It was not that difficult after all - as easy as this game. Once they learned about his coordinates, they have sent him a 500-pound gift - navigated by Light Amplified by Stimulated Emission of Radiation, also known as LASER - and then another piece of justice of the same rest mass - even though the rest frame was not too useful to describe the scenery after the gift landed. The local Iraqi police could have found him, together with five of his appendices. The identification was 100% successful and celebrations could start.
Not everyone celebrates. The father of Nicholas Berg - who was beheaded by al-Zarqawi himself (and many of us have seen the disgusting video) - probably did not like his son too much. He prefers a dumb pacifict ideology according to which the death of al-Zarqawi is a "doubly bad news". No doubt, the prepaid journey of al-Zarqawi to the hell (that Al-Qaeda calls the paradise even though it is full of dirty killers from their own institution) does not mean that Iraq will become a heaven. But I think it is a severe blow to the terrorist organization - and to all of its sympathizers, for that matter: some of them may be just reading this paragraph. ;-)
Some Arabs say that the insurgency will continue but their comments are internally inconsistent. Some of them say that a more radical leader will take over, some of them say that less radical insurgents will become more effective. I think that many of the thugs will finally realize that they can't win their battle and they are not welcome in this world, at least not in the alive form, as long as their acts resemble the acts of their former leader, even remotely.
Meanwhile, Osama bin Laden should notice how happy everyone is, and he should finally reveal his coordinates, too. ;-) When I say "everyone", it includes Al-Qaeda itself that announced the good news on their website as follows:
- "We want to give you the joyous news of the martyrdom of the mujahed shaikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi."
This is what I call a win-win situation. ;-)
Bolton vs. U.N. bureaucrats
In another story, an intense verbal exchange between the U.S. and the U.N. took place. An aide of Kofi Annan suggested, in a coded diplomatic language, that the U.S. should punish ("stand up to") domestic critics of the U.N. such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., realized that this proposed Mugabe-like global "democracy" is a bit over the edge. So he identified the speech of the U.N. bureaucrat to be a "very, very grave mistake" and requested that Kofi Annan will denounce that speech: otherwise the existence of the U.N. itself is at stake. So far, Annan has failed to do so.
I also find it unacceptable that people from an international bureaucratic body that was not elected by anyone - certainly not by me - should have the power to silence their critics, especially if the critics are right.
