the Democrat plan for regaining our global reputation they're on track, since we're about to go back on another promise just as Z-man said.

The term San Francisco values is a misnomer since many folks now share the convoluted self-loathing Pelosi worldview. In today's Libby trial Marcy Wheeler of Firedoglake was describing the testimony of Cheney's current NSA John Hannah. Their liveblogging has been quite helpful, but Ms. Wheeler was peppering leftist editorial comments all over the place, such as this one:

C Libby pressed for resources to prepare against these attacks. Prepare against anthrax. During period we're talking about Libby was dealing with nuclear proliferation by AQ Khan and efforts to stop his activities. Concerned that AQ Khan held info and materials essential to design and production and was seeking to sell it to hostile powers, including NK, Libya, and Iran. Proliferation would pose a direct threat to US. Considered various means of preventing AQ Khan from proliferating, considered action against his network. [bored journalists start yelling "KHANNN!"]

Bored, huh? Explains a lot, doesn't it. And while it's a bit of a stretch to believe Libby never had time to think about Wilson, for them to mock AQ Khan (who was operating when Clarke and Clinton were in there, Ms. Wheeler) shows how utterly wigged out they've become. Libby wasn't playing tiddlywinks, he was helping to stop threats in an effort to protect the country, including these pathetic ungrateful, unpatriotic asses.

The testimony today called up visions of a passage in Woodward's first Bush book "Bush at War". On page 248 he's describing a NSC meeting on October 17, 2001 with Cheney, Libby, and Tenet discussing the anthrax letter attacks:

Tenet said, "I think it's AQ"--meaning al Qaeda. "I think there's a state sponsor involved. It's too well thought out, the powder's too well refined. It might be Iraq, it might be Russia, it might be a renegade scientist," perhaps from Iraq or Russia. Scooter Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, said he also thought the anthrax attacks were state-sponsored. "We've got to be careful on what we say." It was important not to lay it on anyone now. "If we say it's al Qaeda, a state sponsor may feel safe and then hit us thinking they will have a bye because we'll blame it on al Qaeda." "I'm not going to talk about a state sponsor," Tenet assured them. "It's good that we don't," said Cheney, "because we're not ready to do anything about it."

One might wonder what Mr. Tenet will have to say about this in his new book, and whether he'll shine any light on whether we're ready to do anything as yet. And one might wonder about the references to Russia, and the fact we've got a Sec Def and a Sec State who are Soviet experts.

But in the fantasy world of Pandagon and HuffPo life is ignorantly blissful of any threats that don't emerge from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Unfortunately, they've convinced most of the country to come along with them. Good luck to us all.