Iraq's armed guerillas are usually portrayed in vague and shadowy terms, allowing political commentators to cast them in whatever image is deemed convenient. Even the correct word to designate them says more about the commentator than the militants themselves. Those who wish to demonize them call them "terrorists"; those who wish to cheer them on call them the "resistance"; while the majority of the mainstream media cut it down the middle by calling them "insurgents"—while still providing little detail about who they actually are.

Now a front-page Dec. 2 New York Times story (online at the International Herald Tribune) actually provides a breakdown of the insurgency's major constituent entities, and an analysis of its strategies and structure, drawing on the research of the SITE Institute (for Seach for International Terrorist Entities).

The SITE Institute identifies five major groupings, each made up of numerous small, largely autonomous cells that operate under its umbrella. From largest to smallest: al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, Ansar al-Sunna, the Victorious Army Group, the 20th of July Revolution Brigade and al-Rashideen Army.

Recent reportage raises some disturbing questions about the abduction of the four activists from the Christian Peacemaker Teams now being held hostage in Iraq—Tom Fox, 54, of Virginia; Norman Kember, 74, of London; James Loney, 41, of Toronto; and Harmeet Singh Sooden, 32, also of Canada. (See our last post on the case.)

Rather inconvenient news at a time when Bush is hailing a "clear strategy for victory" (Bloomberg, Dec. 1) and "real progress" (Guardian, Nov. 30) in Iraq.

RAMADI, Iraq, Dec 1 (Reuters) - Iraqi militants attacked a U.S. base and a local government building with mortar rounds and rockets in Ramadi, west of Baghdad, on Thursday, before holding ground on several central streets, residents said.

Sen. Joseph Biden's Nov. 21 speech before the Council on Foreign Relations calling for a phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq over the next two years is clearly intended as a response to Dick Cheney's bellicose tirade before the American Enterprise Institute that same day. Cheney merely demonstrates classical addictive behavior. He just can't stop himself:

All of a sudden, the right-wing blogs and pseudo-news sources (MichNews, PostChronicle) are rallying around bogus claims that WMD really were found in Iraq. One who has actually written a book arguing this transparently ridiculous case is Richard Miniter:

From the UK Guardian, Nov. 19:

The right to rule ourselves
Faced with US torture, killing and collective punishment of civilians, support for the Iraqi resistance is growing

by Haifa Zangana

The photograph of an elderly Iraqi carrying the burned body of a child at Falluja, widely shown during the chemical weapons controversy of recent days, is almost a copy of an earlier one that Iraqis remember - from Halabja in March 1988. Both children were victims of chemical weapons: the first killed by a dictator who had no respect for democracy and human rights, the second by US troops, assisted by the British, carrying the colourful banner of those principles while sprinkling Iraqis with white phosphorus and depleted uranium.

Perhaps it is a sign of the turning of the tide, evidenced by Congressional demands for a timetable on troop withdrawals this week. Or maybe it was just the magnitude of the death toll. But after weeks of burying the near-daily ethno-religious carnage in Iraq deep in the paper, the New York Times finally put the latest outrage in the front page Nov. 19.

This is the definition of chutzpah. Even after Memogate and Plamegate (or Nigergate or whatever they are calling it), Cheney thinks he will be believed in these outraged accusations against his accusers. This really is a textbook case of the Big Lie technique—and it is worth noting that the phrase, popularly attributed to the Nazis to describe their own propaganda, was actually first used by Hitler and Goebbels to discredit Allied and "Jewish" propaganda. So, at risk of violating Godwin's Law, we submit that this analogy is not spurious. From MSNB, Nov. 17: