53 Comments

1. Nomenklatura:

There is of course a large and influential Jewish community in the US and in some parts of Europe.

If we accept your analysis, then a large part of Israel’s predicament is due to the number of Jews in western electorates who have dropped any real electoral concern for it. They have been abandoned by their own.

May 9, 2009 - 6:47 pm 2. exhelodrvr:

Well, there is certainly no fear of Israeli nukes falling into the wrong hands.

Although I’m sure Iran has some fears of them falling into their laps.

May 9, 2009 - 7:30 pm 3. Gordon:

Glick is one of my favorite journalists, so few of them now. This article is chilling and Clubbers should read the whole thing. Frankly, I didn’t understand the full intent of the White House with respect to Israel. Even allowing for a measure of alarm and bias on Glick’s part, this attitude toward Israel is hard for me to understand.

May 9, 2009 - 7:31 pm 4. Alexis:

And why have Pakistan’s counterinsurgency campaigns received relatively less scrutiny than Israel’s from the world press?

In the minds of Saudis (who control much of the Arabic language press), Jews are uppity dhimmis. Pakistanis aren’t dhimmis, but are instead preferred servants for rich Saudis. More and more, it seems the Saudi royal family can buy whatever media bias it wants.

May 9, 2009 - 7:35 pm 5. programmer:

And why have Pakistan’s counterinsurgency campaigns received relatively less scrutiny than Israel’s from the world press?

Easy answer:

The Pakistanis don’t give an airborne physical reproductive act about world opinion.

Next question?

May 9, 2009 - 7:42 pm 6. rumcrook:

its pretty simple.

there’s no joooos to scapegoat in the story of whats happening in pakistan.

May 9, 2009 - 7:47 pm 7. Biff Larkin:

There are ideological considerations here you don’t touch upon. Western elites and so-called intellectuals have thrown out all belief in objective reality, received historical standards, Natural Law, Judeo-Christianity and rationality in favor of a self-sustaining, self-referential belief in themselves as the motive force and conscience of world history. In short, we are ruled by irrational racist narcissists who don’t care about browns killing browns (Pakistan), blacks killing blacks (the Congo) or browns killing blacks (Darfur).

None of these historical events have anything to to do with themselves.

May 9, 2009 - 8:03 pm 8. Lifeofthemind:

It is a peculiar conceit of the left to spend endless energy “celebrating diversity” and “cherishing authentic native cultures” while at the same time treating human beings as interchangeable cogs. All inputs are not equal however and an edifice built from substandard mortar will collapse. Judaism or Protestantism may be essential to a creative adaptable civilization. It is certain that they can not be substituted for by Islam. The Pakistani gentry may win their war with the pastoral raiders, it is a struggle that has happened throughout human history, but I doubt it. However even if they do so to the passing profit of American academics and politicians it would not fundamentally change the construct of Pakistani culture. The Taliban are more brutal and ignorant and reject the products of modernity but the established forces they struggle against differ in degree more than in kind. Traditional forces unlike the reactionary revolutionaries of Salafism are less brutal and are willing to use the goods and trappings of modernity but have proven incapable of supporting a tolerant and creative society. They may use what is produced by Jews and Christians but they contribute little that is original.

How fitting that tonight’s movie is The Merchant of Venice.

May 9, 2009 - 8:32 pm 9. Scythianeedle:

Self-referential? Self-reverential.

When I was 16 years old I took a driver’s ed course.

The instructor told me to fix my eyes on some landmark far down the roadway, NOT try to watch the shoulder immediately next to my front fender.

The current *O*ccupant evidently never bothered with driver’s ed.

May 9, 2009 - 8:37 pm 10. Armeggedon Rex:

I’m afraid there’s more than a touch of truth to what Biff said, but it’s certainly not the entire story.

Please remember that both Hamas and Hezb’Allah spend a considerable amount of effort to ensure their side of the story dominates the headlines and airwaves.

With the unflinching cooperation of an anti-western civilization press they are nearly always successful.

Any press members who seem willing to drink the Islamist cool aid are usually given the celebrity treatment by Palestinian terrorists.

They have even tolerated Jewish members of the press if it appears the final product presented to the world will further the information Jihad.

The IDF on the other hand, is not nearly as forthcoming, and is starting with a huge perceptional handicap to boot among the gifted neo-elite of today’s press corp.

The Taliban and Al Qaeda on the other hand have a poor record with the press. Far too many reporters have been detained, harassed, kidnapped for ransom, disappeared to later turn up as bullet-ridden corpses, or beheaded, on camera occationaly you may recall. None of this works in the Taliban’s favor with the international press.

This just demonstrates that even if the press is still determined to aid in the destruction of western civilization, they still will attempt to preserve themselves.

There is thus little to no reporting by western media on the scene, and the little that does come out will tend to be told from the Pakistani government perspective.

The Pakistani government has a very poor record of respecting their own journalists, but has thus far been a largely safe bet for western journalists.

May 9, 2009 - 8:38 pm 11. Wadeusaf:

I have heard in passing that many a mainstream democrat is beginning to favor a one state solution. None of them will however acknowledge what it would take to get the current residents of that strip of sand to live peaceably together. I shudder at the implication.

Even the Arabs are not so foolish as to follow VP Biden and President Obama. Gas kills them just as easily as gypsies.

What can be done to stop this foolishness?

Is this really my government stooping to such machinations?

Mea Culpa?

May 9, 2009 - 9:06 pm 12. steveaz:

Wretchard:

Why are Pakistan’s bombings never going to be equated with Gaza?

Although it may appear tangential, it is helpful, I think, to ponder the alternating and coincidental ebb and flow of both parties’ relative levels of opprobrium tracked against key electoral events. It leads one to ask, is “terrorism” just another operable arm of American minority politics, to be sheathed with its adjuncts “libel” and “hype” in the Progressive’s quiver?

Recalling Reagan’s challenges in Lebanon, I wonder whether the global insurgencies (aka “Islamic Terrorist” fronts) attacking parliamentary governments today in India, Lebanon, Belgium and even America (Pelosi Lied!) aren’t certain influential parties’ “final solution” to be kept on tap for whenever an American Republican is in the White House?

By “final solution” I mean, attack America’s homeland, and mount a global media campaign aimed at stymieing the Republican’s reasoned, militant response to the attack.

Sure, during Clinton’s terms, so-called “Islamic Terrorists” bombed US embassies in Africa, the USS Cole, and even Israeli pizzerias – and as you know, he did nothing about any of them. But behind the cloud of distractions that these pin-pricks provided large-scale machinations crept along unnoticed, some of which were abetted by Clinton’s own cabinet: AQ Khan was distributing nuclear technology to Khomeini and Kim Jong-Il, China gained key details of American ICBM design, the EU put a leash on Microsoft (its never been the same company since) and Russia’s remaining inquisitive journalists began to die, mysteriously. So, you see, behind the pop and crack of this or that terror front, anti-Republican actors (Global Greens, Oil-for-Food, Durban Conferences, et al) made great strides.

I know, I know. It’s post hoc ergo propter hoc meets plausible deniability, but still…

To wind this down, if the trend-line I see stays true, now that this same plausible denialist, post-national clique is governing DC one’d expect to see a renewed spate of media angst leveled at a little nation state for its putative “inappropriate militarism,” while witnessing a dampening of reports that don’t speak well of Muslim/Arab/Paki comportment.

And funny thing is…that’s just what we are seeing!

May 9, 2009 - 9:56 pm 13. Walt:

President Obama seems determined to see Israel cease to exist. Others have had that same dream, and Obama shall fail as well. The Israelis now have no choice but to look out for themselves. The clock is ticking. Armageddon, anyone?

Israelis live in daily fear
Of Gaza driven rockets
While Hamas sees the time is near
To put into their pockets
The Jewish State that stands between
The Arabs and their dream state
A world in which no Jew is seen
A world in which the Jew fate
Is death to every Jew on Earth
Regardless of resistance
By Arabs driven mad from birth
By Jewish mere existence
The Arabs see the end game come
They see its firm construction
And make the Arab wires hum
With threats for the destruction
Of people who are not afraid
Of forces ‘rayed against them
They know the price that must be paid
They know how to defense them
But now they see their mentor friend
US give them a screwing
Obama sees that Israel’s end
Is something he wants doing
It’s all ‘bout oil as some would say
And surely some things puzzle him
But I think this is Obie’s way
Of being a good muzzle im

May 9, 2009 - 10:05 pm 14. NahnCee:

Feeling waves of blissful schadenfreude at reports of Pakistani refugees. Lesson: THIS is what happens when you embrace the Taliban. Or elect Hamas. Or let Hezbollah into your country.

Bottom line: THIS is what happens when you choose to shoot at Americans and let jihadists take over.

If the quoted for Vietnam was “I love the smell of napalm in the morning”, then surely a line for the 21st Century must be “I love the sight of Muslims killing other Muslims.”

May 9, 2009 - 10:29 pm 15. Mad Fiddler:

Fred Zinneman directed the classic “High Noon” in 1952 about the time the House UnAmerican Activities Committee was forming up to investigate Communist infiltration into the U.S. government and military.

Mao Dsedong and his communist army had just trounced Nationalist armies led by Chiang Kai-shek in 1949, Communists were busy kidnapping 30,000 Greek children after unsuccessfully trying to take over *there*. In the five years after WWII, Communists *DID* take over Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Rumania, Albania, Czecho-Slovakia, and Communists insurgencies were trying to topple governments in a number of south asian countries. Iran was a prime target, too.

Almost sixty years later, despite all the historical record and despite the revelations of the briefly opened archives of the Soviet Union, most U.S. citizens have swallowed the lie that communists were all just nice folks with a different point of view, and besides, they were all in the USSR, and they really couldn’t have been that bad if the government just suddenly up and quit, Right?

I don’t know Zimmerman’s politics. Maybe it’s just ironic that his movie fits the current state of the world so well.

Um, oops. Maybe not.

Come to think of it, in today’s version, Gary Cooper would be beat up by the the whole town, not just Lloyd Bridges, and then they would give his wife to the bad guys and let them have their way with her, then stand by and laugh when the bad guys shoot holes in Gary Cooper.

Either that, or Cooper would slink away muttering eschatologic curses, trying to catch up with Grace Kelly, who probably has already taken up with some Marxist schoolteacher.

So now, even ignoring the resurgence of a belligerent Russia under Putin, the most obvious antagonist to civilization is Militant Islamism – Jihad. And the U.S. has been the primary country resisting while bystanders criticize, withhold support, or actively cooperate with and acquiesce to Islamic aggression and intimidation.

We’re not in the fix of Britain standing alone and battered against Hitler in 1940.

Not yet.

No thanks to the Leftward hurtling Odministration, which seems ready to abandon Israel to anyone bidding on e-bay.

I wonder if Eason Jordan is negotiating with any present Mid-east brutal dictator for a front row seat for THAT confrontation.

Israel might be driven to make deals with someone besides the U.S. for long-range support.

That can’t be good for U.S. by any measure.

May 9, 2009 - 10:37 pm 16. 49erDweet:

1. Nomenklatura has nailed it. For over three decades Israel has been increasingly abandoned by US Jews of all religious shades and persuasions, and is now considered by all but the most conservative congregations to be merely an embarrassing reminder of their grandparents’ distant past. The “promised land” has no value or meaning to them, now, and the sooner it is gone the better off they think their lives will be. It is a type of historical blindness of which their forebearers in Auschwitz could have never conceived.

May 9, 2009 - 11:40 pm 17. Charles:

3. Gordon:

Its likely that up until the his mid 20’s Obama was a moslem. That may have something to do with why Hawaii proposed an appreciate Islam day.

May 10, 2009 - 12:18 am 18. wretchard:

During the Israeli incursion into Gaza, Rasmussen polls showed that roughly twice as many Republicans supported the action as compared to Democrats. Only slightly more than half of Democrats think Israel is an ally. Seven times as many Democrats as Republicans think Israel is America’s enemy. Or at least that’s what the polls seem to say. That kind of polling is indicative of what must drive President Obama’s political calculus.

Sixty-two percent (62%) of Republicans back Israel’s decision to take military action against the Palestinians, but only half as many Democrats (31%) agree. A majority of Democrats (55%) say Israel should have tried to find a diplomatic solution first, a view shared by just 27% of Republicans.

While 75% of Republicans say Israel is an ally of the United States, just 55% of Democrats agree. Seven percent (7%) of Democrats say Israel is an enemy of America, but only one percent (1%) of Republicans say the same. For 21% of Republicans, Israel is somewhere in between, and 28% of Democrats agree.

With respect to the war in Afghanistan, Obama actually has more support for fighting the Taliban among Republicans than among Democrats. Another Rasmussen poll showed that:

Sixty-one percent (61%) of Republicans and 52% of unaffiliated voters are Very Concerned that the Taliban will take over Pakistan, a view shared by just 34% of Democrats. … Nearly half of Republicans (48%) think U.S. troops are needed in Pakistan. A plurality of Democrats (44%) opposes such a move. Among unaffiliated voters, 31% favor sending troops, 26% oppose it, and 43% are not sure.

This really calls into question how likely it is that the Obama administration can remain Israel’s friend and maintain a hard line against al-Qaeda. Where is the political support going to come from? The Republican Party? As time goes on liberal Jews may be outvoted by other elements within their own (ie the Democratic) party on questions critical to Israel’s survival. The crucial point may be that it isn’t “moral failure” that’s driving Israel’s “isolation” but nothing more than ordinary money and electoral politics. All those proposals to trade land for peace and for Israel to apologize for this or that may be totally irrelevant to the process. Their like controls whose wires are disconnected from the rudder and elevators. Morality isn’t driving anything. Obama’s going where the numbers are.

May 10, 2009 - 3:44 am 19. wretchard:

Even though no one could predict when the sub-prime bubble would burst it was fairly clear for a long time that it would eventually burst. In a similar way, the current domestic and political world order is being undermined by the very trends that have brought Obama — and in an antithetical sort of fashion, GWB — into power. How the crisis will be resolved is uncertain, but it seems plausible to say that however things may finish up the situation cannot remain as it is.

I think the thing to watch for is the collapse of ‘consensus’, something that may be increasingly likely to happen if polarization continues. Ironically BHO himself may be an accelerant of the collapse in consensus; polls show that he is the most polarizing President in recent memory. A collapse of consensus will mean that rival narratives, possibly non-European or American ones, may gain a sudden credibility. Imagine a world where political correctness, Global Warming, etc was no longer the canon or simply became an effete ideology to which people paid lip service but owed no real allegiance. Back in the day, the inner circle of the British Empire understood that it was sustained not by the Thin Red Line of Tommys but by something called “prestige”. Prestige was really the acceptance of consensus that the Briton was born to rule. Once was that prestige was shattered the Empire imploded practically overnight.

Islam itself is one such challenger to the liberal consensus; and the chaos in the Third World including Russia, though amorphous, is another. People like Chavez, Putin and Zuma, though protected by the Western liberal ideological model but are really its nemesis. They mouth the words, but they mouth them with contempt. Obama’s Big Tent is actually stuffed with allies of convenience, not the most stable of foundations. I’m convinced that we are headed for a period of considerable change, but not of the kind that Obama expects.

May 10, 2009 - 4:28 am 20. novanglus:

Nomenklatura/1
I live in a town that has an unusually high concentration of Jews. I know many of them, and the ones I don’t know I hear at nearby tables when we go out to dinner. Every one of them was an Obama supporter – at least outwardly. What they did in the voting booth, I cannot say. When I would argue with them that BHO at least had Muslim sympathies, if not being an actual Muslim, they would simply scoff. The retort was some anti-Bush non-sequitur. You are correct, American Jews will have played a large role in this new chapter in Jewish history. Some of them are beginning to see their folly, but are not yet clear on what they’ve done. As the lone voice in their circle of contacts who told them how odious Obama would be toward Israel, they now drop me emails or ask in casual conversation, “What do you think will happen?”. My only answer is, “something too horrible for you to imagine.”

After reading Glick’s article, I had a thought – what if the US/EU find a way to stop Bibi from striking Iran? When Iran gets the bomb and Israel has to live under a constant nuclear threat, what does a free people do? They move out from under the missile threat. A new diaspora will unfold. Why would any sane person choose to stay in a place where they could be incinerated like their grandparents, but without the trains and camps and ovens? Iran’s possession of nukes with a delivery capacity to Israel is enough to destroy Israel without firing a shot.

Mad Fiddler/15
So, to tag onto your hint about Israelis making new friends and in the context of where I was leading…China. For years, China and Israel have been working together on technology transfer, including for military applications. China’s a big place. The Chinese are the ultimate (extreme?) pragmatists in this brave new world. For most of Israel’s existence over 6,000 years, it has been a concept, rather than a place. Perhaps the next Israel will be located in China. The world is a much smaller place now than it ever was in the past, so why not? Jews historically migrate to where economic freedoms are greatest, opportunities are largest, and the threat of annihilation is lesser. I must say, it will be kind of startling to be see business cards with names like Shin-wan Feldstein or Dov Wang. But, the world continues to get smaller and anacronistic thinkers like me will disappear.

May 10, 2009 - 4:33 am 21. RAH:

Culture of Death

Just a thought and not totally flesh out, but liberals have adopted a culture of death.

Some of these agendas are the gay promotion, abortion, gun control and destruction of wealth and capitalism to name a few planks of the Democrats and liberals.

The gay promotion is a promotion of homosexual activities that fails to lead to reproduction or in other words death of the species. Many activist homosexuals call woman with multiple children in demeaning tones “breeders” as if that is something wrong.

Areas that have high homosexual population indulge in behavior that is self destructive like bathhouses and refusal to use condoms to reduce the probability of getting AIDS. I have heard that there have been advertisements of those who want to have unprotected sex with AIDS carriers. This really does seem like a death wish.

Liberals also promote killing of the unborn for any reason and that also promotes death or procreation.

Now we have our socialist left that want to destroy the capitalist system that provides the better life and profitable lives we have in the US. See the destruction of contract rights in Chrysler and TARP. The rush to destroy the ability to get wealthy. Obama next rush to get health care rationed that will allow government to decide what care to pay for or not and let some die. This will kill the progress in humans living long and prosperous lives.

The push to provide easy divorce to destroy marriage and family units and reduce family sizes. The new push to redefine marriage to allow more unproductive marriages.

The leftist’s desire to destroy our military or demonize them as baby killers when that more accurately reflects their position as pro abortionists. They constantly work to undercut our ability to fight our enemies by making enemies the good guys (Hamas and Hezbolla)

Gun Control; to make sure that people are defenseless against the predators in our societies matches the agenda that it is bad to fight against Palestinians, Hamas, Hezbolla, Iran NK, Taliban to name a few. Gun Control is a desire to strip away from humasn the methods to survive or fight against predators, which is a death wish.

So since Pakistan against Pakistan Taliban is not obviously a way to destroy American values and wealth, this does not excite the liberals. As soon as they figure out that the violence and unrest is a result of the Pakistani military fighting back to secure the territory from Taliban control, expect a spat of stories how ruthless the Pakistani is against a sincere desire of these areas to live under Sharia rule.

The meme of the mean Israelis against the poor Pakistanis with Pakistani military as the Israel and the Taliban as the freedom fighters to secure justice and peace to Swat.

I think the liberals have not woken up since they are focused on the dreams of Obama. Just wait.

May 10, 2009 - 4:43 am 22. RWE:

When you think about it, isn’t “the Gaza Phenomenon” pretty much endemic to the whole of Islamic culture?

Doesn’t every Islamic region have its version of Gaza? From Sadar City to Turkey and Iran’s Kurdish areas to Pakistan and Afghanistan’s tribal areas, to Thailand’s and the Philippines’ Islamic outbacks, to the forbidden urban areas of France, they all have places where some locals are always getting blown up, and often for good reason.

Back in the 60’s the USA sold Hawk missile batteries to the Saudis. They supposedly needed the missiles from us because we sold A-4’s to the Israelis; in reality they needed them because Egypt occasionally sent Migs over to strafe Saudi villages due to some Islamic slight or perceived insult. The Saudis were Egypt’s Gaza then.

Is it not ironic that “Ghetto” is a Jewish word, one that meant keeping the “Damned Jews” confined but which came to mean – for Jews – centers of culture and safety. For everyone else Ghetto means people you don’t want around you, usually for good reason. And no where have they embraced this concept more wholeheartedly than in the Islamic world.

May 10, 2009 - 5:05 am 23. novanglus:

RWE/22
Ghetto actually appears to be of Italian origin. I was recently in Venice, home of the first enclave of Jews that was referred to by this name. They were restricted to living on one of the city state’s islands, which had previously been a foundry, the Italian name for which was gheto.

May 10, 2009 - 5:17 am 24. Barry Meislin:

Even though no one could predict when the sub-prime bubble would burst it was fairly clear for a long time that it would eventually burst. In a similar way, the current domestic and political world order is being undermined …

Exactly so.

We are currently in an Orwellian bubble of lies (and lying narratives), fueled by those whose aim is to destroy, and assisted by those of whatever motivation and persuasion (including the belief that they are acting in good faith and in the world’s best interests) who decide to believe and abet these ever-hopeful destroyers.

We saw what happened when the Nazi bubble of lies burst (assuming we haven’t forgotten, willfully or otherwise).

And we saw what happened when the Soviet bubble of lies burst (assuming, once again, we haven’t forgotten, either willfully or otherwise).

It seems, alas, indisputable that these two precedents will pale in comparison with what erupts when the current bubble of lies must eventually burst.

May 10, 2009 - 5:21 am 25. Tony:

The truth of the liberal position seems trite, they really do Blame America First. Likewise, any strong American ally is part of the problem, think not just Israel but Taiwan, Pakistan under Musharraf, etc. The Left demonizes them all. And now we have the culmination of the Left’s desires, a completely leftist President who has the “power” as he describes it, to counter America and her allies. Frightening, fascinating, and completely unsurprising based on consistent liberal attitudes over the last 50 years. Here are a few revealing, chilling snips from Glick’s predictive analysis:

Gottemoeller legitimized Iran’s claim that it cannot be expected to suspend its quest to acquire nuclear weapons as long as Israel possesses them. She also erased any distinction between nuclear weapons in the hands of US allies and democratic states and nuclear weapons in the hands of US enemies and terror states.

. . .

Even Ethan Bronner of the The New York Times pointed out this week that Obama’s Middle East policy is not based on facts. If it were, the so-called “two state solution,” which has failed repeatedly since 1993, would not be its centerpiece. Obama’s Middle East policy is based on ideology, not reality. Consequently, it is immune to rational argument.

Yup, sounds like a liberal worldview to me. My liberal friends assure me that “The Jews treat the Palestinians worse than the Nazis treated them.” They say these disgusting, ahistorial abominations with a smug, cooler-than-thou mien. When my liberal friends suddenly began believing “Bush lied” about Saddam, WMD’s and terrorist support, I would send them videos of President Clinton making all these same points, send them copies of the UN resolutions on the subject … and their answer would always be the same, somebody tricked their beloved Democrats in Congress into voting for AUMF in Iraq.

The term “immune to rational argument” perfectly describes liberal thought, completely free of not only rationalism, not only absolutely embracing willful historical ignorance, but completely immoral in the deepest sense of not caring what is right or wrong, caring only what is “cool” among their confederacy of dunces. They have the perfect President in Obama.

May 10, 2009 - 5:23 am 26. I'm Just Plain Dumb:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05092009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/dont_blame_israel_168418.htm

May 10, 2009 - 5:34 am 27. novanglus:

Tony/25:
The term “immune to rational argument” perfectly describes liberal thought, completely free of not only rationalism, not only absolutely embracing willful historical ignorance, but completely immoral in the deepest sense of not caring what is right or wrong, caring only what is “cool” among their confederacy of dunces. They have the perfect President in Obama.

That was perfectly stated – thank you.

While I wish upon these folks the full pain of reaping what they have sewn, the tragic part is that the other 48% of us who didn’t vote for Him must also pay the piper.

However, until calamity strikes, I don’t see them opening their eyes. And so, is it wrong for me to think faster, please? Should I feel some moral repulsion for wanting to see the civil dislocation and global conflict arrive sooner, rather than later? I know in most projects of which I have participated, change later means more expensive, more difficult change. But, are we on a parabolic curve where the longer we wait, the more extreme the carnage will be? Or are we on a self limiting curve, where we are approaching some asymptotic limit?

I am an agnostic, but I occasionally wonder how I could distinguish between the actions of The O and the Anti-Christ and the Mahdi. I recall one day in NYC looking westward and talking to my roommate as we were watching the skyline and planes mill about. We watched as two planes appeared to be heading twoard each other, unsure of the distances between them because of our observation angle. Then, in an instant there was a fireball as they collided. I get the same feeling watching today’s global events. How close are we to the fireball?

May 10, 2009 - 5:39 am 28. Willie G:

#21 RAH -

You’re correct, it is a downward spiral to extinction. It reminds me of the Roman custom of the rich having a banquet with all of their friends and then retiring to the bath where they sliced their wrists.

The only question that matters now is how do the rest of us get off the bus before it launches over the cliff?

May 10, 2009 - 6:02 am 29. Cascajun » Putting Politics First:

[...] sultans of swat. addthis_url = ‘http%3A%2F%2Fcascajun.arabie.org%2F2009%2F05%2F10%2Fputting-politics-first%2F’; [...]

May 10, 2009 - 6:42 am 30. JFSanders:

“The reader who sent the link said the article reminded him of Gaza, but without the outrage. Which got me to wondering. Pakistan happens to be approximately as old as Israel. It was conceived as a homeland for Muslims seeking to escape the “Hindu colossus” of India during partition. Given this, why does Pakistan have more “legitimacy” and at this point, more sympathy from the administration than Israel? And why have Pakistan’s counterinsurgency campaigns received relatively less scrutiny than Israel’s from the world press?”

What?! You doubt the double standard that is this administration? How can this be?! Do you not understand that all that is Islam, PBUH and the Ummah, is beyond question? The religion is settled! Kuffar, you have gone beyond the pale to question this.

Actually this is one of the most stark contrasts in the known universe. The hell hole that is Pakistan and the functioning albeit largely socialistic in nature but still light years beyond Pakistan state of Israel. But the place they most resemble each other is in their treatment of the enemy. Both states use half measures and placation as a balm on the flagrant boil that is wahhabist Islam. Sunshine is a wonderful disinfectant. Let us make them all stand naked in the sun until they are cleansed of their boils. (euphemism for nuclear detonation at minimum elevation. For those from Rio Linda). Look, we nuked two cities in Japan. And they came back better than ever. Considering that the Swat valley has less than 1/10 the usefulness that Japan had at that time. We should not even be sweating Sqwat…

May 10, 2009 - 7:33 am 31. JFSanders:

19. Wretchard:
Lip service is the only talent the left truly excels at.

It would seem that there is no skeleton to this monster of “Liberalism” a veritable Blob from the deep. But for us to wait for it to collapse under it’s own contradictions and tear itself apart is not going to work. Waiting will only lead to slow starvation. Fortune favors the bold, I have been oft told.

From where, will America obtain the new Washington, Jefferson, and most importantly the new Madison? Surely they will emerge from a western state or maybe they will be formed in the cauldron of South America. Most likely they will come from under the heel of the former USSR. That kind of repression will undoubtedly produce more than one Vaclav Havel. Or does our country need to go through the oven of Socialism to produce the necessary ingredients for the formation of our own Havels?

20. novanglus:

“After reading Glick’s article, I had a thought – what if the US/EU find a way to stop Bibi from striking Iran? When Iran gets the bomb and Israel has to live under a constant nuclear threat, what does a free people do? They move out from under the missile threat. A new diaspora will unfold. Why would any sane person choose to stay in a place where they could be incinerated like their grandparents, but without the trains and camps and ovens?

Iran’s possession of nukes with a delivery capacity to Israel is enough to destroy Israel without firing a shot.”

That is absolutely true… So does the current Israeli leadership just sit on it’s hands or do they go preemptive and risk retaliation? Surely seems as though the world is set upon a course of conflagration.

I wonder how many carbon credits will have to be bought to offset the amount of CO2 that will be generated by the exploding ordnance?

24. Barry Meislin:

Along with the bubble analogy. Has everybody noticed that these “bubbles” are coming faster? As in the heat is being turned up and the world will soon come to a full boil…

May 10, 2009 - 8:17 am 32. DOWNTOWNDUBAI:

HEY

if anyone thinks that Bibi will buckle under to the Kenyan punk, has radar that needs adjusting. i have no doubt that Bibi who plays extremely well to the american public will kick ass. he just talks the talk and will let the chimp look, well, like a chimp. of course, Barry will be looking awesome and well groomed, but a Harvard punk in a suit. something you learn real early attending MIT…Harvies really just suck !!!

May 10, 2009 - 8:38 am 33. twobyfour:

Big 0gabe supporters waking up after he seems to be poised to make good on his mugging promises.

What did they think they’d get? Or where the money to pay off trillions in debt would come from, beside John P. Taxpayer?

One day they may wake up soaking in a really cold sweat when they realize that their business is not “their” anymore but has been “nationalized” by Soros & Co.

May 10, 2009 - 8:40 am 34. Gordon:

All: later in the article by Carolyn Glick she points out that the major Arab countries don’t care anything about the Palestinians but are very afraid of Iran and their Shia minorities. Thus, Israel has become a secret ally and they are very exercised at the idea that the US might rein in the Israelis vs Iran.

Strange place.

May 10, 2009 - 9:07 am 35. steveaz:

RE bubbles, bubble economies and bubble politics: the first sign I had the latest bubble was gearing up to pop was an FT (I think) report from early 2007 on the real size of China’s economy.

The report suggested that the PRC’s real GDP was around 1/4 of official reports. This news, and its implications for America’s ability to finance our mounting debt, coupled with a sense that my fellow Americans were dangerously indebted themselves, ended my sense that our boom was perpetual.

And it wasn’t.

Per JFSanders’ comment and his observation that bubbles are coming faster and faster, I do think there is a wing in the DLC that finds succor in bubbles. Many of our social engineers capitalize monetarily while the bubble inflates, then they sell on the high (usually with the benefit of insider knowledge), and last they capitalize politically when the bubble bursts (ie. “crisis”).

If it is the case that America’s socialists’ controls derive from the predictable up/down/crisis progression of bubbles, be they housing, stock-market, or political ones, then there’s plenty of incentive for the Left to drive our economy recklessly from bubble to bubble to bubble…until they get the “changes” that they think they want.

Social engineering schemes, perpetual motion machines: I’m reminded of a caged squirrel caught in an endless feedback loop. And to keep all those squirrels running, they’ve given themselves permission to feed their pets with free Americans’ nuts.

May 10, 2009 - 9:30 am 36. steeple:

Gordon, the Palestinians are just useful pawns for Arab Muslims. If Saudi and Iran really wanted to care for the 3MM Palestinians, they could do it in a heartbeat. But instead, they use them as packmules of death.

May 10, 2009 - 9:32 am 37. Voltimand:

#21 RAH

You echo my precise thoughts both in the conclusion and in the details. Liberals are in a downward spiral psychologically, and this has something to do with the info derived from whatever polling agencies ask people such questions, namely, the resulting response that liberals are less happy people than conservatives.

Liberals strike me as terminal neurotics for whom nothing gives them pleasure outside of the shadenfreude of attacking others’ lives and ways of living. As a former academic where I had the unenviable chance to watch liberal academics day after day, I was left with the feeling on retiring that I had escaped a toxic atmosphere filled with hatred, animosity, childish temper tantrums, all aimed at all those people including heterosexual white males like myself who were standing in the way of some sort of “equality” political utopia, which if they could ever reach it would “change everything” for them.

They are secretly–the secret is mainly what they keep from themselves–dedicated to the proposition “If I can’t be happy, then I will make sure that everyone is destroyed.”

Yeah, liberals are the enemies all right.

May 10, 2009 - 10:18 am 38. Morton Doodslag:

The truest thing Wtetchatd says above is that the current status quo cannot persist. A new narrative is already unfolding, but it’s so insane, so detached from reality, that it simply augers more instability, more collapse is in the offing.

Did anyone else see those nauseating interviews of Zardari (Pakistan) and Karzai (Afghanistan) on Meet the Press this morning? It’s well worth a watch. The Islamic hatred and contempt on display ny these two vile leaders was barely contained in these interviews. Even Karzai, the Afghan mutt who usually could be relied on to deliver only the most comforting bromides no longer feels any obligation to parrot such deceptions today under Obama’s regime. Obama’s far left anti-American blame-America-first ethos came through loud and clear, and dovetails very nicely indeed with the Islamists propaganda in the West. These lying Muslim snakes had the rhetoric down perfectly – they both failed to blame Islam or to implicate Islam in the heinousness of their respective gutter cultures – instead, just as in the leftist screed from which they read for Western consumption, paint all of the nightmares unfolding in their region is someone else’s fault, specifically the USA’s fault. Zardari has even taken a page out of Obama’s ugly playbook and suggested that everything wrong in Pakistan is because of Mushareff’s “tyranny”. How can he be held to account for what’s happening in Pakistan?! He was in jail during Mushareff’s regime, and after all, Mushareff was our man! Nevermind the fact that his psychotic wife Bhutto helped develop and cultivate the Taliban, and that her regime was central to the treacherous development of the Islamic Bomb which now threatens world stability.

And what will fix the mess we’ve supposedly created? More tribute, more money, more Jizya paid by infidels (the fewer strings attached the better!) and delivered to the long suffering Muslims.

It made me physically ill to watch it, but it was as chilling as it was revealing. These Muslim dogs no longer feel the slightest compunction in pretending. They will back the truck up to the self loathing American Bank of Leftist Pretexts, and loot as much booty as the morons in the White House can deliver. In short, Islam is off the hook – those Muslim leaders are off the hook, and American taxpayers have to fix those respective Muslim shit holes or else… Sounds familiar. If crappy government regulation and corruption made our current crisis, the Left in America tells us the solution is even more crappy regulation and even more government corruption. Brilliant. Let’s just bail out the entire collapsing rotting House of Islam while we’re at it!

May 10, 2009 - 10:52 am 39. E. Nigma:

I found this passage from Caroline Glick’s column fascinating:

“As Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel made clear in his closed-door briefing to senior AIPAC officials this week, the administration is holding Israel indirectly responsible for Iran’s nuclear program. It does this by claiming that Israel’s refusal to cede its land to the Palestinians is making it impossible for the Arab world to support preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.”

Couple that with the report by Morton Doodslag on “Meet the Press”, and there is only one conclusion.
Truly, to be a practicing Muslim is to be part and party to a suicide pact. They thirst for death, particularly their own.

Oh yeah, and Rahm Emmanuel is an imbecile. When things start to really fall apart, just what will the Obama Administration do? Who are your allies now, Mr. President?

May 10, 2009 - 11:14 am 40. cubanbob:

Sharon once said “they have the oil but we have the matches”. The calculation Wretchard refers to is based on the calculus of Arab intransigence, arrogance, perceived insanity and the willful restraint from the West and the the Israeli’s abiding by West’s desires. That calculus can be changed instantly by Israel’s not going along with the program. Simply bomb Iran’s oil refineries, oil export port facility and key electrical generation pants and distribution nodes and game over for the Arabs. The world needs oil, not Arabs. The Arabs and the Muslims need to have that lesson administered to them. The EU can bluster and rant all it wants but if Israel were to actually do something like that, what exactly could they do? Nothing at all. Once the Arabs see the west utterly impotent in the face of such as Israeli action that will a game changer for them as well. They have always counted on Israel’s ultimate restraint or being restrained by the West. Once the restraints are off real fear will moderate their behavior. The Iranians act the way they do simply because they really believe they will not suffer or suffer much for the consequences of their actions. Such a blow will remove all illusions from them.

If America under Obama cuts Israel off, then Israel will solve her problems without any American restraint. Imagine what top line Russian combat aircraft with Israeli avionics and electronics would be like. As good as the best of the US, no. Better than what the US exports to most of the world ? Absolutely. And those weapons will be sold without all the pesky conditions the US attaches to them. India, China are but two rather large exports accounts for such a joint venture. When you have something to sell that world wants, there will always be buyers. The Arab world essentially produces nothing of great economic value. They are nothing more than land renters to oil companies and the beneficiaries of oil trust funds. They recycle the dollars but add no real value. Absent the oil income and their GDP’s combined are barely larger than Israel’s. Put it this way, it takes three hundred million Arabs to produce what five million Jews produce. More telling than that of just how dysfunctional a civilization they are cannot be found.

Obama is throwing an ally, a talented technologically advanced ally that we can moderate and influence out in to the cold in exchange for what? Once that happens no matter who comes after Obama, not matter how sincerely amends are offered, no Israeli government will ever fully trust the US again. And once again America will be shown to be an unreliable ally and one to never get too reliant on or too pliable for. Ask the South Vietnamese, The Cambodians, The Laotians and others. Funny thing is its always the Democrats that do this to our allies. Just ask the Shah of Iran. And once again Obama will have proven Charles De Gaulle right. Never rely on or trust the American’s too much. They will betray you in the in the end. We are still paying for FDR’s treatment of De Gaul and Eisenhower’s stabbing them in the back in Vietnam, Suez and Algeria. And are we any better for having done so? No.

May 10, 2009 - 11:22 am 41. F:

Cubanbob:

While I will not disagree with the substance of your comment, the details call for a slight rebuttal. Eisenhower had just managed a costly war in Europe that was predicated in part on the rights of people to live free of foreign domination. In the light of that he looked at European colonies all over the globe clamoring for self-rule. India was of course the largest example, and self-rule there predated Eisenhower’s administration. But when Ike took office many African nations were similarly clamoring to be free from British, French, Portuguese and Spanish rule.

Did Ike betray France by taking sides against their colonial domination in Vietnam, Egypt, Algeria and other former colonies? Hmmmm. Not an easy question to answer. We had recently paid an enormous cost to defeat Nazi Germany, and de Gaulle had made lots of promises to leaders in places like Cameroun, who offered the Free French a base from which to call themselves a government in exile. As for Suez, siding with the British and French over the Egyptians during that small war was not a simple question, especially in the cold war setting that then obtained. (The French call this kind of analysis “nuanced”.)

So it’s perhaps a little too easy to suggest that the Americans are not reliable allies. The world changes and it’s appropriate to weigh evolving situations in the light of the changed circumstances. Of course old allies will sometimes feel betrayed, but the French are nothing if not pragmatic (some would use a stronger term) about international relations.

All that said, I do not support any policy that abandons Israel to Arab perfidy if that is Obama’s intent (and I fear that is the case). If we think Israel has been an imperfect ally, just wait until we see how reliable the Arab nations (?) are. F

May 10, 2009 - 12:51 pm 42. Richard Aubrey:

Rhetorical question, right?

May 10, 2009 - 1:29 pm 43. Gordon:

Given the state of the US intelligence apparatus, if we turn away from the Israelis we will be losing the cooperation of the best intel and counter-intel operation in the area, one of the few best in the world. Then we will truly be blind in the mid-East.

May 10, 2009 - 1:42 pm 44. Doug:

UCSB Alum Graduates from Prison, anticipates Ayers, ACORN Grants from Obama Admin.

Kilgore joined the SLA after graduating from the University of California, Santa Barbara, in 1969.
Barbara Bodine, Joe Wilson, James Kilgore…

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) – The last captured member of the Symbionese Liberation Army, the radical 1970s-era group notorious for bank robberies, killings and the kidnapping of newspaper heiress Patricia Hearst, was released from prison Sunday, a corrections official said.

James William Kilgore, 61, was paroled from High Desert State Prison after serving a six-year sentence for the murder of housewife Myrna Opsahl during an April 1975 bank robbery.

Kilgore had eluded arrest longer than any of his fellow SLA fugitives. His cover unraveled after the 1999 arrest of his former girlfriend, Sara Jane Olson, who had become a doctor’s wife in St. Paul, Minn. Olson, formerly known as Kathleen Soliah, was paroled from a California prison in March.

The gang of mostly white, privileged would-be revolutionaries led by a black ex-convict also was responsible for the murder of Oakland school superintendent Marcus Foster, bank robberies, and the attempted bombings of Los Angeles police cars. Joseph Remiro is serving a life sentence for Foster’s 1973 murder.
—
” They were an extremely misguided group of idealists. They really believed they could make the world better by what they did,” Jordan said. “I just think they tapped into some mythological fairy story. ”

Sorry about that, Mum,
and oh, btw: Happy Mother’s Day!
Jon Opsahl, whose 42-year-old mother was shot to death by another SLA member as she deposited a church collection 34 years ago, expressed sympathy in a recent interview for a man he called an idealist who
“got in with the wrong crowd.“

May 10, 2009 - 1:49 pm 45. toad:

I can’t remember who said, it but I keep remembering the comment, ” If Israel get hit with a nuclear weapon, it should retaliate by nuking Berlin, Paris, and London.” Might as well add Washington DC to the list now.

May 10, 2009 - 1:57 pm 46. Rob:

Don’t connect the two. Pakistan and Israel are not the same except that news from both comes from the usual twisted, biased, anti-Semitic, shallow sources.

Pakistan is in trouble because of contradictions built into it at birth. It was born as an Islamic country. It is now threatened with being swallowed by violent Jihadists from up in the hills. The goal is to find the military and political will to deal with this. Governments, both civilian and military in Pakistan, have dodged this issue and now are confronted with a challenge to the very existence of the entire county.

So on second thought I take it back. Israel and Pakistan are threatened by the same thing; Jihadis. Their very existence is threatened. I hope we do not cripple their ability to fight this threat. The since 9/11 we must realize the Jahadis target us too.

May 10, 2009 - 1:58 pm 47. cubanbob:

41. F: I won’t quibble with your point on the actual historical detail. Its for all practical purposes besides the point. What is the point is the perception by the French. That FDR’s treatment of the De Gaulle during the war made a lasting and unfortunately for the US a less than desirable impression that is still affecting the US.

Eisenhower made a bet, a wrong bet, on Arab nationalism by supporting Nasser. Whether its his fault in the particular or the overall fault of the CIA and the State Department is better left to historians but surely it must have been obvious to more astute and nuanced individuals at the time that no socialist, nationalist Pan Arabist movement was ever going to be friendly to the US and the West. At best they could be neutral to the US and the West, playing off the West against the Soviet Bloc such as Yugoslavia. Nasser was not fooled by this, he saw the US take out less than friendly leftist regimes in Iran and Guatemala in the years before Suez. The British and the French also noticed this as well. They saw the US take action that contradicted the piety of the colonial independence movements when it suited the US national interest yet the US had no problem shafting them when it came to their national interests. In the end besides India and a handful of countries, can anyone say that the former colonies are really better off since independence?

Please don’t get me wrong, I believe that the US should always act in its national interest, every other nation does and the US has no obligation to sacrifice its interest. What the US needs to do is get a more complete and nuanced concept of its long term national interests and be more consistent particularly with allies the US needs and desires for the long term. Arabs are a one trick pony, all they have to offer is oil and no matter what they say or do, they need to sell the oil in order to eat. If push were to come, the oil states would starve to death if the US embargoed their ports faster than the US would suffer severe economic harm from an Arab oil embargo. On the other hand, countries with real economies and real scientific, technical and industrial capabilities that can be extremely damaging to the US are not nations we need to be throwing under the bus, particularly those we have a friendly and beneficial relationship with. And would we want to? How would that benefit us in the long run? Again we need to think out the calculus of our long term national interest.

May 10, 2009 - 2:57 pm 48. RAH:

Voltiman #37 to followup on my post # 21. I find it is interesting that Arabs or the jihadists also have a “Culture of Death”. They rather send their children to die in futile attacks and suicide bombings. I beleive a leader said that the west would fail since we worship life.
Did not Iran said that they could easily sacrifice 6 million to eliminate Israel 1.5 million?

Make us want to say be careful what you wish for.

May 10, 2009 - 4:29 pm 49. Gringo:

#20 Novanglus:

Regarding the intersection of Chinese and Jews. Years ago I read a book that claimed that the very surname of Chou-en Lai indicated that he had Jewish ancestry.

May 10, 2009 - 7:00 pm 50. noprisoners:

Novanglus @ #20:

You are getting close to a question that I have had. I am wondering if the Jews on this thread have any anecdotal evidence of Jews who voted for Obama now regretting that decision. Personally, my Jewish friends all (with the possible exception of one) voted for McCain. They do not seem aware of any of their coreligionists who have changed their minds yet. This surprises me. Can anyone provide signs that I’m wrong?

May 11, 2009 - 10:51 am 51. joe buzz:

If the Palestinians must have a state…then why not the Taliban?

May 11, 2009 - 12:00 pm 52. Fletcher Christian:

I continue to be astonished at Tolkein’s understanding of the geopolitical situation as it was then and still is.

The fighting between different factions of the enemy reminds me sharply of the squabbling between different tribes of Orcs depicted in the Lord of the Rings. Of course, in this case the real problem is that one of the factions has custody of the Ring…

Time to end the squabbling by destroying Barad-Dūr.

May 11, 2009 - 3:04 pm 53. Cadmus:

There is one main difference between Swat and Gaza. The Pakistanis are fighting the Taliban, who are at war with the US and using Swat as their base. The US has been urging Pakistan to deal with this problem. How can we now show any sympathy or undermine what we asked for?

The Palestinians of Gaza, whatever anyone may think of them, are not in a direct war with the US and the war was not requested by the US.

I do find it refreshing that so many are actually waking up to the threat of radical Islam. It is about time. Sadly, the lack of coverage of this issue for so long makes most believe this is somehow a new phenomena. It is not. Radical Islam dates back to the days of Mohamed.

Islam is a religion that grew by the sword and ruled by the sword. The name of the religion tells it all. In Arabic it means Surrender. It is not a religion of peace and tolerance as some would like us to believe.

It is a culture of submission and absolutism. All is in the hands of God and all for God. The individual is nothing except a tool for God. There is no respect for the individual or the ability to create and develop. That is why Moslem countries fall so far behind the rest of the world.

Those who referenced the Arab world’s production are absolutely right. I point another fact. The number of books translated into Greek (10 million people) is ten times larger than those translated into Arabic (300+ million people) and 90% of that is done in Lebanon, where the Christians dominate that sector. Lebanese Christians do not need the Arabic versions since they all read English and/or French.

The Taliban, Al-Qaida and others are reflective of all this as they reject all things modern.

Unfortunately this fact has been obscured for too long by narrow economic interests and the obsession with Communism. In fact communism masked this issue more than anything as the Soviet Union straddled the divide between Islam and Christianity for most of the 20th century. In the few places the two met, there was war. Oil interests lead the West to simply ignore the Christians and paint them as intolerant monsters and actually defend and support Islam.

I read all the whining about how the US liberals are abandoning Israel and recall the old story about Nazi Germany (The author eludes me) “They came for the communists and I did not speak out for I was not a communist, … the Jews … the Gypsies… etc.., when they came for me there was no one left to speak out”.

However, it was not just the liberals. All US administrations for decades have ignored the issue of Islamic fundamentalism and often helped create the problem.

The Taliban and Al-Qaida were supported, trained and armed by Washington to fight communism.

Khomeini was also supported in his take over from the Shah, as the Shah was opening channels to the Soviets, and Islam was deemed the best guarantee against communism.

Washington went to war in Yugoslavia in defense of Bosnia, which was a focal point of Islamic fundamentalism and later became the main route for fundamentalists in Europe to go fight our troupes in Iraq.

Washington ignored 25 years of the Sudanese Government’s genocidal war against its Christians in the south and continues to do so. All we hear is Darfur, because they are Moslems and the Saudis want us to talk about them.

The whole Moslem world treats its Christian minorities as Dhimmis and denies them their most basic rights, but we are OK with that.

The Arabs have waged a 35 year war in Lebanon in the name of “Arabism” which is nothing but a euphemism for Islam. They have worked hard to eradicate the last place Christians still have rights in the region, and the US more often than not took their side.

Hizbullah has only become an issue when the Saudis wanted it out of the way. But, for 30 years, the Lebanese Christian suffering was acceptable to the West.

The list goes on and on. Pakistan against India, Armenia (Nagorno-Karabakh), East Timor, Ethiopia-Eritrea, Cyprus, etc.

Israel and the Jews never complained and often were part of that policy.

I do not hate the Jews or deny them any rights. I have had this discussion with too many Jews over the years, explaining that this will eventually get to them. Some agreed, but felt helpless to change things. Some had too much arrogance to believe that this tsunami would ever touch them.

I will never forget listening to Jewish leaders in Washington arguing against any recognition of the Armenian massacres by the Turks a century ago. They feared that recognizing those genocidal acts would reduce the potency of the Holocaust. How one genocidal act would reduce another was beyond me. But, none of them stopped to think that denying those acts would only allow them to happen again and eventually happen to them.

Now it is knocking at their door, and … there is no one left to speak. I hope we are not there yet.

The liberal agenda you speak about has effectively made people ashamed to proclaim they are Christians. How can they defend Christians when they are ashamed to proclaim their own Christianity?

I have heard this way too many times. When I brought up the issue that Christianity in the Middle East was at stake, the answer is almost always an emphatic “We are not a Christian country” This is not an issue for us.

When we explained that places like Lebanon were merely the first steps in the Islamic march Westward, we were dismissed with similar notions.

Then comes 9/11, and the proof. But, even now we are still incapable of actually naming the enemy.

We have a war on “Terror”. Terror is a tactic, not an enemy. You cannot have a war on a tactic. We must identify the enemy, if we are ever to have a chance of winning.

The enemy is RADICAL ISLAM a fanatic movement bent on dominating the world by force and willing to kill anyone in its way. It is not every person born in the Moslem world. But, if left to grow it will eventually include all.

Are we willing to make that stand?

Are we willing to face the fact that this is a religious war?

Are our Jewish friends willing to accept that we fight back as Christians? And, not continue to fear that our Christianity is a threat to them.

Cadmus

May 12, 2009 - 2:37 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments:

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail