Crossposted from Flopping Aces

Is there any doubt why this happened?

Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said Sunday that he was pulling his fighters off the streets nationwide and called on the government to stop raids against his followers and free them from prison.

The Iraqi government quickly welcomed al-Sadr’s apparent move to resolve a widening conflict with his movement, sparked Tuesday by operations against his backers in the oil-rich southern city of Basra.

Al-Sadr’s nine-point statement was issued by his headquarters in the holy city of Najaf and broadcast through loudspeakers on Shiite mosques. It said the first point was: “taking gunmen off the streets in Basra and elsewhere.”

He also demanded that the Iraqi government stop “haphazard raids” and release security detainees who haven’t been charged, two issues cited by his movement as reasons for fighting the government.

Followers handed out sweets in Baghdad’s main Mahdi Army militia stronghold of Sadr City.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh called the statement “positive and responsible.” But he also warned in a telephone interview broadcast on Iraqi state TV. that security forces would continue to target those who don’t follow the order.

Why you ask? Because they were getting their asses kicked from one end of the city to the other:

With the fifth day of fighting in Baghdad, Basrah and the South completed, the Mahdi Army has suffered major losses over the past 36 hours. The Mahdi Army has not faired well over the past five days of fighting, losing an estimated two percent of its combat power, using the best case estimate for the size of the militia.

A look at the open source press reports from the US and Iraqi military and the established newspapers indicates 145 Mahdi Army fighters were killed, 81 were wounded, 98 were captured, and 30 surrendered during the past 36 hours.

Since the fighting began on Tuesday 358 Mahdi Army fighters were killed, 531 were wounded, 343 were captured, and 30 surrendered. The US and Iraqi security forces have killed 125 Mahdi Army fighters in Baghdad alone, while Iraqi security forces have killed 140 Mahdi fighters in Basra.

While the size of the Mahdi Army is a constant source of debate, media accounts often put the Mahdi Army at anywhere from 40,000 to 60,000 fighters. With an estimated 1,000 Mahdi fighters killed, captured, wounded and surrendered, the Mahdi Army has taken an attrition rate of 1.5 to 2.5 percent over the past five days.

It didn’t look too good for them on the political front either:

About 200 demonstrators held a rally to support the military operations in Basra
and Maliki’s government, in Diwaniya on Saturday.

The major political parties in the ruling Coalition remain united in supporting the offensive against the Mahdi Army and the Iranian-backed Special Groups cells. President Jalal Talabani and Massoud Barazani, the president of the Kurdish Regional Government reiterated their support for the operation on Friday, while Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki ratcheted up the rhetoric against the Shia terror groups.

Maliki called the Shia terrorists “worse than al Qaeda” and vowed to remain in Basrah until the operation is completed. “Our determination is strong … those who break the law are punished, and those who draw their weapons in the face of the state are punished,” Maliki said on Iraqi state television.

And the disinformation campaign waged by Sadr, which the MSM fell for hook, line and sinker was highlighted once again:

The Sadrist movement claimed numerous Iraqi policemen and soldiers are defecting. “Groups of Iraqi troops came to us to lay down their arms,” said Sheikh Salam al Afraiji, the leader of the Sadrist movement in eastern Baghdad.

But the spokesman of Baghdad Operations Command denied Iraqi security forces are defecting en masse. “The registered number that we have [defecting to the Sadrists] is that 15 soldiers were able to escape,” said Major General Qassim Atta in a briefing today in Baghdad. Atta stressed that there are over 50,000 Iraqi security forces operating in Baghdad, and some level of defections should be expected. Atta also said Maliki has “ordered [the military] to prosecute those soldiers according to the Military Punishments Law.”

Either way you look at it, the man was getting beat and wants a time out. Problem is, the Iraqi government seems to be allowing it instead of pushing ahead and taking out the whole of the gang. But I have no doubt in the long run Sadr is done. Maliki still remains in Basra, Sadr’s troops are in retreat, and the sovereignty of Iraq appears to be strengthening, slowly but surely.

Whatever will the MSM do? Ed Morrissey already noted how they spun this fight:

Anyone who follows the news closely in Iraq knew this day would come. The British left a power vacuum behind in the south that the Baghdad government could not fill at the time, and Sadr and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council’s Badr Brigades filled it instead. They have fought each other and some smaller Shi’ite groups for control of the streets ever since 2005, as Steven Vincent tried to warn people just before they murdered him in Basra. The Iraqi government had no choice but to challenge the militias for control of Basra and the surrounding areas, but they waited until the Iraqi Army had enough strength to succeed.

Did our media give anyone this context? No. They reported it as some kind of spontaneous eruption of rebellion without noting at all that a nation can hardly be considered sovereign while its own security forces cannot enter a large swath of its own territory. And in the usual defeatist tone, they reported that our mission in Iraq had failed without waiting to see what the outcome of the battle would be.

I doubt anyone is shocked that our MSM would perform this way. Iraq has been off the frontpage for months now because there was nothing bad to report. They must of gone into a orgasmic shudder when this Sadr fight came up, not understanding that Sadr was no longer a match for the American trained Iraqi army.

also:

Questioning Gore On His Global Warming Credentials.

Joe Bastardi tackles Gore’s global warming credentials….and rightly so:

I am absolutely astounded that someone who refuses to publicly debate anyone on this matter and has no training in the field narrated a movie where frames of nuclear explosions were interspersed in a subliminal way in scenes of droughts and flood, among other major gaffes, can say these things and then have them accepted… by anyone.

The list of degreed meteorologists, climatologists, scientists, that signed the Manhatten declaration stating their disagreement with Mssr. Gore’s premises grows by the day.

What gets me most is he goes on unchallenged one-on-one on this. Never in all my years of competition have I seen someone elevated to a level that he is, in any thing, without any face-to-face competition to establish credibility.

When someone gets a PhD, his or her thesis is normally attacked, for lack of a better word, in something known as the “orals,” at least it was for those venturing into those waters at PSU.

In other words, a group of people still in a higher academic standing than you, one you want to ascend to, will try to get you to defend what you do in a way where you show what you know, not by some programmed unchallenged remark, but by competition with the people that are criticizing. Why? Because you can defend what you know, if you have worked hard enough. It is typical of the mentality of this person, that he thinks that he should be able to get something for nothing, just go on unchecked, hurling insults at people who have forgotten more than he will ever know.

But you know he DID invent the internet so we have to give him that…..sigh

Meanwhile in other global warming news there appears to still be a few level headed blokes in England:

Today, Andrew Guy Tyrie, Conservative Party Member of Parliament for Chichester, first elected in the 1997 General Election, and formerly a special adviser at HM Treasury, has written an excellent piece in The Times, in which he describes our carbon emission targets as “absurd” [‘A fantasy that will bankrupt us’, The Times, March 27]:

“… drastic reductions in the use of fossil fuels and therefore huge increases in the cost of energy – in industry, for heating our homes and in our cars – would leave us all worse off. It would hit the poor hardest, for whom energy is a larger proportion of their income.

Implementing the [Climate Change] Bill would also, in practice, mean the closure of parts of British industry, only to see them reopen in China and elsewhere. The UK contributes only 2 per cent of global emissions. Unilateral action by the UK, as required by this Bill, would be politically irresponsible and economically disastrous.

Back in the real world these targets are unlikely to be met…”

Mr. Tyrie is to be congratulated – how unusual it is to hear an MP who dares to say what we all know in our heart of hearts to be true; it punctures the balloon of hypocrisy like a bubble bumping onto a thistle.
And finally a new book is out by Lawrence Solomon on the the deniers of man-mad global warming. Born out of many articles he wrote for the National Post regarding those scientists who were labeled “deniers” by the many environazi’s we have all grown to know quite well over the years. The book The Deniers: The World Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud**And those who are too fearful to do so states on the jacket that “What he found shocked him. Solomon discovered that on every “headline” global warming issue, not only were there serious scientists who dissented, consistently the dissenters were by far the more accomplished and eminent scientists.”

Sterling Burnett wrote this about the book:

This book does not attempt to settle the science, or show that humans are or are not responsible for the present warming trend, or settle what we can expect the future harms/benefits of continued warming (or cooling) might be. Rather, the genius of the book is that it shows in a manner accessible to a lay audience that uncertainties concerning each important facet of the “consensus” view on warming abound, and that the dissenting views are at least as plausible (and often more compelling) than the IPCC/Gore camps.

The Deniers, examines what should be the active debates concerning the plausibility of the argument that human CO2 emissions (or CO2 per se) is a driver for climate change, what role the sun may play in warming, what role the present warming trend (and human activities) play in hurricane and tropical/parasitic disease patterns, and the reliability of the climate models, among other issues. In addition, Solomon notes the harsh treatment that many scientists have endured simply because they followed the scientific method, the evidence from their research, and their own consciences, all of which led them to the conclusion that this or that facet of the global-warming consensus view was woefully incomplete or flat-out wrong. This treatment has had the effect intended by global warming scaremongers — to shut down promising areas of research and to silence credible critics.

Though there are many good books on global warming, The Deniers is among the most effective in showing how science is being fundamentally undermined in the current politicized atmosphere of climate research. In addition, like no other book or paper I know, it provides a concise but thorough overview of the myriad weaknesses of the consensus view, the quality and substance of the criticisms of that view, and the stellar qualifications of those scientists labeled derisively as “deniers.”

Certainly appears to be a book you should pick up to better understand how the vitriol and labels of “the debate is over” have effected the debate over man-made global warming.