Something similar to what I’ve been saying for months…

has surfaced on InstaPundit today (and it’s nice that Glenn is back, I’ve been in InstaPundit withdrawal for a week). If al-Qaeda are such a bunch of badasses, why is 9/11 their only claim to fame? Because we’ve kicked their asses back into the Stone Age, that’s why!
Anyone who thinks Osama is still alive is out of their minds. Read Mark Steyn’s July 4 column and see if you don’t agree. al-Qaeda, except for their PR machine, are history, and they know it. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t be playing Osama’s Greatest Hits over and over.

I’d like to thank…

the New York Times for this timely disclosure of American military secrets. There’s not a whole lot here to work from but obviously there is a big fat leak or six over at DOD.
I don’t believe in government censorship, but out of patriotic duty, newspapers simply shouldn’t print this sort of thing in time of war; they should have enough sense to self-censor this kind of material. I’m sure the Times in its wisdom (?) doesn’t want the US to go to war against Iraq. But some of the blood of our soldiers who will die there in the process can now be charged to the Times’ account.

Thoughts on the Pledge:

We were sitting in meetings all day yesterday so the news that the Pledge had suddenly become unconstitutional came as somewhat of a surprise when I pulled up InstaPundit, et al., around 6PM. Amongst my techie colleagues this was a brief topic of conversation at lunchtime, and I was somewhat surprised again at what came out of my own mouth.
I am not certain that the words “under God” belong in the Pledge. But at the same time, I’m fully aware that the nation was indeed created by religious men — and I don’t care about the crap about them being Deists or Theists, they wrote plainly that they believed in the help of Almighty God, and they wrote it consistently; just because Jefferson didn’t believe in the Trinity did not make him less of a Christian (and this coming from a Jew…oh well. You’re invited to dispute Jefferson’s level of Christianity, but not here. BWAHAHAHAH!).
But the Pledge was written in 1898 and it apparently served quite well until 1956, when Congress made the undoubtedly-good-at-the-time decision to add the words “under God” into it. Why? What was the rationale? To prove to the peepul back home that they were doing the Lord’s work?
I’m sure I can find this out easily enough, but I haven’t got the resources handy (he said, while sitting 10 miles east of the Library of Congress…but have you ever tried to get into DC at rush hour?).
Anyway, this is something people really ought to think hard about, even though the Ninth Circuit seems to have semi-reversed itself, apparently shocked by the negativity shown toward their decision, and even though the decision isn’t likely to pass muster with the Supremes. Do we really need “under God” in the Pledge? We are pledging allegiance to the flag (and thus to our country — remember, that’s what “the flag” meant to people in 1898), not to the Divine Providence Who came to the aid of the Founders. If you want to pledge allegiance to Him, perhaps you need to be directed to your local church, synagogue, or mosque.
And I was in favor of prayer in school not too long ago. Am I getting old and crotchety?
Stay tuned. Who knows what evil lurks in the minds of men?