Work has me travelling again. Last week, Biloxi, Mississippi. My observation: Just because a place has casinos, it doesn't mean that it is glamorous.

Hamas said that they would exact revenge on the US because Israel killed Sheikh Yassin. That would be the same Hamas that Saddam Hussein openly supported with money and arms.

Anyone see where I am going with this?

P.S. - would any of you "secular Saddam could never ever work with religious bin Laden" folks tell me why secular Saddam sent checks that religious Hamas was proud to cash? I have never, ever gotten an answer to that question. Thanks.

From Instapundit:

work as a freelancer for a major national publication, and was talking to my editor as we were closing a piece last week. It was Thursday, and the reports were coming out of Pakistan that we might have Ayman al-Zawahiri surrounded. I passed this news on to the editor, who was crestfallen: "Oh, no. I don't want anything good to happen for Bush before the election," was the reaction (P.S., this editor does not edit foreign or political stories).

It was a sickening moment. This is a man responsible for thousands of American deaths. So while I have no desire to see Bush re-elected, and I disagree with our attack on Iraq, to hope for our failure in capturing one of the deadliest people in the world is a moral blindspot.

Tolja.

Just a gut feel from the way things are going, but I think something is about to change, or has just changed, in the war on terror. Perhaps the attack in Spain is yet another major miscalculation of cause and effect, maybe US polling data is affecting things, or maybe it is just coincidence. But I think that Michael Ledeen is about to get his "Faster, please."

I noted before that President Bush made an almost explicit threat to Syria and Israel. We've got the spring offensive going on, and if it didn't get Zawihiri, it did get hundreds of AQ types, and put that region on notice. And then the killing of Sheikh Yassin. I have been saying since about 9/12/01 that one outcome of the WTC attack is that the Arab-Israeli situation will get resolved, and I would think that it won't come out well for the people who danced in the street with joy at our misery. Arafat is scared, and he should be. And if Hamas thinks that attacking the US is a good idea, well, go ahead, make my day.

I am thinking that perhaps the President has decided to say "Damn the torpedoes." Or maybe that is just wishful thinking. But something is definitely up.

It says on Fox:

He added: "One shudders to think what additional errors (Bush) will make in the next four years to strengthen the Al Qaeda follow-ons: attacking Syria or Iran, undermining the Saudi regime without a plan for a successor state?"

We can only hope!

Splash, over.

Splash, out.

Dang that Allah with his no hotlinking! Fixed it, though!

Another Drudge headline: Al-Qaida No. 2: We Have Briefcase Nukes.

Again, news? What about this article from October, 2002? In that one, AQ got 20 suitcase nukes for $30M.