Meanwhile in Iraq

U.S. troops opened fire after an explosion near a military convoy Monday in Mosul, as fears grew that the anti-coalition insurgency was spreading north a day after two American soldiers were savagely beaten and killed in the same city.

...Local residents said U.S. troops immediately cordoned the area in Hay al-Dobat neighborhood. "I heard a strong explosion saw the Americans randomly shooting in all directions," said Omar Hamed, a witness.
article

Like I said, when Georgie Double-face was pomping his ass in London, it's a good thing there weren't any of these soldiers around when the canons soluted the Dirtball. Were these soldiers trained? I'm pretty sure it's Clinton's fault.

In other developments:

President Bush heads to Fort Carson, Colo., to visit a military community hit hard by the war in Iraq. Twenty-seven soldiers from the post have died.

Finally. Suppose that Act for Change internet petition helped?

The savagery of the [recent attack on two U.S. soldiers] was unusual for Mosul, once touted as a success story in sharp contrast to the anti-American violence seen in Sunni Muslim areas just north and west of Baghdad.

According to pResiden Evil's definition of progress, this is cause for a celebration, as even the people who once supported us have turned brutally violent.

Give us a little time. We'll draw out every last one of those closeted evil-doers.

....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.

Update 1:40 pm:

This is interesting:

The Christian Science Monitor reports the radical al-Sadr faction now accepts the occupation, strengthening the marriage of convenience between the US and Shia majority upon which American control depends. The movement led by Moqtada al-Sadr dominates the huge Shia slum quarter in Baghdad, and its open hostility to the US occupation was a major concern to the Americans, who feared the group would lead the Shias into an alliance with the Sunni-led armed resistance. But al-Sadr has fallen onto the other side of the fence and is now telling his followers that the “Ba’athists” and “terrorists” are the enemy, and is preparing to join his Shia rivals in an expanded body similar to the Governing Council he once rejected. The New York Times reports that this development, and assurances from other Shia leaders that they aren’t seeking an Islamic republic, has persuaded the Bush administration that an Iraqi government dominated by Shia Islamists would not necessarily be inimical to US interests.

Sounds like al-Sadr is a typical third world U.S. partner. Unreliable. No particular ideological loyalty. Buyable. Wait till he flips back the other direction.