Schools reopened in Thailand under guard of thousands of police.

The last school that was attacked was an elementary school in Bangasod, in the district of Bannang Sata, in Yala, which was burnt to the ground last Sunday.

No one was killed in the incident but according to local news reports, at least 50 teachers have been killed in the three provinces since January 2004 and a total of at least 2,100 people have died in over three years of violence.

Besides the Bangasod school, another 29 others have to be re-built after they were attacked. The Thai education minister, Wijit Srisa-arn, admitted that they have not found any companies that are willing to work on schools in the “Deep South”, as the three provinces are often referred to.

And just who has been attacking these schools? Radical Islamists of course.

An Ohio man was indicted today by a federal grand jury on “charges of joining al Qaeda and conspiring to bomb European tourist resorts and U.S. government facilities and military bases overseas.”

“The indictment of Christopher Paul paints a disturbing picture of an American who traveled overseas to train as a violent jihadist, joined the ranks of al Qaeda and provided military instruction and support to radical cohorts both here and abroad,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein said.

Paul was arrested yesterday outside of his apartment after a four year investigation.

The indictment says that Mr. Paul traveled to Germany about April 1999 to train co-conspirators to use explosives to attack European and U.S. targets, including government buildings and vacation spots frequented by American tourists.

It does not name specific resorts or buildings that might have been targeted but gives U.S. embassies, military bases and consular premises in Europe as examples.

Prosecutors claim Mr. Paul later sent a wire transfer of $1,760 from a financial institution in the United States to a purported co-conspirator in Germany.

A fax machine in his home contained names, phone numbers and contact information for key al Qaeda leadership and associates, according to the indictment.

Mr. Paul also is accused of storing material at his father’s house in Columbus, including a book on improvised land mines, money from countries in the Middle East and a letter to his parents explaining that he would be “on the front lines,” according to the indictment . . .

Mr. Paul was born Paul Kenyatta Laws. He legally changed his name to Abdulmalek Kenyatta in 1989, then to Christopher Paul in 1994, according to the indictment.

After finishing his al Qaeda training in the early 1990s, he returned to Columbus to teach martial arts at a mosque, the indictment said.

Two other Columbus men have been charged in federal investigators’ terrorism investigation. Iyman Faris was sentenced in 2003 to 20 years in prison for a plot to topple the Brooklyn Bridge. Nuradin Abdi, accused of plotting to blow up a Columbus-area shopping mall, is awaiting trial on charges including conspiring to aid terrorists.

If Paul, Faris and Abdi are convicted, what is in Columbus that encourages people to go jihadi?  Surely it’s not the water.

Heh.  The New York Times writes on what would be a Blogger code of conduct, which is funny since the idea appears in, once again, the New York Times where there is actually a code of conduct that isn’t followed.

Mr. O’Reilly and Mr. Wales talk about creating several sets of guidelines for conduct and seals of approval represented by logos. For example, anonymous writing might be acceptable in one set; in another, it would be discouraged. Under a third set of guidelines, bloggers would pledge to get a second source for any gossip or breaking news they write about.

Bloggers could then pick a set of principles and post the corresponding badge on their page, to indicate to readers what kind of behavior and dialogue they will engage in and tolerate. The whole system would be voluntary, relying on the community to police itself.

“If it’s a carefully constructed set of principles, it could carry a lot of weight even if not everyone agrees,” Mr. Wales said.”

Well, there could be badges and what not, or people might actually have to read the content and then decide whether or not they wish to continue reading.  You know, kind of like how consumers already do with media organizations.  And from the looks of things, it would be more sound if the Times decided to look at its own production and find out why its own numbers are falling.

But this entire critique always leaves out the most important thing.  For the most part, bloggers are not journalists, and no one in their right mind goes to a blog looking for straight news without commentary.  Come to think of it, neither does anyone who reads the Times.

The Movement for the National Liberation of Iraq from Foreign Occupation is upon us, and if Muqtada al-Sadr gets his way, he will be leading it. At least that’s what he hopes. Muqtada al-Sadr issued a call for Iraqis to protest the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad with an anti-American protest by way of a statement read out loud by a senior member of his movement on Friday in Sadr City. The protest is to take place in Najaf on April 9.

It would appear al-Sadr has been listening to the United States Congress and is simply going along with their lead.

One source opined, “I assume that thought will be given how to respond to legions of young Iraqis , parading down Sadr City, dressed in black, … BUT unarmed, with mothers and sisters in tow. One may hope there not be a shot heard, lest it become the volley heard around the provinces. This is nothing but the free-will exercise of a free people”

According to Al-Jazeera, al-Sadr said, “Fly Iraqi flags atop homes, apartment buildings and government departments to show the sovereignty and independence of Iraq,” … “[Show] that you reject the presence of American flags and those of other nations occupying our beloved Iraq…”

(more…)

For what it’s worth, Muqtada al-Sadr allegedly survived an assassination attempt that was called for by the Iraqi government.

Radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr narrowly avoided an assassination attempt in recent days in Kufa, south of Baghdad, according to Iraqi deputy Biha al-Araji. He told Arab newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi that elements linked to the government of Nouri al-Malkiki [sic] were behind the plot. The plan reportedly involved the killing of al-Sadr on Friday while he was preaching inside the Kufa mosque. Once the plot was uncovered the he decided not to attend the mosque that day.

I have trouble believing this report because Sadr has done wonders for the Shia block in the Iraqi government, of which al-Maliki is a part of.  It would be far more believable if there was a faction within or a group who splintered apart from the Mehdi Army due to Sadr’s alleged dual stance on the Shia militia.

Col. Ralph Peters on Sunnis looking the other way when Shia are killed unless they can tie the United States into the mix:

Imagine the reaction if Western agents slaughtered a hundred Sunni pilgrims on their way to Mecca. The outrage would spark incendiary rhetoric, riots and revenge killings from Peshawar to Paris.

But when Sunni suicide bombers murdered 118 Shia pilgrims (and wounded almost 200 more) on Tuesday, Sunnis around the globe looked away: Shias only count as Muslims when America can be blamed for their suffering . . .

Where was the outcry?

Human-rights groups were too busy applauding European requests for the extradition of CIA operatives (the real enemies of Western civilization, of course). Since this butchery wasn’t the fault of Americans or Brits, the Europeans themselves took no interest.

American leftists, who raved that Abu Ghraib was another Auschwitz, didn’t offer a single word of pity for the Muslim victims of Muslims.

All to be expected.

But shouldn’t Muslims have denounced the attacks on the pilgrims? Shouldn’t such an atrocity have sparked Arab anger that transcended Islam’s internal divide? After all, those murdered Shias were fellow Arabs, not Persians.

Where were the public statements of sympathy by government ministers and mullahs? Where was the noble Arab media? Where are the outraged demonstrations?

This is a point we’ve made all too often.  For there to be genuine signs of anger in the Middle East, it takes an American or a Jew to somehow be involved, and it’s maddening.  Cartoons are enough to fire-bomb about, but the continued slaughter of pious Muslims by Muslims is just another piece of news.  Perhaps it’s because it’s to be expected, but that still doesn’t mean it’s any less bizarre.

Last night’s ’60 Minutes’ featured a segement about jihadis using the Internet to communicate and recruit, and the segment was not bad.  It rather had a few interesting points to make.

Watch the segment here.

And yes, that’s the name they gave the episode.  Jihad.com?

Atlas Shrugs recorded and posted a rather lame debate between Robert Spencer and Dinesh D’Souza yesterday at CPAC.  I saw the debate, if one can call it that, on CSPAN last night and actually recorded it, but it was just quite odd with D’Souza never figuring out that he could not eat the microphone and speak clearly at the same time.

Atlast believes Spencer won the debate, but I disagree.  I don’t think Spencer ever had a chance to win the debate because there wasn’t a debate going on.  It was filled with shots across the brow from D’Souza towards Spencer and Spencer didn’t get the time to fully rebutt those cheap shots.

Quite odd really, given that D’Souza blames the ‘cultural left’ for 9/11 and Spencer tries in earnest to explain what gave way towards the events of 9/11 is written within Islam and professed in Islamic circles.  D’Souza explains not all of Islam is that way, to which Spencer certainly agrees per his books and his writings at Jihad Watch and Dhimmi Watch, but it’s not the Muslim population of Turkey or Bangladesh that has declared war on this nation nor Muslims in Bangladesh, one of D’Souza’s favorite nations to use in rebuttal to Spencer due to D’Souza being Indian I presume, where the basic structure of jihad was formulated.

Anyways, more interesting is Atlas’ interview with Spencer after the ‘debate.’  Check it out.

The ‘Secular Islam Summit‘ begins tomorrow, and Gateway Pundit plans on live-blogging it. The Summit seems like it would be well worth the fee to go, but alas it would be one heck of a trip for me to get there in 12 hours.

Speakers include:

1. Irshad Manji – Irshad Manji is the internationally best-selling author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith. She is circumventing censors by posting free translations on her website: www.muslim-refusenik.com. A senior fellow with the European Foundation for Democracy, Irshad writes columns that are distributed worldwide by the New York Times Syndicate. She is also producing a PBS documentary about Islamic reform, to be aired in 2007. Above all, Irshad is president of Project Ijtihad, which aims to reconcile Islam with freedom of thought.
2. Dr. Walid Phares is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington (2001-2006) and a Visiting Fellow with the European Foundation for Democracies in Brussels (2006). He has been a Professor of Middle East Studies, Ethnic and Religious Conflict at Florida Atlantic University from 1993 to 2006. He has published several books and articles including in the Middle East Quarterly, Global Affairs, Journal of Middle East and South Asian Studies and other specialized journals. He has been interviewed by national networks including MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, CNBC, NBC, PBS, Discovery Channel, C-Span, BBC, Sky News, CTV, CBC, Globat TV, al Jazeera, al Hurra, Abu Dhabi TV, al Arabiya as well as local ABC, CBS, PBS, NBC and others. He appears on European, Arab, South Asian and Latin American outlets and is a frequent contributor to US and international radio programs.
3. Wafa Sultan – a Syrian-American psychiatrist whose essays on Middle East issues are widely circulated in Arabic. On February 21, 2006, she appeared on Al Jazeera’s weekly discussion program “The Opposite Direction” to debate Dr. Ibrahim Al-Khouli. The New York Times estimated that the video of her appearance has been viewed at least one million times. In 2006 she was included in Time Magazine’s list of 100 influential people in the world “whose power, talent, or moral example is transforming the world.”
4. Amir Taheri – Amir Taheri was born in Iran and educated in Tehran, London and Paris. He has been a columnist for the pan-Arab daily Asharq Alawsat and its sister daily Arab News since 1987 and a contributor to the International Herald Tribune since 1980. Between 1972 and 1979 he was executive editor-in-chief of Kayhan, Iran’s main daily newspaper. He later served as editor-in-chief of Jeune Afrique, the French weekly specialising in Africa, as well as Middle East editor for the London Sunday Times. Taheri has written for The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Newsday, and The Washington Post, Die Welt, Der Spiegel, Die Zeit, Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung, La Repubblica, L’Express, Politique Internationale, Le Nouvel Observateur, El Mundo, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, and the Daily Mail, among others. Taheri is a commentator for CNN and is frequently interviewed by other media including the BBC and the RFI. He has written several TV documentaries dealing with various issues of the Muslim world. Taheri has published nine books some of which have been translated into 20 languages.

There are others, but I didn’t recognize their names. Phares is a personal favorite of mine as I am enthralled by most of what he writes, and Sultan is famous for her words on Al Jazeera at the height of the Danish cartoon protests that was broadcast out on the Internet several times over.

I will definitely be checking in with Jim tomorrow to see what’s going on at the Summit, and I’ll check to see if any of it is covered on CSPAN or a similar network. Glenn Beck of CNN is going to do some reporting on it.

Clifford D. May writing on the war of perception in Iraq:

In Iraq, we have been losing not clashes of arms but clashes of perceptions. Our enemies understood early on that they could not defeat American troops in combat. But they were clever enough to realize they didn’t need to. Instead, they could win a war of ideas.

Their strategy was audacious: They would target their enemies –“occupiers,” “infidels” and “collaborators” — only opportunistically and sporadically. Their most lethal weapon, the suicide-bomber, they would deploy against ordinary Iraqis shopping in the market, waiting on line for jobs, sitting in cafes.

One might have expected the fabled “Arab Street” to erupt over the slaughter of fellow Arabs. It did not do so. Muslims around the world ought to have been furious over seeing their co-religionists killed in cold blood. They were not . . .
The media, for their part, were not diligent in reporting on the affiliations, motives and strategies of the killers — whom they referred to as “insurgents” or “militants” or something equally non-judgmental. They talked about “the violence,” and the “security situation” — as though the cause of the bloodshed was not specific individuals, groups and regimes but a force of nature, like a hurricane or a tornado.

The White House, the Pentagon and the State Department allowed this spin to go almost unchallenged — and eventually to become the dominant “narrative.” What could they have done instead? They could have made the truthful case — forcefully and relentlessly – that ruthless fanatics were intentionally killing innocent Iraqis; that civilized people do not excuse such barbarism, no matter the cause or grievance; that principled people fight and defeat it.

On a BBC radio show, an interviewer asked if I agreed that the situation in Iraq was dire: I said I thought it was: Iraqi non-combatants — men, women and children — are being murdered by the score. So surely, I added, the one thing we must not do is turn the country over to those dispatching the killers.

Startled, he suggested that the presence of Americans was responsible for the violence. I asked him to be more precise: Is it the sight of Americans that causes people to kill one another? Or is it perhaps our smell?

You’ll have to read the rest of the article while I go hop in the shower to hopefully wipe away my American smell.