Mark Steyn on MultiCultural Sensitivity...

Mark Steyn is simply great. Another example why as he artfully destroys the notion of Multi-Culturalism...

Remember a Hero

I've written on him before, but once again thought I'd link to an article about Fabrizio Quattrocchi. An example of the best that Italy has to offer, who died at the hands of "men" not even a thousandth of the man Fabrizio was.

The Dregs of Society Pray on One of the Best

This is just awful...

Not even 24-hours after Private First Class Tim Hines's wife and family said goodbye at his funeral, American flags that had adorned their Fairfield yard were piled beneath a car and burned [by vandals -ES]. . . .

As firefighters brought the fire under control they discovered a pile of around 20 American flags underneath the car.

Neighbors say Hines' wife's family had flags line their front yard and on the porch.

Those were taken as well as flags in neighboring yards.

I can't fully describe how despicable that is. Some people don't deserve to live in your country...I wish we could send them to Iran. Or North Korea. But that'd be too nice for them...


[Via Instapundit]

Egypt and Terror: Quietly fighting the War

Here's an interesting perspective on recent terror trends in Egypt from Dan Darling over at The Fourth Rail

Sample Quote:

It is still far from clear to me as far as what actually happened in the last several terrorist attacks and I suspect that Mubarak is keeping things equally ambiguous to other governments for fear that they might actually warn anyone planning to visit the pyramids this summer that they might stand a good chance of being blown up within the comfort of the hotel room.

Faulty Polling and Distorted Coverage

I am a huge critic of polling in general, especially because they are so ubiquitous these days and so often poorly done, misleading, or pre-designed for a specific result.

This poll that I ran across today seems a prime example of the kind. It could merely be that the person writing the article is inept and trying to claim that the polling data supports something it never intended to support. But at any rate, the presentation is typically slanted.

The article/poll discusses a study done of Japanese and American attitudes towards our expecations of a World War III, the use of nuclear weapons, and general attitudes about the two countries.

As an example of its poor analysis:

According the poll, we are told that "60 years after [the U.S. used atomic weapons on Japan]...[m]ost people in both countries believe the first use of a nuclear weapon is never justified."

Now, note the present tense usage of "is never justified." Not was, is. The sentence then is not referring a polling question not about the literal first use of atomic weapons in Japan, but instead the concept of "First Use/First Strike" atomic attacks generally. This is an important distinction.

Clearly, the implication of the article's word choice is to call the U.S. bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki "first strike" atomic attacks and state that a majority of people disagree with their occurance.

Definitionally, there is a disconnect here. The general understanding of "first use/first strike" attacks is a strike done in the absence of previous "hot" conflict (Reading cold war literature or watching Hollywood productions from..oh, how about the last 50 years...would tell you as much).

Quite obviously, from this definition, U.S. usage of atomic weapons --coming after we had been embroiled in a world war for the better part of 4 years and suffered nearly a half million deaths--wouldn't fall under the umbrella of a first strike (I suppose technically it might be seen as a Last Strike). So why attempt to argue that the "majority-disagree" data is relevant?

Laziness on the part of the writer is a possibility. Also possible and more likely is that the author wanting the poll to be more clearly in line with the message they want it to portray, whether for ideology or to attract interest/ratings.

Interestingly, the poll does specifically ask about opinions on American usage of atomic weapons in WWII. The results are:

"Two-thirds of Americans say the use of atomic bombs was unavoidable. Only 20 percent of Japanese felt that way and three-fourths said it was not necessary. Just one-half of Americans approve of the use of the atomic bombs on Japan."

Such a result is interesting on its own (Such as how it is that 1/3 of those Americans polled can find the action unavoidable, yet still think it morally contemptible. I haven't taken an Ethics class in a couple years, but there seems a disconnect there to me).

But it's not nearly as catchy as saying that majorities in both Japan and America ostensibly opposed them since they oppose first strike attacks. Afterall, would it surprise anyone to learn that the Japanese don't approve of our bombing them?

And that gets me to the point of this post. Ultimately, who cares? The poll in question isn't really that significant or important. But it illustrates how media coverage of polling data can be shaped to create a story instead of reporting one.

The difference between saying "One in Three Americans finds President doing poor job" and "Two-Thirds of Americans satisfied with President" is more than merely rhetorical since rhetoric shapes perception.

As any reader of the former HorseRace blog, a site for in-depth statistical analysis of polling data during the last Presidential election, can tell you: Polls and the media coverage that surrounds them is deeply and unmistakably flawed.

It is unfortunate then that they are given such prominence in how we analyze our world. In times where the latest polling data on public support for our war efforts will shape how we proceed Diplomatically/Militarily, it is enormously important that our polls (and the media presentation of them) accurately reflect public sentiment. Not doing so will someday turn another Tet-Offensive victory into a defeat.

Of course, as long as the powers that be (namely politicians, the Media, etc.) are aware that perception of reality if more powerful than reality itself, there isn't much hope...

No net...

I hate having to give excuses for why my posting is so infrequent these days. But in this case, it's not merely laziness on my part:

I don't have internet at my house currently (and won't for a couple more weeks).

Bear with me. I'm hoping to get back to constant, daily posting in due time...

Thanks!

American Heroes...

Here's a fascinating story about the Navy SEAL team that was isolated and nearly destroyed while fighting a heroic battle in Afghanistan.

Rumors are flying that the teams mission might not have been as 'routine' as original speculation indicated, and that its target was maybe the most wanted man in the world...really an interesting, albeit terrifying and heartwrenching account.

Worth the read to appreciate our military men's sacrifices. We'll likely learn more about this specific engagement as time passes.

Eloquence on British resolve...

Here's a great quote from Donald Rumsfeld (who, at least to me, has been unusually quiet these days):

"Though it is not yet known with certainty precisely who is responsible, we do know terrorists’ intentions. They strike without warning and without regard for human life in the hope that they can frighten and intimidate free people -- to change our way of life. And they won't stop until their side or our side has prevailed.

But if these terrorists thought they could intimidate the people of a great nation, they picked the wrong people and the wrong nation. For generations, tyrants, fascists, and terrorists have sought to carry out their violent designs upon the British people only to founder upon its unrelenting shores.

Before long, I suspect that those responsible for these acts will encounter British steel. Their kind of steel has an uncommon strength. It does not bend or break."

I like that.

Thoughts on 7/7

Here's a good editorial on the bombings in London from the National Review.

Among many good quotes,

"Our first response should be to kneel down and pray for God's mercy on the souls that were ripped so untimely from this life. We are horribly aware of the magnitude of the crime and the tragedy of the lost and maimed.

Yet Britain is not "burning with fear and terror," as the group claiming to have murdered these innocent people alleges on an Islamist website. That allegation represents what the terrorists hope and calculate will be the response of its victims...

...Nothing like that has happened in Britain. In addition to the self-disciplined response of Londoners on the spot, the remarks of Prime Minister Blair, opposition Tory leaders, and other public figures have all struck a note of determined defiance.

...Today the terrorists scored a typically vile success, but they were denied a victory by the courage of our allies. Now we know — indeed, we never doubted — that Britain can take it. But Britain and America have to show that we can also dish it out."

Read the whole thing here.

Stand Firm Ye Bulldogs...

Thoughts and prayers with the British on a sad day. Let it be a resolute future.

NASA causes moral suffering for Zodiac lovers...

This is truly wonderful. It's nice to see that among other things, America's love for lawsuits has spread worldwide. Though I actually don't blame the U.S.. There are idiots in every part of the world. Here's an enormous one in Russia.