sometimes you got to laugh, rockwood helps.

"History does not long entrust the care
of freedom to the weak or the timid."
Dwight D. Eisenhower
(ive noticed because I tend to include a lot of photos, a tendency for my blog to sometimes need to be loaded more than once to get all the graphics to show.)

"the clear & present danger" presented by islamo supremacists, radical islam and what it wants.

We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity.
-Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, head of the al Muhajiroun group in London.

Asked about his comments that he wanted to have the banner of Islam at 10 Downing Street, Muhammad said, "Yes, it's my dream. I believe one day that is going to happen. Because this is my country, I like living here."

Hussein Massawi, former leader of Hezbollah, summed it up very pithily:"We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you."

"Muslim institutions, schools and economic power should be strengthened in America. Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver themessage of Islam ...... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

Omar Ahmad Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations

become aware find out about cair

Daniel Pipes has been researching Islam for the past three and a half decades. He directs the Middle East Forum - a Philadelphia think tank. Among his twelve books, four focus on Islam. In 2003, President Bush appointed him to the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace.
Pipes on islamofascists~~~ "militant Muslims are at war with America, not because of what America did, but because Islamists perceive themselves as being in a long-term conflict with the values of the West.
Excerpted from Arab & Iranian telecasts in March & April of this year. Available & thoughtfully subtitled by the indispensable MEMRI.
[suicide attacks] carried out by boys and girls… these redeem self-confidence and hope… because a nation that does not excel at the industry of death does not deserve life.
"The Muslim Students' Association on american campuses ~~
Queensborough Community College in New York in March 2003 "We reject the U.N., reject America, reject all law and order. Don't lobby Congress or protest because we don't recognize Congress. The only relationship you should have with America is to topple it … Eventually there will be a Muslim in the White House dictating the laws of Shariah."

Islamic fanaticism was not created by anything that we have done


Goodbye my Love,
I will carry Your memory within me,
as I await the travail of time.
Which I must cross,
before I will touch your face again.
resting in the warmth of your soul,
together again.

Wednesday, March 31, 2004

what to do about Falluja 

The Grave of the Hundred Dead

by Rudyard Kipling

There's a widow in sleepy Chester who weeps for her only son;
There's a grave on the Pabeng River, a grave that the Burmans shun,
And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri who tells how the work was done.

A Snider squibbed in the jungle, somebody laughed and fled,
And the men of the First Shikaris picked up their Subaltern dead,
With a big blue mark in his forehead and the back blown out of his head.

Subadar Prag Tewarri, Jemadar Hira Lal,
Took command of the party, twenty rifles in all,
Marched them down to the river as the day was beginning to fall.

They buried the boy by the river, a blanket over his face—
They wept for their dead Lieutenant, the men of an alien race—
They made a samadh in his honour, a mark for his resting-place.

For they swore by the Holy Water, they swore by the salt they ate,
That the soul of Lieutenant Eshmitt Sahib should go to his God in state;
With fifty file of Burman to open him Heaven's gate.

The men of the First Shikaris marched till the break of day,
Till they came to the rebel village, the village of Pabengmay—
A jingal covered the clearing, caltrops hampered the way.

Subadar Prag Tewarri, bidding them load with ball,
Halted a dozen rifles under the village wall;
Sent out a flanking-party with Jemadar Hira Lal.

The men of the First Shikaris shouted and smote and slew,
Turning the grinning jingal on to the howling crew.
The Jemadar's flanking-party butchered the folk who flew.

Long was the morn of slaughter, long was the list of slain,
Five score heads were taken, five score heads and twain;
And the men of the First Shikaris went back to their grave again,

Each man bearing a basket red as his palms that day,
Red as the blazing village—the village of Pabengmay,
And the drip-drip-drip from the baskets reddened the grass by the way.

They made a pile of their trophies high as a tall man's chin,
Head upon head distorted, set in a sightless grin,
Anger and pain and terror stamped on the smoke-scorched skin.

Subadar Prag Tewarri put the head of the Boh
On the top of the mound of triumph, the head of his son below,
With the sword and the peacock-banner that the world might behold and know.

Thus the samadh was perfect, thus was the lesson plain
Of the wrath of the First Shikaris—the price of a white man slain;
And the men of the First Shikaris went back into camp again.

Then a silence came to the river, a hush fell over the shore,
And Bohs that were brave departed, and Sniders squibbed no more;
For the Burmans said
That a kullah's head
Must be paid for with heads five score.

There's a widow in sleepy Chester who weeps for her only son;
There's a grave on the Pabeng River, a grave that the Burmans shun,
And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri who tells how the work was done.



using palistinian childrens lives like kleenex 

Occam's Toothbrush had this article posted, and it shows just how vile the palistinian terrorists are. how they use palistinian childrens lives like kleenex.

Islamic Jihad promises heaven to teen recruit

On Sunday, 15-year-old Tamer Khawireh ran home and buried his head in his mother's arms. Sobbing, he repeated over and over: "They tricked me, they tricked me." Islamic Jihad had recruited Khawireh to be a suicide bomber for martyrdom and limitless virgins thereafter.

Khawireh is one of four Nablus boys recruited by terrorist groups and then arrested for an attempted suicide attack against Israel in the past month. And with the city's mayor forced out of office by threats, a police force long-since imploded, and a population at best ambivalent about suicide attacks, nothing seems able to hinder the recruitment. "I want to stay here with you, I want to be part of this life," cried the boy, as recounted Tuesday by his eldest brother, Raed. An Islamic Jihad religious leader had wooed the youth, captivating him with the prospects of heaven's rivers of honey and the beautiful women he would find there. A few hours after Khawireh's confession to Raed, IDF troops swooped down on the family's Nablus home, arresting him and another young man. Both remain in Israeli detention. Like the other boys his age, Khawireh was easily bought. NIS 100, a new set of clothes, a cellphone, and some cigarettes had done the trick. One day Raed caught his brother smoking and using the phone. "I cuffed him and he promised to give the phone back," said Raed. "Am I not a rich man?" asked Khawireh's stunned father, Massoud, on Tuesday, as he passed out pictures of his son to reporters in his upper middle class home. Massoud said he called Islamic Jihad to demand an explanation. They apologized, lamely arguing that they mistook the gawky 10th grader for an 18-year old. They then promised not to do it again, said Massoud. He and Raed believe the Islamic Jihad, or collaborators with Israel embedded within the group, fingered his younger son after it became clear that he chose life. Khawireh's family called on the Palestinian Authority to launch an investigation to find out who is responsible for recruiting children.
"We discovered the plan only three hours before my brother was supposed to set out on the suicide mission," Raed said. "It's clear that he had been manipulated by suspicious elements and people who do not represent the Palestinian resistance." The brother said that, a few days before the arrest, he discovered that Khawireh was smoking. "I had a serious talk with him and asked him to stop smoking, because it was something he had never done before," he added. "But a day before he was arrested, I saw him in the city center, and he was talking on a cellphone and smoking. I was very angry with him and told him to go home immediately. I questioned him about the cellphone, and he said that it belonged to one of his friends who gave it to him to repair." The following morning, the family's suspicions grew when they discovered that the boy did not show up for school. When Khawireh returned home later that evening, his brothers started questioning him about the reason for his absence from school. "When he saw how worried we were, he broke into tears and said, 'They have fooled me, they have deceived me,' " Raed recalled. "He told us that the armed wing of Islamic Jihad was trying to recruit him for a suicide mission and that he had retracted and decided to return home. They tried to brainwash him, exploiting his young age and innocence. To a certain extent, they were successful." As the PA crumbles around residents of Nablus, and terrorist groups assume the mantle, locals increasingly feel that they have no one to turn to. Raed, a level-headed 23-year-old with a marketing degree, has demanded an investigation into the incident. The PA said it would send someone to confer with the family, but Raed has heard nothing since Sunday. The only acknowledgment of the family's distress came in the form of a condolence call from Islamic Jihad. It was hardly the justice they were looking for. Behind Massoud Khawireh, Tamer's pale mother paced as she read an article about her son in the Palestinian daily Al-Ayam. She said nothing throughout the 90-minute interview. Abu Ahmed, the proprietor of the Bukhri restaurant in downtown Nablus, said the lawlessness of the city is such that "a man could be killed right outside this shop. Days later we would receive a leaflet telling us who it was."
When asked if someone would investigate such an incident he quipped, "What investigation, what authority? What legal action? We have none of that here, it is an absolute mess."

The recruitment of teenage bombers spurred Abu Ahmed to "constantly investigate the life of my son [who is 14]. I ask the grocer, his teachers and his mother, whom he met and what he did every day."
A few steps from Abu Ahmed's restaurant, a gaggle of men gathered around a reporter in Nablus's central market trying to uphold Palestinian honor in the only way they could. One man swore that the Shin Bet had fabricated the stories of youths being conscripted, that "no Palestinian group would do such a thing." When asked how many of them believed that version, all the men, young and old, raised their hands. In private, Palestinians react differently. "I appeal to Israel to allow us to establish peace. I appeal to them to act against Palestinians who sabotage peace," said Massoud Khawireh. That was before guests arrived. In public, Tamer's father stuck to the standard Palestinian line: Israel is to blame. Tamer Khawireh is the fourth boy of his age to be arrested in Nablus in recent weeks for planning to carry out a suicide attack. Last week, Husam Abdu, 16, was detained at the Huwara checkpoint south of the city with an explosive belt strapped to his body. On March 16, another boy, Abdallah Quran, 11, was caught at the same checkpoint as he was carrying a bomb in a backpack. The boy was later released after it turned out that he was unaware that he was carrying a bomb given to him by two Fatah activists. In February, the IDF arrested another Nablus boy and his father, who were contracted by Hizbullah. On March 25, a Nablus girl, Reem Salah, now 18, was sentenced to 32 months' imprisonment for planning to launch a double suicide attack along with a classmate. Her father, a Nablus cab driver, believed the accusations exaggerated. Still, he wagged an accusatory finger at the nebulous "them" for recruiting such a young girl, "for ruining her life, our life." There is no one to call, there is no one to complain to, he added, brandishing the Israeli court documents and the plea-bargain deal that got his daughter off relatively easy. The militias in the city are so powerful that even their own supposed controllers say they can't rein them in. Abu Said, 30, the sturdy-looking leader of the Tanzim branch in the Balata refugee camp said that he begged the Aksa Martyrs Brigades – who sent Abdu – to leave the kids alone. "But it is hard to approach those who are armed," he said from his office. "We just provide them with money and supplies."


Tuesday, March 30, 2004

Anti-Semitism and Anti-Americanism 

ive had a growing feeling, an epiphany so to speak that even though it is irrational and impossible for america to be responsible for the woe's of the world, and in fact are the largest contributor to economic prosperity and international security, we are being tarred as the perpatrators of all things evil,
we have advanced the concept of god given individual rights and true justice, western justice, which boils down to all men being created equal, and the goal of equal treatment under the law no matter the wealth or power of the individual or group to which that individual belongs, this came from jewish tradition. handed down via christianity

humanistic socialistic and fascistic societies can not tolerate the light of God shinning on thier inherently evil systems, which champion the oposite of everything I detailed above.

thus judiaca which champions justice and now america and americans which follows that tradition of judeo christian beleifs must be destroyed, or character assasinated or used as a straw man, but most of all they must carry the blame for all that goes wrong all evil that is purpetrated, and at its hieght evil is called good and good is branded evil its the nature of those that do not walk with the word to try to obliterate it.

with the blinders off for one moment does anyone beleive that if one of these islamofascist groups or countries got a nuke they wouldnt try to use it?

and conversly if america and isreal were truely rogue nations would even one of our enemies and all the innocent peoples living under them be left allive right now?

in a way a case can be made that americans are like the new jews of the world.

everything you ever wanted to know about how antisemetic europe is can be found in this article compiled with voluminous notes. ive pulled out one small fraction

Anti-Semitism and Anti-Americanism

The classical anti-Semitic motif of a Jewish conspiracy aiming to dominate the world reemerges in new forms. Josef Joffe, editor of the German weekly Die Zeit, comments that certain circles in Europe and the Arab world connect the hatred of America with hatred of the Jews. They maintain that the Jewish desire to rule the world is being realized today, mainly through the “American conquest.”

There are both important similarities and differences between European anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism. Alvin Rosenfeld encapsulated the similarities by saying: “Anti-Americanism functions in much the same way anti-Semitism has over the centuries – as a convenient focus for discontents of many different kinds and a ready-made explanation of internal weaknesses, disappointments, and failures. It is, in short, both fraudulent and counterproductive.” As an example, Rosenfeld mentioned the leading German philosopher, Peter Sloterdijk, who in a 2002 interview in the Austrian journal Profil, named America and Israel as the only two countries today that struck him as being “rogue states.”

The thesis that Europe builds its identity from opposition to the United States has been indirectly confirmed by two of Europe’s leading thinkers, Frenchman Jacques Derrida and German Jürgen Habermas, who wrote that the major anti-Iraq war demonstrations on February 15, 2003, in London, Rome, Madrid, Barcelona, Berlin and Paris, might enter history books as the beginning of a pan-European public awareness.

American political scientist Andrei Markovits analyzed the differences between European anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism: “While the two European prejudices overlap, there are also huge differences. Anti-Semitism has killed millions of people, while European anti-Americanism has only murdered a few. There were never any pogroms against Americans. Violence, as a rule, did not go further than the destruction of property and the burning of many American flags. There has never been a blood libel about Americans.”

Markovits relates to anti-Semitism as a tool of identity creation. In his view, anti-Americanism fulfils a similar role today: “Nobody knows what it means to be a European. It is unclear what Greeks and Swedes have in common. …Anti-Americanism thus enables the Europeans to create a hitherto missing European identity that must emerge if the European project is to succeed.” He also points out that Anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism are the only major icons shared by the European extreme left and far right, including neo-Nazis.


chronicaling the impending doom in europe 

charles at LGF posted this one and it gives slim hope that not all french are weasils, and europe still may save itself...

Terror and tolerance

By Jean-Christophe Mounicq

The morning of Jan. 29, upon hearing about the attack on a bus in Jerusalem, I did not experience the expected emotion. It seemed such a "normal" thing, and I have not enough tears to shed for people I do not know.
The next day, on Jan. 30, I read an article about one of the victims — Avraham Belhassen, 26 years old, a young father — and realized that I could tolerate no more. I can no longer tolerate terrorist folly, Islamist hatred, the passivity of Muslims, the blindness of the West.
Following the attacks in Madrid, this feeling struck me again. The reaction of the Spanish people, cringing in fear before the Islamist claim of responsibility, bothered me even more. I can no longer tolerate such cowardly Munich-like behavior that leads inevitably to dishonor and war.
The reaction of the European media and political class to the elimination of Sheikh Yassin — the master of hate and terrorism, and one who had called for the murder of Jews — pushed me over the edge. I can no longer tolerate descriptions of the monster responsible for hundreds of deaths and thousands of wounded as a "spiritual leader," a poor "paralytic in a wheelchair." I can no longer tolerate murderous, barbaric Islamist hatred.
I can no longer tolerate the electoral victories of Islamists in Algeria, Turkey or France. I can no longer tolerate the indifference of Muslim leaders and the majority of Muslims to the suffering of non-Muslims. I can no longer tolerate their affected statements or their perpetual self-victimization.
I can no longer tolerate the double game of Yasser Arafat, the Saudi princes or Pakistani leaders. I can no longer tolerate watching Muslims dance with joy, in the Palestinian territories or in Paris, following attacks on the World Trade Center or an Israeli bus. I can no longer tolerate their anti-Semitism, anti-Christianism, anti-Buddhism or anti-Hinduism.
I can no longer tolerate those who hate liberty but take every advantage of it. I can no longer tolerate Islamist lack of respect for secularism and equality, between men and women, Muslims and others. I can no longer tolerate their lack of respect for the cultures of the very countries that shelter them. I can no longer tolerate the multiplication of veils on women in the streets of Paris.
I can no longer tolerate attacks on French officials, abusive complaints against the police, terrorism against judges, the ban against teaching about the Holocaust in schools, or the brutalization of male doctors who treat Muslim women in hospitals. I can no longer tolerate burning cars in Strasbourg and synagogues in Bondi. I can no longer tolerate catcalls when the Marseillaise is played during games at the Stadium of France. I can no longer tolerate the cries of "death to Jews" in their demonstrations or "death to Christians" written on walls.
I can no longer tolerate concealing the massacres of Christians and Jews in Islamic countries, Copts in the Middle East, of one-and-a-half million Orthodox Armenians in Turkey at the beginning of the last century, as well as a million-and-a-half Christian Sudanese at its end. I can no longer tolerate Muslim ethnic cleansing in Kosovo or Palestine. I can no longer tolerate Islamist totalitarianism.
I can no longer tolerate the relativism and masochism of a West incapable of recalling its own history other than to denounce it. I can no longer tolerate comparing the Crusades to jihad, when the Crusades were nothing but a parenthesis in the history of Christianity while jihad is an integral part of Islam.
I can no longer tolerate the cowardice, weakness and mediocrity of the majority of Western leaders, or the unwillingness of Westerners to affirm their own values and the superiority of liberty and democracy over all other principles and systems. I can no longer tolerate the inability of Europe to recall its Judeo-Christian heritage.


Christendom awake! 

I posted about brigitte bardot a few months ago and this review dovetails nicely into that. wake up europe or find yourself displaced and asking for refuge from us here in america in less than 40 years. or fighting civil wars in 15 or 20.

Christendom awake!
a review of Robert Spencer's Onward Muslim Soldiers

Twice convicted of inciting racial hatred after she criticized the ritual sacrifice of sheep by Muslims during their Eid el-Kebir holy day, Brigitte Bardot (above) is making news again this year for much the same reason. Two French human rights groups took swift legal action against the provocative French screen siren, charging that her latest book Crî dans le silence is full of racist attacks against Muslims—though, of course, Muslims are of all races.

The evidence of her latest offense: Bardot denounces the "Islamicization" of France and blames the degeneration of French society on her country’s liberal immigration laws. "For twenty years we have submitted to a dangerous and uncontrolled underground infiltration," she writes in her new book that became an instant bestseller in France this summer. "Not only does [Islam] fail to give way to our laws and customs. Quite the contrary, as time goes by it tries to impose its own law on us."

Naked facts would seem to bear out BB’s contentions. For example, practically all of France’s 1,200 mosques are funded by foreign governments, and out of the country’s 230 major imams, none is French. According to journalist Christopher Caldwell, "imams are often chosen by foreign governments for loyalty to their ideological priorities," priorities that are decidedly not those of France. Anyone who has been to Marseilles recently will understand what Bardot means by "Islamicization." The Muslim population of France doubled between 1989 and 1998, and if population trends continue, the eldest daughter of Christendom could have a Muslim majority by 2040 or earlier.

Back in the U.S.A., Robert Spencer has topped the aging sex kitten with a new book of his own. Onward Muslim Soldiers is jam-packed with some of the most politically incorrect statements about Islam (e.g., "Jihad and killing is the head of Islam."), though it is instructive to note that many of these statements, like the example above, are direct quotes from Muslim religious leaders themselves. Such is Spencer’s tack in providing his critical analysis of Islamic writings, history, and current practice.

Irony abounds. While Brigitte Bardot is being sued for the third time by French human rights groups advocating on behalf of Islam, Spencer charges that it is Islam itself, its traditional teachings and modern practice, that not only incites hatred—hatred of non-Muslims (infidels)—but also incites violence. Islamic intolerance, he says, plays no small role in our present clash of civilizations.

Last November, for example, Nigerian journalist Isioma Daniel penned an article for the Lagos daily This Day about the Miss World pageant, which was to be held in Nigeria in December. She asked, "What would Mohamed think? In all honesty, he probably would have chosen a wife from one of them." Muslims were outraged, including the Muslim official in the Nigerian province of Zamfara who called for the journalist to be killed for her "blasphemy." Riots ensued and Muslims set ablaze the offices of This Day. Approximately 500 people were killed in the rampage, and since then Christians have been fleeing the area. Such is what President Bush expediently called a "religion of peace."

Again, Spencer’s thesis that Islam is an intolerant religion is not a politically correct vision, nor one that is widely accepted among scholars—big surprise. Despite the fact that he provides dozens of supportive examples throughout his well-documented book, Onward Muslim Soldiers will undoubtedly come under attack as being filled with "racist attacks" against Muslims. To be sure, if he had published his book in France he would be facing the same sort of legal offensive by hysterical rights groups that make a living out of defending the status quo of European multicultural rot.

The most absorbing point, if not the main point, of Onward Muslim Soldiers is that most Western countries, and especially France, are serving the twin gods of multiculturalism and tolerance to their own demise. The big question with respect to the Muslim immigration to Europe and America: How can a tolerant society (as characterized by the West) survive the presence of an intolerant minority (as characterized by Islam)?

Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn asked exactly that question just before he was assassinated last year on the eve of Holland’s national elections. Fortuyn, a self-professed homosexual and unapologetic libertine (whose kitchen featured portraits of Marx and Lenin) was consistently vilified by Europeans as "far right" despite the fact that in most ways he supported the postmodern, post-Christian Holland of hashish cafes and licensed prostitutes. What set him apart? Fortuyn believed that traditional Islamic values are incompatible with the liberal, secular societies of the West and warned that immigration from Islamic countries threatens to change Dutch values inalterably. He once called Islam "a backward religion," arguing that while Christianity and Judaism have gone through the laundromat of humanism and enlightenment, as much cannot be said of Islam.

Spencer claims it was partly Fortuyn’s flamboyant homosexuality that led him to espouse such a controversial position. The Dutch politician pointed out that in the Netherlands homosexuality is treated on par with heterosexuality. In Islam, not so. Tired of being insulted by Muslims who called him "lower than a pig" for being a gay man, Fortuyn proposed curbs on Muslim immigration to Holland and called for the assimilation of the Muslims already there into the secular, multiethnic, multicultural, tolerant framework of modern Dutch society. "We need to integrate these people; they need to accept that, in Holland, gender equality and tolerance of different lifestyles is very, very important to us."

Fortuyn’s assassin, Volkert van der Graaf, believing that Dutch Muslims are an oppressed minority, felt that the rise of Fortuyn on the national political scene signaled the advent of fascism. He explained that he shot the Dutch renegade in order to save the Netherlands from such a neo-Hitlerian mentality.

Fortuyn, however, was able to vocalize what his Dutch brethren are unwilling to accept, that most Muslims commonly believe that the only legitimate basis for a society—and that would apply to Dutch society as well as anywhere—is the Sharia, the Islamic law that the Taliban was so strictly enforcing. Spencer quotes an imam in Holland: "The Sharia does not have to adopt to the modern world because these are divine laws. People have to bend to the Sharia." Defense of the Sharia includes, among other things, the defense of stoning—not only for the sins of Sodom, but also for adultery, a staple of modern Dutch life. Moreover, Muslim cultural features such as arranged marriages, revenge killings, and female circumcision (including sewing up the woman’s vagina from top to bottom) are diametrically opposed to Western values. Fortuyn’s fatal mistake was to warn Holland against the Trojan horse of intolerance it is inviting into its society in the name of tolerance and multiculturalism.

Tensions between Islam and European secularism are also apparent in the realm of women’s rights. If the principles of classic Islamic law hold sway, women will be reduced to second-class citizens.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, elected to the Dutch parliament in January, has criticized Islam precisely on this point. Hirsi Ali, a young Somali immigrant who considers herself an "ex-Muslim," charges that it is Islam at its core (not simply so-called "radical Islam") that is oppressive to women. She refers both to verses in the Qur’an as well as modern-day Muslim practices. For example, Sura 4:34 of the Qur’an says women should obey the male members of their families—even if, say, they are forbidden to leave their homes—and if they do not obey then the husband may beat his wife: "As for those [women] from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them." According to Hirsi Ali, there are millions of Muslim men who carry out that simple verse, beating and oppressing their women in the name of Islam. For daring to voice such a scandalous testimony, the young Somali was forced to flee her country under threat of death, becoming a latter-day Salman Rushdie.

To be sure, Spencer duly recognizes that some Muslims willfully secularize, but he takes great pains to point out that many other Muslims not only reject the idea of assimilating with the prevailing secular cultures of the West, but see as their goal nothing less than the establishment of Islamic states in Europe. If the mounds of evidence piled up in Onward are to be believed, the groundwork is already being laid in more ways than one.

Turkey’s Catholic Archbishop Giuseppe Bernardini warns, for example, that millions of Saudi petro-dollars have been used not to create work in the poor Islamic nations of North African or the Middle East, but to build mosques and cultural centers in the heart of Christian countries with Islamic immigration, even including Rome, at the very heart of Christendom.

How can we ignore this blatant Muslim program of "expansion and reconquest," asks the archbishop, especially when radical Muslims have been so forthright about their intentions? Bernardini recounted a conversation he had with a Muslim leader who said to him: "Thanks to your democratic laws, we will invade you. Thanks to our religious laws, we will dominate you."


Monday, March 29, 2004

The French Betrayal of America 


evariste on LGF spotted this on Brian Tiemann blog and although I new the french were a bunch of duplicitous asshats, this confirms it.

March 22, 2004, 8:51 a.m.
The French Connection
Kenneth Timmerman reports on deep and tight Chirac-Saddam ties.

Kenneth Timmerman, a New York Times best-selling author, lived and worked as an investigative reporter in France for 18 years. His latest book, The French Betrayal of America, was released last week from Crown Forum. He recently spoke to NRO Editor Kathryn Lopez about the new book.

NRO: It seems "cool" these days for right-of-center Americans to French-bash: Hasn't it gone a little too far? Aren't you just adding to the lifespan of "freedom fries" with a book about a "betrayal?"

Timmerman: It's a serious matter when the leaders of a country such as France show by their actions that they are willing to jettison a friendship with America that goes back 225 years in favor of a dictator such as Saddam Hussein, whose claim to fame includes the massacre of some 300,000 of his own people. And yet, that is precisely what French president Jacques Chirac and his foreign minister Dominique de Villepin have done. They have shown that they were willing to exchange exclusive oil deals with Saddam, and political payoffs, for the French alliance with America.

NRO: Did Chirac actually lie to President Bush before the Iraq war?

Timmerman: Yes, and this is why the president and Secretary of State Powell were so taken aback when foreign minister Dominique de Villepin pulled the rug out from under United Nations negotiations on January 20, 2003, by announcing, apparently out of the blue, that France would never ever agree to using force against Saddam Hussein.

Before the first U.N. vote in early November 2002 (actually, it was the 17th U.N. resolution condemning Saddam and calling on him to voluntarily disarm or suffer the consequences, which included his forceful ouster), Jacques Chirac picked up the phone and called President Bush at the White House, personally reassuring him that France "would be with" us at the U.N. and in Iraq. To demonstrate his intentions, he said, he was sending one of his top generals to Tampa, Florida, to work out the details with U.S. Central Command leaders for integrating French troops into a Coalition force to oust Saddam.

"Chirac's assurances are what gave the president the confidence to keep sending Colin Powell back to the U.N.," one source who was privy to Chirac's phone call to Bush told me. "They also explain why the administration has been going after the French so aggressively ever since. They lied."

NRO: How close was the relationship between Saddam and Chirac?

Timmerman: Like lips and teeth. One of my favorite stories is the bullfight Chirac hosted for Saddam in the southern France resort town les Baux-de-Provence in September 1975, where Saddam bet $600,000 on the bulls. During that first trip Saddam made to France, Chirac stuck to him like glue. He also arranged to sell Saddam a nuclear-research reactor, which Saddam himself called a nuclear-bomb plant. If the Israelis hadn't taken it out in a daring air strike in June 1981, there is no doubt that Saddam would have had the ability to make a nuclear weapon by 1985 — at the latest.

NRO: How much of a friend would France be losing if the people of Iran were to topple the mullahs?

Timmerman: The people of Iran will remember who befriended them in their time of need, and who helped the mullahs retain power by legitimating them, apologizing for them, and letting them — literally — get away with murder. Iranian hit teams operated in Europe with virtual impunity throughout the 1980s and the 1990s, murdering Iranian dissidents, while the Europeans carried out a policy they called "constructive engagement." The only "constructive" thing about it was the number of chemical plants and missile-design centers they built for the mullahs. While Germany certainly led the way, France was never far behind and continues to send trade delegations to Tehran and to defend Iran as it hides its nuclear-weapons program from the IAEA.

NRO: You accuse France of actually encouraging genocide — it seems like an outrageous charge.

Timmerman: It's a very specific charge, made by Hoshyar Zebari, who is now the Iraqi foreign minister. Zebari was referring to the massacre of the Marsh Arabs who used to live in the Howeiza marshes along the southern border between Iran and Iraq. In the mid-1990s, at the urging of the French, who worried about sending their oil engineers into the area, Saddam drained the marshes — an area the size of the state of Delaware — turning the rich, fertile homeland of this ancient people into a dust bowl. Then he sent in the Republican Guards, massacring thousands of civilians. Why? To make the area safe for French oil engineers and French oil workers.

NRO: You say in your new book that the Iraq war was, in fact, all about oil.

Timmerman: The war in Iraq was indeed a war for oil waged by the French, not the United States. The Chirac government was desperate to maintain its exclusive — and outrageously exploitative — oil contracts with Saddam's regime, which would have earned the French an estimated $100 billion during the first seven years of operations, according to experts I interviewed for my book. My worry today is that a Kerry administration would back the French, who continue to assert that these contracts are legally binding on the new Iraqi government. That would be a travesty and a dishonor to all those Iraqis who died under Saddam.


When should we stop supporting Israel? 

March 28, 2004

saw this at LGF

Victor Davis Hanson's Private Papers

The recent assassination of Sheik Saruman raises among some Americans the question—at what point should we reconsider our rather blanket support for the Israelis and show a more even-handed attitude toward the Palestinians? The answer, it seems to me, should be assessed in cultural, economic, political, and social terms.

Well, we should no longer support Israel, when…

Mr. Sharon suspends all elections and plans a decade of unquestioned rule.

Mr. Sharon suspends all investigation about fiscal impropriety as his family members spend millions of Israeli aid money in Paris.

All Israeli television and newspapers are censored by the Likud party.
Israeli hit teams enter the West Bank with the precise intention of targeting and blowing up Arab women and children.

Preteen Israeli children are apprehended with bombs under their shirts on their way to the West Bank to murder Palestinian families.

Israeli crowds rush into the street to dip their hands into the blood of their dead and march en masse chanting mass murder to the Palestinians.

Rabbis give public sermons in which they characterize Palestinians as the children of pigs and monkeys.

Israeli school textbooks state that Arabs engage in blood sacrifice and ritual murders.

Mainstream Israeli politicians, without public rebuke, call for the destruction of Palestinians on the West Bank and the end to Arab society there.

Likud party members routinely lynch and execute their opponents without trial.

Jewish fundamentalists execute with impunity women found guilty of adultery on grounds that they are impugning the “honor” of the family.

Israeli mobs with impunity tear apart Palestinian policemen held in detention.

Israeli television broadcasts—to the tune of patriotic music—the last taped messages of Jewish suicide bombers who have slaughtered dozens of Arabs.

Jewish marchers parade in the streets with their children dressed up as suicide bombers, replete with plastic suicide-bombing vests.

New Yorkers post $25,000 bounties for every Palestinian blown up by Israeli murderers.

Israeli militants murder a Jew by accident and then apologize on grounds that they though he was an Arab—to the silence of Israeli society.

Jews enter Arab villages in Israel to machine gun women and children.

Israeli public figures routinely threaten the United States with terror attacks.

Bin Laden is a folk hero in Tel Aviv.

Jewish assassins murder American diplomats and are given de facto sanctuary by Israeli society.

Israeli citizens celebrate on news that 3,000 Americans have been murdered.

Israeli citizens express support for Saddam Hussein’s supporters in Iraq in their efforts to kill Americans.

finish reading


eating healthy 


warding off cancer by getting anti-oxidants in your diet cant be under rated.

Vitamin E May Ward Off Bladder, Prostate Cancers
Nuts, Seeds, Vegetable Oils Rich In Vitamin E

POSTED: 9:43 a.m. EST March 29, 2004

ORLANDO, Fla. -- A diet rich in vitamin E could help ward off bladder and prostate cancers, according to new research.

Two studies released over the weekend suggests that getting plenty of vitamin E by eating foods like nuts and olive oil appears to cut in half people's risk of certain types of cancer.

The research was released Sunday at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research in Orlando, Fla.

"Nuts and seeds, whole-grain products, vegetable oils, salad dressings, margarine, beans, peas and other vegetables are good dietary sources of vitamin E," said Stephanie Weinstein, one of the researchers.

Whether vitamin E does anything to stop cancer is still far from proven, but some think the vitamin may be helpful, perhaps by warding off the damaging effects of oxygen.


censorship in iraq? 

mypetjawa made a case for censorship in iraq those who wish to see the coalition fail in iraq.

well this morning some news out that follows his advice. and note from the two different reporters, one says hundreds poured into the streets and the other says thousands poured into the streets, both hedge that its unclear why the paper was shut down, even though later in the article they state that this "cleric" is in the process of building an "army/militia" to chalenge the coalition and the interim governments authority. so the paper is a mouthpiece for a group working its way up to starting civil war. also the second reporter claims security seems increasingly elusive.
yet still doesnt make any connection that this group has been stepping over the line.

By Alissa Rubin
March 30, 2004

The US-led coalition in Iraq has closed a newspaper sponsored by a popular anti-American Shiite cleric, accusing it of creating unrest and inciting violence against occupation forces. Within hours of the closure, hundreds of followers of the cleric, Sheikh Muqtader al-Sadr, poured into the streets near the newspaper's offices in central Baghdad and into a slum area known as Sadr City in honour of the cleric's assassinated father.Although the protests were peaceful, some observers feared the shutdown would inflame anti-American sentiment."Of course, it will provoke Muqtader al-Sadr's followers," said Hamid Bayati, a spokesman for the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a leading Shiite political party."It will emphasise the suspicions of the Iraqi people that America says it wants democracy but is suppressing any view that is not convenient for them." It was unclear why the coalition chose Sunday to close the paper, but the occupation administration has had a battle with Sheikh Sadr that extends far beyond his newspaper's articles.

Sheikh Sadr, in his early 30s, has routinely denounced the occupation in his sermons and has sought to raise his own militia, called the Mahdi's Army.

Initially a ragtag collection of unemployed youths, it has become increasingly organised, and now operates in several southern cities as well as in Baghdad's Sadr City neighbourhood. The US has been closely tracking his efforts to expand the militia.

The al-Hawza newspaper was shut down on Sunday when dozens of US soldiers arrived at its offices and ordered the staff out.

Troops handed the paper's editor, Sheikh Ali Yasseri, a letter from US civilian administrator Paul Bremer alleging it breached an order issued last year banning incitement of violence. The weekly paper is banned for two months.

Although the protests were peaceful, some observers feared the shutdown would inflame anti-American sentiment.

In his letter, Mr Bremer gave several examples of articles said to impugn the coalition's work or lie about US-led forces in ways likely to inflame anti-US feelings.


BAGHDAD American soldiers shut down a popular Baghdad newspaper and padlocked the doors after the occupation authorities accused it of printing lies that incited violence..
Thousands of outraged Iraqis protested the closing on Sunday as an act of American hypocrisy, laying bare the hostility many feel toward the United States a year after the invasion(hmm thousands? and do you think he doth editorialize to much)that toppled Saddam Hussein. "No, no, America!" and "Where is democracy now?" screamed protesters who hoisted banners and shook clenched fists in a hastily organized rally against the closing of the newspaper, Al Hawza, a radical Shiite weekly. The rally drew thousands in central Baghdad, where masses of angry Shiite men squared off against a line of American soldiers who arrived to seal off the area. The protest ended peacefully as night came. The closing of the paper reflected the struggle by the American authorities to strike a balance between their two main goals, encouraging democracy and maintaining stability, as the days wind down to the June 30 target date for handing sovereignty back to the Iraqi people..
But security seems increasingly elusive...


kerry files 

Fox interview with author Gerald Nicosia who wrote "home to war" this morning breaks news that while he was out of his house for aprox. 3 hours a profesional burglary took place in which only boxs and files related to kerry and his anti war years were taken.

Nicosa admitts that he had offered to show the kerry camp some of the damaging records and they had been in his house.

he had petitioned to recieve the documents starting in the late 80's

fox reported this morning an author writing a book about kerry, who had a several boxs of kerry's FBI files, had his home robbed and the only thing taken were the FBI files. no sign of forced entry.

very interesting indeed.

here's the latest left wing colaboration with the "religion of peace" to apear at the top of my blog

Understanding Islam
A brief illustrated guide about Islam, Muslims, and the Holy Quran. Green Party of the US
Against a war in Iraq Your only true Peace Party



Sunday, March 28, 2004

AOL News - New Hamas Chief: Bush Is 'Enemy of God'

New Hamas Chief: Bush Is 'Enemy of God'
By Shahdi el-Kashif, Reuters

GAZA (March 28) - The new Hamas leader in Gaza said Sunday President Bush is the enemy of God and Islam (maybe the enemy of islam but unless by "god" he means satan I dont think so) but stopped short of threatening revenge on Americans as he has on Israel for its killing of the militant group's founder. (yeah because he doesnt want to meet his "god"/satan quite yet)

Driven underground by Israel's vow to wipe out the remaining Hamas leadership by air strike, Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi emerged briefly for a fiery open-air speech before 5,000 people in the main courtyard of Gaza City's Islamic University.

Israeli warplanes roared overhead at one point during his address and the crowd gazed skyward nervously. But Rantissi seemed unmoved and kept speaking. He was flanked by armed bodyguards and stood on a podium close to the throng.

Rantissi, who last June survived an Israeli missile strike of the kind that killed Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin a week ago, said Thursday's U.S. veto of a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Yassin's assassination was no surprise.

''We realize that Bush is the enemy of God, the enemy of Islam and Muslims. America declared war on God. (no asshole we declared war on evil murdering scum like you and when you die your gonna meet the real God and he aint gonna be happy with your death cult worshipping baby killing ways)(Israeli Prime Minister Ariel) Sharon declared war on God and God declared war on America, Bush and Sharon,'' he said.

''The war of God goes on against them and I can see victory arising from the land of Palestine by the hand of Hamas,'' Rantissi said of the militant faction behind suicide bombings that have killed hundreds of Israelis. (lets have a little truth in advertising, his is a war of terror sanctioned by the hand of the devil)

A grassroots movement challenging mainstream Palestinian authority and its policy of negotiations with Israel, Hamas seeks not just to roll back Israeli occupation in Gaza and the West Bank but to destroy the Jewish state.so the bottom line is thier is no negotiation with them they must be destroyed.

europe is on one knee being bluedgeoned to death by its "guest" and its ignoring the problem hoping the rude house guest that wont respect its house rules will change or go away on its own.

well thats not working out well for them....


Sirri was not working in a vacuum. The geography of Islam--and of the Islamic imagination--has shifted in recent years. The faith has become portable. Muslims who fled their countries brought Islam with them. Men came into bilad al kufr (the lands of unbelief), but a new breed of Islamists radicalized the faith there, in the midst of the kafir (unbeliever).

The new lands were owed scant loyalty, if any, and political-religious radicals savored the space afforded them by Western civil society. But they resented the logic of assimilation. They denied their sisters and daughters the right to mix with "strangers." You would have thought that the pluralism and tumult of this open European world would spawn a version of the faith to match it. But precisely the opposite happened. In bilad al kufr, the faith became sharpened for battle. We know that life in Hamburg--and the kind of Islam that Hamburg made possible--was decisive in the evolution of Mohammed Atta, who led the "death pilots" of Sept. 11. It was in Hamburg where he conceived a hatred of modernity and of women and of the "McEgypt" that the Mubarak regime had brought into being. And it was in Hamburg, too, that a young "party boy" from a secular family in Lebanon underwent the transformation that would take him from an elite Catholic prep school in Beirut to the controls of a plane on Sept. 11, and its tragic end near the fields of Shanksville, Penn. In its economic deterioration, the Arab world is without cities where young Muslims of different lands can meet. A function that Beirut once provided for an older elite had been undone. European cities now provide that kind of opportunity.

Satellite TV has been crucial in the making of this new radicalism. Preachers take to the air, and reach Muslims wherever they are. From the safety of Western cities, they counsel belligerence and inveigh against assimilation. They forbid shaking hands with women examiners at universities. They warn against offering greetings to "infidels" on their religious holidays, or serving in the armies and police of the new lands. "A Muslim has no nationality except his belief," wrote an intellectual godfather of radical Islamism, the Egyptian Sayyid Qutb, who was executed by Nasser in 1966. While on a visit to Saudi Arabia in 2002, I listened to a caller from Stockholm as he bared his concerns to an immensely popular preacher. He made Qutb's point: We may carry their nationalities, he said, but we belong to our own religion.
Radical Islamism's adherents are unapologetic. What is laicite (secularism) to the Muslims in France and their militant leaders? It is but the code of a debauched society that wishes to impose on Islam's children--its young women in particular--the ways of an infidel culture. What loyalty, at any rate, is owed France? The wrath of France's Muslim youth in the banlieues (suburbs) is seen as revenge on France for its colonial wars. France colonized Algeria in the 1830s; Algerians, along with Tunisians and Moroccans, return the favor in our own time.

France grants its troubled Muslim suburbs everything and nothing. It leaves them to their own devices, and grants them an unstated power over its foreign policy decisions on Islamic and Middle Eastern matters; but it makes no room for them in the mainstream of its life. Trouble has come even to placid Belgium. In Antwerp, Dyab Abu Jahjah, a young Lebanese, only 32, has stepped forth to "empower" the Muslims of that country. Assimilation, he says, is but "cultural rape." He came to Belgium in 1991, and he owns up to inventing a story about persecution back home; it was a "low political trick," he says, and in the nature of things. The constitution of Belgium recognizes Dutch, French, and German as official languages. Abu Jahjah insists that Arabic be added, too.

Europe's leaders know Europe's dilemmas. In ways both intended and subliminal, the escape into anti-Americanism is an attempt at false bonding with the peoples of Islam. Give the Arabs--and the Muslim communities implanted in Europe--anti-Americanism, give them an identification with the Palestinians, and you shall be spared their wrath. Beat the drums of opposition to America's war in Iraq, and the furies of this radical Islamism will pass you by. This is seen as a way around the troubles. But there is no exit that way. It is true that Spain supported the American campaign in Iraq, but that aside, Spain's identification with Arab aims has a long history. Of all the larger countries of the EU, Spain has been most sympathetic to Palestinian claims. It was only in 1986 that Spain recognized Israel and established diplomatic ties. With the sole exception of Greece, Spain has shown the deepest reserve toward Israel. Yet this history offered no shelter from the bombers of March 11.

axis of weasils starting to feal the pinch

Keep bases here, Germany implores U.S.

German officials lobby to keep U.S. military bases as the Pentagon looks at realigning forces in Europe.


Associated Press

WUERZBURG, Germany - As host to 170,000 American soldiers and dependents, Germany has a lot to lose under Pentagon plans to shift forces out of western Europe, and officials in areas facing a pinch are lobbying heavily for them to stay.

Economic survival for their communities, more than security, is the concern for these supporters of a continued U.S. presence in their regions, where ties are deeply rooted despite Germans' current criticism of U.S. policy in Iraq.

Many of the communities depend on business and jobs generated by the bases, located mainly in economically weak regions of southern and western Germany.

''We realized that our installations are in grave danger,'' said Karl Peter Bruch, a state official in Rhineland-Palatinate who heads an effort to lobby U.S. officials. ``And then came the question, what can we do to make us more attractive?''

The tactic has drawn mixed reviews from the Americans, who have some 80,000 military personnel with 94,000 family members in Germany.

The issue has nothing to do with Germany being unattractive, U.S. officials say. It's part of a global realignment to meet changing threats centered in Central Asia and the Middle East.

''We're still sitting where we were at the end of the Cold War,'' said Air Force Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Kohler, the U.S. European Command's point man on planning for force realignment.

found this thru anti-com.com

a quote from anti-com "The Next Great Jewish Migration"

"Nidra Poller, a Jewish novelist who moved to Paris from the States in the 70's for love of culture, food, and all things European, is coming to new conclusions, reassessing her decisions, having political reality set in on her own life and her future.
This is the ending of a truly moving and foreshadowing article:"

Nidra Poller

I’m being treated to a poignant lesson in European and Jewish history. The 30’s: why did they stay?
Why didn’t they run for their lives? Couldn’t they see what was happening?
I see before me a vivid demonstration of the deep roots we dig to make our lives bloom, the intricate biology of a human life, irrigated with the lifeblood of a community, inextricably connected to a society, born of life to give life to keep life alive. Leaving is not packing up and tipping your hat goodbye.
It is tearing live flesh out of a living matrix. I am, or was, the first American-born generation in a family that fled Europe before World War I: a lesson in the wisdom of leaving before it is too late. Now I am the first stage in the story of a three-generation "French" family. Why don’t people just pick up and go while they still can? It’s always the same.
There is an ailing grandmother, a son in medical school, a daughter who just got married, a business too good to throw away and not good enough to sell. There are in-laws and obligations and unfinished business and . . . hope. Hope that it will all blow over. That people will come to their senses, reason win out, normal life resume. And so, blinded by hope, people minimize danger and cling to an imagined stability.

Jews are being persecuted every day in France. Some are insulted, pelted with stones, spat upon; some are beaten or threatened with knives or guns. Synagogues are torched, schools burned to the ground. A little over a month ago, at least one Jew was savagely murdered, his throat slit, his face gouged with a carving knife. Did it create an uproar? No. The incident was stifled, and by common consent—not just by the authorities, but by the Jews. Some Jews are simply frightened; they are reluctant to take the subway, walk in certain neighborhoods, go out after dark. Others, clearly identifiable as Jews, are courageous and defiant. Many, perhaps the majority, show no outward signs of Jewishness and do not seek to know the truth about the rampant and increasingly violent anti-Semitism all around them. If you are Jewish but do not defend Israel or act too religious or look too different, you are not yet a target—so why insist on monitoring the danger when daily life is so delicious?

And the lies so tantalizing. A thick, hand-knit comforter of prevarication spreads itself over the French population.
Every morning, instead of waking people up, the press tucks them in. France has become a nation of sleepwalkers. You sense it with particular sharpness after a visit to the U.S. How is anyone to face the truth about anything when the truth is hidden by 19th-century-style posturing, pretentious humanitarian hoodwinking, and lowdown village tomfoolery?

France is in fact an adversary of the United States—as is its right, after all. But the French honestly believe their country is behaving like a reasonable ally, and there is no way to convince them of the contrary. They are hooked up to an intravenous flow of lies about the United States, fed propaganda disguised as information, molecules of fact dissolved in a carefully regulated solution to keep them on an even keel and save them from having to judge for themselves. No raw data allowed; one mustn’t have people developing a taste for reality.

I don’t see signs that any of this is about to change. Every measure taken in the right direction, or what might seem to be the right direction, hides a fatal flaw. After the floods, and with the exception of a brief parenthesis for a sourpuss acknowledgment of the arrest of Saddam Hussein, the subject of concern has become the hijab, the "Islamic veil." Enlightened by the findings of a national commission, the president spoke out grandiloquently in support of a law that would ban the wearing of "ostensible" signs of religious affiliation in schools and government offices. The time has come, said the president, to reaffirm the "values of the Republic" and to put an end to all these separate communautarismes, which he pronounced with a big zzzizzzy plural "s." The law has not been drafted yet (it is scheduled for parliamentary debate in February), and even if it is passed, one wonders if it will ever be applied.
But it is askew in its very conception. Unwilling or unable to name the problem for what it is—political Islam on the march—the government has turned headscarves into a religious issue and lined up its troops on the barricades of that peculiar French form of universalism known as laïcité. Since religion is the official culprit, the law will be evenhandedly aimed at the kippa as well, adding insult to injury for religious Jews just at a time when France’s chief rabbi has advised them to hide their yarmulkes under baseball caps so they won’t be beaten up by Islamists on the rampage. So now, in the name of a doctrine originally promulgated to provide a bulwark against an overbearing Catholicism, the Jews are to be thrown in with those who really are hammering away at the secular values of the République. Jews lived quietly in France for centuries before the massive Muslim immigration started after World War II—but suddenly you cannot say anything bad about Muslims without saying something bad about Jews? To be sure, the law is also going to mention that Catholics must not wear big crosses to school; but to my knowledge they have never intended to. Largely indifferent to the once-powerful Church that provoked the 1905 law mandating the separation of church and state, the vast majority of French Catholics swear by the principle of laïcité and don’t even begin to suspect that they are being turned into dhimmis in their own country. The handpicked leader of a recently created Muslim umbrella organization has called for reluctant compliance with the proposed law while already haggling for an Oriental compromise. But the major element in the organization, the radical UOIF, has mobilized against the law and against a Republic that would dare discriminate against Islam. You can’t fool them by banning yarmulkes! And they intend to fight.

Will the pacifist and pacified French stand up and defend their nation? Or will we have to leave? That is what it boils down to. Things have gone from shouting "death to the Jews" to firebombing schools and synagogues, to persecution, attacks, even murder.
We have Muslim rage in schools, hospitals, and courtrooms. Police headquarters are attacked, hospital personnel beaten, judges threatened.

The Republic is under siege, and what are the French doing about it? They are trashing America. This, it seems, is their new Maginot line: the sneer of hatred. Hand in hand with the government and the intellectual classes, the French media are channeling the national dismay over lost grandeur into contempt for America. Watch these suave Europeans, snickering to themselves because American soldiers are getting killed in Iraq. Is that (they sneer) any way to risk your life? Go on a crusade to fight incurable disease, cross in front of a moving car, smoke a cigarette. But fight to defend your own country? It’s indecent! For me, the monuments are crumbling. The glistening golden dome of Les Invalides. The châteaux and the triumphal arches, the obelisks, the bux om fountains, the wrought-iron balconies, the slightly tipsy 18th-century apartment buildings, the rivers winding through those darling towns and cities. How can so much beauty cover such deep cowardice? I lash myself to the mast and close my senses to the sirens, while my heart rings with pride for "the land of the free and the home of the brave." We are not free in France. I know the difference. I come from a free country. A rough and ready, clumsy, slapped together, tacky country where people say wow and gosh and shop at Costco. A country so vast I haven’t the faintest idea where I would put myself. A homeland I would have liked to keep at a distance, visit with pleasure, and leave with relief. A native land I walked out on with belated adolescent insouciance. A foreign land where I was born because Europe vomited up my grandparents as it is now coughing up me and mine.


Friday, March 26, 2004

I looked at the top of my blog and found that the banners rotating across the top are straight out of a cox & forkum editorial cartoon where the "peace" protestor hippy is hugging an islamofascist. if your open minded at my blog you will learn all you need to know to understand islam and especially how the leftist "anti war" scum have turned into boot licking acomplices for the splodeydopes.

here's the combo on my blog~~~~

Info on Islam, Muslims & the Koran. Brief Illustrated Guide. Read Now! Peace Anti War T-shirts
"Who would Jesus Bomb?" "It's not over." And many more.

the Belmont club breaks it down, so even a "usefull idiot" of the liberal aparatus can understand.

Friday, March 26, 2004


The possible electoral defeat of President Bush by John Kerry raises the question of whether the Global War on Terror ultimately requires a war on the Left. That is to say whether a political defeat of the Left is a prerequisite for stamping out worldwide terrorism. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many in the Left, at least, believes that the GWOT is a war on them. America, not Osama Bin Laden is the putative enemy, and their fire is directed accordingly. Conversely, many conservatives are conditioned by the sight of a de facto alliance between the Left and Islamism to think that both parties are on the same side of the fence. But must it necessarily be so?

Answers in the affirmative normally rest on the presumption that the Left is engaged in a protracted Gramscian program of Western civilizational suicide in which Islam serves as a convenient means of attaining quietus. For those who truly subscribe to this theory, it is the Left not Islam which is Western civilization's strategic enemy. The inevitable implication of this concept is that the principal battlefield in the Global War on Terror is not Iraq or Afghanistan, but the newsrooms of the major Western cities. Supporters of this idea will point to the fact that the stunning military successes of the War on Terror were easily overturned in Spain by the cynical actuations of the Socialist Party. If President Bush is defeated by John Kerry the case will be made. The Left will have fixed him as the man responsible for 9/11 in the same way that Vietnam is now described as "Nixon's War", proving once again that the lie is mightier than the sword.

Dan Darling at Regnum Crucis suggests that the Islamists themselves on a certain level understand that their main force does not consist of armed Jihadis, nor even of the system of prosletyzing madrassas, but of the battalions of the secular Left. He quotes an Al Qaeda document as seeing the world in this way: "We can describe the international system...as a spider web. And whereas it is also all interlinked like a spider web, even a light wind is sufficient to tear apart this web." And they aim to achieve this by harnessing the power of toppling dominoes, using the potential energy of Western political hatred to achieve their goals in much the same way that the weight of the Twin Towers was used to pulverize it. Force, in Al Qaeda's most recent view, must be used as a precise scalpel for manipulating political events in the West -- for casting the dominoes. In their calculation, once the Left has hamstrung the conservatives, the carcass of what was known as Christendom will be easy meat for the Jihadis.


this exellent piece exposing the rancid core of the left from a left leaning writer found through junkyardblog and it again highlights the america hating that goes on at the "peace rallies" and is just more sad evidence not of thier support of "peace" but of the intent to harm america and give aid to its enemies


by Ron Rosenbaum

So I went up to the antiwar demonstration in Central Park this weekend, hoping to hear some persuasive arguments. After a couple of hours there, listening to speeches, reading the hate-America literature, I still don’t know what to think about Iraq—will an attack open a Pandora’s box, or close one?—but I think I know what I feel about this antiwar movement, or at least many of the flock who showed up in the Sheep Meadow.

A movement of Marxist fringe groups and people who are unable to make moral distinctions. An inability summed up by a man holding a big poster that proudly identified him as "NYC TEACHER." The lesson "NYC TEACHER" had for the day was that "BUSH IS A DEVIL … HANDS OFF NORTH KOREA, IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN …. "

Yes, Bush is "a devil" compared to those enlightened regimes that torture and murder dissidents (like "NYC TEACHER"). Bush is certainly "a devil" compared to enlightened leaders like Kim Jong Il, who has reduced the North Korean people in his repulsive police state to eating moss on rocks; or to Saddam Hussein, who tortures and gasses opponents, and starves his people to fund his germ-war labs; or to the Taliban in Afghanistan, who beat women into burqas. Yes, surely compared to them, Bush is "a devil." Thank God New York’s schoolchildren are in such good hands.

Because America isn’t perfect, it must be evil. Because Marxist regimes make claims of perfection, they must be good.
So, for my part, goodbye to all that. Goodbye to a culture of blindness that tolerates, as part of "peace marches," women wearing suicide-bomber belts as bikinis. (See the accompanying photo of the "peace" march in Madrid. "Peace" somehow doesn’t exclude blowing up Jewish children.)

Goodbye to the brilliant thinkers of the Left who believe it’s the very height of wit to make fun of George W. Bush’s intelligence—thereby establishing, of course, how very, very smart they are. Mr. Bush may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer (I think he’s more ill-informed and lazy than dumb). But they are guilty of a historical stupidity on a far greater scale, in their blind spot about Marxist genocides. It’s a failure of self-knowledge and intellectual responsibility that far outweighs Bush’s, because they’re supposed to be so very smart.

Goodbye to paralysis by moral equivalence: Remind me again, was it John Ashcroft or Fidel Castro who put H.I.V. sufferers in concentration camps?

Goodbye to the deluded and pathetic sophistry of postmodernists of the Left, who believe their unreadable, jargon-clotted theory-sophistry somehow helps liberate the wretched of the earth. If they really believe in serving the cause of liberation, why don’t they quit their evil-capitalist-subsidized jobs and go teach literacy in a Third World starved for the insights of Foucault?

Goodbye to people who have demonstrated that what terror means to them is the terror of ever having to admit they were wrong, the terror of allowing the hideous facts of history to impinge upon their insulated ideology.

Goodbye to all those who have evidently adopted as their own, a version of the simpering motto of the movie Love Story. Remember "Love means never having to say you’re sorry"?

I guess today, Left means never having to say you’re sorry.

finnish reading it

junkyard blog nails the la times on its bias


I never did hear back from the LA Times on the two stories that the JYB highlighted a couple days ago. I sent the stories off to their readers' representative with a clear demonstration that those stories left out highly relevant facts in a very selective (and Kerry friendly) way, and got no reply. I wonder why. This might be an answer:

An astute reader e-mails:
Richard Clarke is deeply wired into the Kerry campaign, and not just through Rand Beers. His main contact is his good friend Jonathan Winer, who's been Kerry's chief political operative and investigator through Iran-Contra, BCCI, and all the way back to his days as Lt. Gov of Massachusetts. Jonathan's been identified publically as one of a handful of people running Kerry's "shadow state department" along with Beers. The LA Times yesterday had a story quoting Winer as saying he was talking regularly with Clarke while Clarke was still in the White House, and that Clarke was expressing his disgust with the Bushies. Oddly (or maybe not) Winer is described as a nonpartisan public servant, and isn't identified as a Kerry operative; indeed, he's been used by several publications as a character reference, so to speak, for stories lauding Clarke. Google "Jonathan Winer" and you'll find all sorts of interesting stuff. My own experience here is that Winer is such a useful and promiscuous source that most of the reporters in DC aren't inclined to embarass him by connecting him to Clarke, and mess up what's obviously a Kerry-inspired phony scandal. (my emphasis)

That Times story linked above is a glowing hagiography of one Richard Clarke. Completely uncritical, even spinning Clarke's obstinate personality as making him "an effective bureaucrat." D'ya think there might be an anti-Bush agenda at work out there in la-la land? This is the same paper that dumped gropers on Ahnuld just a few days before the recall...

So why haven't I heard from the Times' reader rep? The silence must have been a signal that the Times plans to gin up more stories leaving out salient facts in ways that help Kerry's campaign, and didn't want to take the trouble to respond to every single allegation of bias when they essentially have no defense.

Or maybe the Times just doesn't see misinforming its readers as a problem worth addressing.


Wednesday, March 24, 2004

Citizen Smash interviews a traitor at a "peace rally" who advocates supporting the terrorists in iraq who are killing american soldiers, just another example showing the organizersand speakers and many of the attendees are not "pacifists" who hate war but america hating traitors bent on siding with the enemy .....I cannot believe he kept his compsure, he is a better man than I....

"Ah, she was a classic Watermelon: Red on the inside, Green on the outside.

SMASH: You were Socialists, but you were supporting the Green candidate?
REBECCA: We were in that case. I think the idea is that, we see the Democrats kind of co-opting movements as a major – as a major problem. So, building third party candidates, in certain situations, we see as important.

OK, that's enough softball questions...

SMASH: I want to talk about what you were saying up on stage. You had some ideas about how to fight the war in Iraq, or how to resist it. Could you sum those up for me?
REBECCA: OK. So, the main three points that I was talking about were, supporting Iraqi Resistance. I think that we need to see ourselves as allied with Iraqis who are opposing the war

SMASH: Specifically, the armed Resistance, or…

REBECCA: Any, any resistance that’s occurring to the Occupation. I think that we have to

So I wasn’t imagining it. She really does support the terrorists who had killed my college roommate Kylan, and Bob Zangas, and Fern Holland. And she had no idea that she was speaking to a veteran of the war in Iraq. I had never felt the urge to hit a woman before…

SMASH: Would you include in that, even people there who are fighting from outside the country, as well?
REBECCA: Um, yeah. I guess if, you know, I mean… In general people who are fighting directly, trying to oppose the Occupation.

SMASH: Do you differentiate between, say, indigenous resistance movements, where people are volunteering to join those movements, and say, people like Ayman Zarqawi, who is a Jordanian, who some people say he’s tied with al Qaeda? Would that turn you off because al Qaeda attacked the United States, and al Qaeda might be helping the Resistance? Or is that really not an issue for you?

REBECCA: Well, our main concern is, in a situation like this, actually, making a statement about being more with regular Iraqi people than against them. Um, in terms of tactics, we don’t endorse the kind of tactics that are used by al Qaeda. But, I’m much more concerned with the general support of Resistance. Looking back at what happened in Vietnam. You know, the idea that, a nation – it’s necessary for a nation to resist…

No, she doesn’t support al Qaeda. Well, sort of, but not really – not in a "bad" way. Right."

this is about all im going to point to as a concrete example of the bullshit propaganda spewed by the mainstream media to try and hurt bush with a neaky attempt to pin innaction on the bush administration that didnt exist yet BECAUSE HE HADNT BEEN ELECTED YET! interesting that the end of the sentence wasnt that clinton didnt follow up.....

via junkyard blog to instapundit

March 24, 2004
BUSH CAN'T GET A BREAK: Now he's being blamed for not invading Afghanistan in 1998! Here's the relevant passage from MSNBC:

The report revealed that in a previously undisclosed secret diplomatic mission, Saudi Arabia won a commitment from the Taliban to expel bin Laden in 1998. But a clash between the Taliban’s leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, and Saudi officials scuttled the arrangement, and Bush did not follow up.

Damn him -- governing Texas while Rome burned! Why didn't he send the Texas Rangers to finish off Bin Laden? ("One mullah, one Ranger!") Sheesh. Can you say "Freudian slip?"

It's not as if anybody has the storyline on this figured out from the get-go or anything. . . .

UPDATE: Then there's this from another story:

One event that panel members found galling was why there was no retaliation by either administration for the bombing of the destroyer Cole in early 2001.

Maybe because the Cole was bombed on October 12, 2000? It seems like people are trying awfully hard to make it sound as if all this stuff happened on Bush's watch.

Coming soon: Complaints about why the Bush Administration didn't do anything to prevent the assassination attempt on Harry Truman at Blair House. And what about the Maine, huh? Why didn't Bush do something about that?

Posted by Glenn Reynolds at March 24, 2004 09:21 AM


Tuesday, March 23, 2004


a page of pics in memory of gunther and an introduction for ottzie



Cair the front group for radical hate filled muslims in our midst finnally gets blasted by a sane real live moderate muslim, may god be with you Tashbih, because you painted a target on yourself.

The Islamist Agenda

By: Tashbih Sayyed
Muslims, according to Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) are angry with President George W. Bush and want to defeat him in the coming elections. CAIR says that many American Muslims will vote for ABB - anybody but Bush. He, according to the Wahhabi and Saudi supported groups has betrayed them. In 2000, Muslims endorsed George W. Bush for president, citing his outreach to the Muslim community and his pledge to end the use of so-called secret evidence in immigration deportation hearings. He, according to Islamists, had also promised to address Muslim concerns on domestic and foreign policy issues but reneged.
Free Muslims do not understand as to where did the U.S. president go wrong?
One of the very first things that President George W. Bush did following the attacks on the United States of America on September 11, 2001, was to declare that Islam is a religion of peace. He impressed upon everybody that the lives and properties of the American Muslims are as sacred as that of any other American citizen. Bush insisted that the Islamist terrorists waging jihad on Western civilization "are evil people who have hijacked a great religion." Quoting from the Koran, Bush said, "in the long run, evil in the extreme will be the end of those who do evil. For that they rejected the signs of Allah and held them up to ridicule." He declared that the radical Islamists do not represent Islam and the war on terrorism is not a war against Islam.

President Bush spoke out strongly against Americans who have discriminated against Muslims, "Americans who mistreat Muslims should be ashamed," the president said at Washington's Islamic Center. The United States counts millions of Muslims amongst its citizens, he pointed out, and they are making "an incredibly valuable contribution to our country." He said, "the face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war." Experts believe that Bush administration's unequivocal support for the Muslims did save many Muslim lives.

To rehabilitate the image of American Muslims in the community, President Bush started a White House tradition of Iftaar (ramzaan fast breaking). He went out of his way to dispel the perception that the Muslims have perpetrated an unending pattern of catastrophic terrorism against the United States. Mr. Bush said Muslim leaders have asked him: "Why do Americans think Muslims are terrorists?" He answered, "That's not what Americans think. Americans think terrorists are evil people who have hijacked a great religion."

Hearing President Bush and watching Americanism in action, my hopes were that the Islamist leadership will reciprocate Bush's sentiments by convincing Muslims that the U.S. is not anti-Islam. But the attitude and conduct of the radical Islamists working in the guise of Muslim advocacy groups clearly proved that they had a different plan. Bush administration's respect for Islam went against their designs to prepare ground for a psychological war against the American freedoms.

Communal harmony and tranquillity did not suit Islamist agenda. They needed a polarized society to advance their programs. They required an environment of tension and hate in which American Muslims would feel insecure. Advocacy groups hoped to attract scared Muslims, looking for protection. This would have provided them with opportunities to recruit a good number of them for their extremist causes.

To achieve this goal, they did not allow Bush's message of peace to reach the hearts and minds of the Muslims. And for those who understand radical Islam, the anti-American agenda was always on display. First, the Islamists leaders took their time in condemning the Tuesday terror. First they encouraged the conspiracy theories. The attack on the World Trade Center towers was the job of Mossad or CIA, one of such theories said. Another rumor pointed out that the U.S. needed a pretext to attack Muslim lands. So, it orchestrated the whole thing. And when they finally did condemn the atrocity, they also used the occasion to insist that U.S. foreign policy contributed to the anti-American fervor that led to the September 11 attacks.

They echoed Osama bin Laden that the U.S. bestrides the world like a colossus.
They told the Muslim street that the US giant is trying to re-arrange the world in its own interest. The U.S., they insisted, is controlled by Jews and Christians and wants to control the natural resources of the Muslim world. That's why, they said, Washington is sending troops to every corner of the globe and bombing Afghanistan and Iraq unilaterally. They brainwashed Muslims into believing that U.S. has put its weight behind Israel's "illegal military occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza.

Spearheading this psychological war against the U.S. was Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR, to many Muslims is a front for the Arab terrorist groups like HAMAS and Hezbollah. The fact that CAIR has never condemned HAMAS and Hezbollah leadership or the imams who defy Quraa'n's teachings by preparing young and innocent Muslims to become homicide bombers, supported this impression.

CAIR that is always on the lookout for an opening to condemn U.S. policies, has never used its influence to condemn Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, Aiman al Zwahiri and their ilk. CAIR has never used its control over the hearts and minds of the American Muslims to refute the Muslim belief that the United States of America's war on terror is not a crusade against Islam. Instead it demanded of the American Muslims to oppose the war against Saddam Hussein and Taliban.

Even when it welcomed the capture of Saddam Hussein, it betrayed its real feelings by expressing its opposition of Iraq war that resulted in the tyrant's capture. CAIR said, "As we continue to oppose the war in Iraq, we hope the capture of Saddam Hussein creates a window of opportunity for peace and reconciliation."

CAIR also tried to remind its audience that the U.S. is an invader and an aggressor. "Hussein's capture should also facilitate the rapid transfer of sovereignty to a representative Iraqi government and the swift withdrawal of American military forces. It is now time for the Iraqi people, free of despotic rule or foreign occupation, to take control of their own destiny." Muslims wondered as to why CAIR did not care about the control of the destiny of Muslims by supporting our war effort.

Another proof that CAIR is waging a psychological war against the U.S. is its reluctance to condemn Osama bin Laden's hate filled messages. Muslims are convinced that CAIR agrees with Osama bin Laden's mission, who said in his new year's message, "this crusade war (U.S. war on terrorism) is primarily targeted against the people of Islam. Regardless of the removal or the survival of the socialist party or Saddam, Muslims in general and the Iraqis in particular must brace themselves for jihad against this unjust campaign and acquire ammunition and weapons."

"There will be no harm if the interests of Muslims converge with the interests of the socialists in the fight against the crusaders, despite our belief in the infidelity of socialists. The fighting, which is waging and which will be waged these days, is very much like the fighting of Muslims against the Byzantine in the past. And the convergence of interests is not detrimental. The Muslims' fighting against the Byzantine converged with the interests of the Persians. And this was not detrimental to the companions of the prophet."

Another evidence of CAIR's psychological war against the U.S. in the garb of a "Muslim advocacy group" is its latest campaign to defeat George W. Bush in the coming elections. American Muslims, according to CAIR are angry with President George W. Bush. CAIR says that many American Muslims will vote for ABB - anybody but Bush. He, according to the Wahhabi and Saudi supported groups, has betrayed Muslims trust. They said that George W. Bush did not keep his word of protecting the Islamist interests. Therefore, he must be defeated.

Independent Muslims are at a loss to appreciate CAIR's logic. They want to find out as to where did George W. Bush let the Muslims down? Did he fail the Muslims by going after Taliban, who were destroying the image of Islam? Or, did he hurt Islam by removing Saddam Hussein who was making fun of Allah and his messenger Muhammad by ridiculing "Allah O Akbar" sign on his flag? Is President George W. Bush destroying Islam by empowering the Muslims who are persecuted by Wahhabis and radical Islam?

Free Muslims are convinced that the CAIR controlled Muslims are mad at Bush because he did not allow the Islamists to control or guide his foreign and domestic policies. Here too, like in France, Islamists want to use their growing numbers to control the United States of America's direction. CAIR, as the front of the radical Islam, wants to stop the U.S. administration from going after jihadi mentality. It wants Washington to support the homicide bombers and assist radical Islam in undermining the democratic societies like Israel. It wants Washington to applaud HAMAS and Hezbollah for their achievements in destroying the Middle East Road Map. And it wants the U.S. to become a society where non-Wahhabi Muslims and Jews are discriminated against and persecuted.

Bush's failure to satisfy CAIR's agenda has made him an enemy of Islam. The fact is that when CAIR says that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the U.S., it means that radical Islam is getting ready to take control of the White House.

(The writer is editor-in-chief of Pakistan Today, a California-based weekly newspaper, president of Council for Democracy and Tolerance and adjunct fellow of Hudson Institute.)

presidential material??

The anti-war group that John Kerry was the principal spokesman for debated and voted on a plot to assassinate politicians who supported the Vietnam War.

Mr. Kerry denies being present at the November 12-15, 1971, meeting in Kansas City of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and says he quit the group before the meeting. But according to the current head of Missouri Veterans for Kerry, Randy Barnes, Mr. Kerry,who was then 27,was at the meeting


Report Card:

Mr, and Mrs. Islam, little islam does not work or play well with others....

blames his shortcommings on others...

is constantly attacking and physically hurting others, but cries uncontrollably when corrected for his anti social tendencies.

allways pathologically blaming others for misdeeds even when cought in the act....

refuses to tolerate ayone elses opinions

constantly violates others personal space

constantly claiming other peoples property as his own even in the face of overwhelming evidence against him, (recently tried to claim australia, and also claimed he discovered america.) including absconding with other peoples holy sites..

lacks any sense of proportion in regard to percieved personal slights from others (everything merits a death threat)

did I mention constanly attacking others?


belmont club cuts through the clutter and cacophony of stupid "leaders" and talking pundits to put what has happened with yassin, iraq, and the war on terror in perspective in the way that can only be done with superior critical thinking skills, and wretchard is again tops.
Survival Strategies in a Barroom Brawl

The death of Hamas big Sheik Yassin at the hands of the Israeli Defense Forces highlights the strategic problem of Europe. The war is spreading and is becoming increasingly difficult to sit out. The Al Qaeda attack on the Madrid train, the renewed unrest in Kosovo, the unrest in Iran and Syria and developments in Iraq -- added to the probability of escalating conflict in Israel -- make it increasingly difficult to benefit from hanging back. Historically, France's "independent" strategy was based on being able to tilt the balance in an inconclusive struggle in a bipolar world, in the process extracting the maximum benefit for itself. This worked during the Cold War where it could play both ends against the middle, selling its support to the highest bidder, behavior that could be justified as "realpolitik" and hard-nosed maneuvering in the the national interest.

However, the struggle against terrorism now threatens to become a fight to the finish instead of a Cold War ballet of competition circumscribed by deterrence. Since Jihadistan has shown no inclination to settle for less than total victory, it invariably led to symmetrical American goals. September 11 proved that terrorism could not be contained. It had to be finished. A prescient European foreign policy would have realized on September 12 that this conflict structure would inevitably lead to a widening war, one that would engulf Europe's own borders. But it did not grasp the implications of the struggle in time. It is now terribly vulnerable to the tides of conflict that lap against its frontiers.

Fully knowing that it cannot strike with much effect at the IDF, Hamas may now be tempted to hit at Europe and through them to pressure Israel. Why not? It worked in Madrid and from now one anyone may be tempted to ring Europe's bell for whatever reason. But worse yet for Europe, the descent of the war on terror into a death match, as exemplified by the struggle between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist groups means that there will be but one victor and one loser at the end of the day. With each passing moment the odds lengthen that the EU or the UN can broker a negotiated settlement between Israel, India, Russia and USA on the one hand, and the Jihadis on the other. There will be no Congress of Vienna at which French palaver can work its wonders, only unconditional surrender by one side or the other. A zero-sum conflict guarantees that Europe will not be on the winning side. Whoever the victor, Europe will be despised and whether America or Jihadistan triumphs, Europe will have played the wrong hand.

Before this is over the world will have had a bellyful of war. Each morning's unbearable news will cast the net wider. Neither the man commuting to work in Central Madrid nor the peace marchers in costume on Market Street can escape being combatants. Leftist sympathies, whether in Israel, America or Europe will prove no armor against car bomb fragments. War was Osama Bin Laden's goal in attacking the United States on September 11. He hoped to force America into fruitless but ineffectual reprisals against the Islamic world, then offer a hudna at intervals while he prepared his next blow. George Bush's counterstroke, which history will either judge as an act of supreme folly or genius, was to go beyond Afghanistan into Iraq. In a worthy riposte to Osama's, he escalated the struggle to the point where it was mutually mortal. If the fall of the Twin Towers was a gauntlet in America's face, the fall of Baghdad was a glove shoved down the Islamist's throat. Both Bin Laden and Bush have made compromise impossible. If the jihadis believed they could control the tempo of the conflict they were misinformed; American forces in the Arab heartland have forced a zugzwang to compel the game to the bitter end.

Yassin's assasination serves the same purpose. Israel's main problem was to escape the cycle of murder and negotiation that was slowly bleeding it to death. No matter how horribly Israel was attacked it was always expected to return, in an attitude of abjection, to the negotiating table. The Jihadis learned that any Israeli counteroffensive could be aborted by throwing the prospect of further talks into its path. Israel's superiority on the battlefield would be nullified because it would always be restrained by the "Peace Process", a misnomer if ever there was one. But the operation against Yassin reverses the dynamic. By striking at so senior a terrorist target, the Jihadis will be in no mood for negotiations. They themselves will cast away the Peace Process and sheer fury will make them forswear their favorite tactic, the faux hudna -- thereby granting Israel a meeting on the battlefield. For this is Israel's mortal challenge to Hamas which has often said it would kill the last Jew. The message, now ringing in their ears, is that the Jew will kill the last terrorist, beginning at the top.

**************************************************************************** Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?


this mans essays on the defense of and value of western culture are amazing and if you are a liberal you need to read them, maybe when you are done (if you have a moral compass or soul) you might turn your self around from a life spent attacking america. and if you are of right mind but feeling down, again they are a must read.
  • Eject! Eject! Eject!

  • STRENGTH (part 1).
  • STRENGTH (part 2).

  • *************
  • eurabiantimes
  • armies of liberation
  • Aaron’s Rantblog
  • The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
  • The British Pickle
  • Blackfive
  • mypetjawa
  • USS Clueless
  • The Official Al Franken Website
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • bastardsword
  • exellent critical analysis on the news. this guy can chew the propagandists up and spit em out. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • History's End
  • history in the making is being taught at this blog. I like it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • command-post
  • lgf: contains petroleum distillates
  • http://junkyardblog/
  • voice of reason form iraq
  • AlphaPatriot
  • Pink Flamingo Bar & grill
  • coincidently I used to work at a nightclub called the pink flamingo bar & grill, good times good booze, good food and bad girls what a great combination...
  • blaster's blog
  • haganah
  • jihad watch
  • Armies of Liberation
  • IMAO
  • Cox & Forkum Editorial Cartoons
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ this guy has a grasp of history, its nuances, and an ability to make comparative analysis that blows my socks off.
  • Belmont Club
  • want to know what real critical analysis is? here's must read homework from Belmont club
  • Smoke and Mirrors Versus Gunsmoke
  • Smoke and Mirrors Versus Gunsmoke Part 2
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • Allah Is In The House
  • funny stuff sharp and to the point
  • iowahawk
  • new political satire blogger (and really funny unlike that washed up jackass al franken who would'nt know funny if it was stenciled to the front of a city bus that just ran him over.)
  • grandvizier
  • grandvizier is a fellow traveler in the verbal war against the death cultists
  • A.E.Brain
  • IRAQ NOW an american soldier with boots on the ground
  • A Nice Jewish Boys' Weblog
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If like me, you enjoy a good cigar, but hate paying retail this is the joint. I've bought hundreds of good cigars from them, allways with great service
  • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ meet the bouncers gunther,tasha, sweetpea & the new kid ottzie

  • Friends of Israel
  • archives
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Free Web Page Hit Counters
    Manhattan Lasik ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    this site listed on

    Blogarama - The Blog Directory ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Fallen Patriot Fund