No one looks dopier today than the collection of self-righteous fuddy-duddies who voted for Ned Lamont in Tuesday’s Democratic Primary in Connecticut. In the darkness of his soul Lamont himself must be wondering how to react to the news that another ten jets filled with innocent human beings were about to explode over the Atlantic. Not good for his campaign. It reminds me of the old LA Weekly cartoon: “Nuclear War? There goes my career!”
The problem with Lamont and his ilk is that they are unable to wrap their minds around the fact that Islamic Fascsim is a deeply real and pervasive phenomenon with hundreds of millions of adherents and fellow travelers. Surely, these soi-disant liberals think, these people can be reasoned with. But it couldn’t be more obvious that they can’t . They are imbued with a fanatical religious culture vastly different from and in complete opposition to ours. However, for these “liberals” to face this uncomfortable reality would vastly disrupt their weltanschauung and cost them power, money, position, prestige, etc. It might even cause personality disintegration. This is the Culture of Narcissism gone berserk.
Unfortunately, I think today’s episode will not be enough. Fortunately, for many innocent people, the religious madmen were stopped before they acted. Maybe after one or ten finally slip through these “liberals” will wake up. But even then I wonder.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
35 Comments
1. Ripper:Roger:
Aug 10, 2006 - 11:20 am 2. jayhawk:The problem is with Britian itself. Tony Blair is a distinct minority over the there. The majority of Britons have nternalized the world view of Prince Jugears, Ken Livingstone, George Galloway, Robert Fisk, Harold Pinter, Max Hastings, John le Carre, Jenny Tonge, Claire Short, Gerald Kaufman, Jack Straw, Vanessa Redgrave, Robin Cook, the BBC, Reuters, The Guardian, The Independent et al. Melanie Phillips’ book “Londonistan” is a must read.
“However, for these ‘liberals’ to face this uncomfortable reality would vastly disrupt their weltanschauung and cost them power, money, position, prestige, etc. It might even cause personality disintegration. This is the Culture of Narcissism gone berserk.”
Thank you for stating this so plainly. I live in southern Marin County in California so I see this revolting phenomena on an almost daily basis. The lefties’ political views are designed to stroke their ego image as intellectually superior bohemians in Land Rovers. They don’t give a flying f*&k about the real impact of the policies they support and they are incapable of making any sacrifice that doesn’t serve the purpose of calling attention to their moral and intellectual superiority, i.e., going to a “peace march” and telling everyone about it.
Aug 10, 2006 - 11:34 am 3. chuck:Roger,
Ambisinistral put up a great little post on this subject comparing it to the gas station scene in the movie The Jerk : He hates these cans! Stay away from the cans!.
Aug 10, 2006 - 12:00 pm 4. AlanC:Roger, the question is not “…I think today’s episode will not be enough.” The question is “Would it be enough if this plot HAD succeeded?”
The LLL is already blaming this on Bush and the UK is so dhimmified that they consulted with the Muslim “community” before they announced this!!
I truly think that a backlash is due. We need to see leaders leading, denouncing the Islamists and specifically calling their cult into question. We need to see people producing MORE cartoons like the Danish ones and mocking and sneering at this death cult and its adherents.
If this insults the MMM (mythical moderate muslim) too bad, maybe they ought to start looking at themselves in the mirror and realizing that it’s time to fish or cut bait.
Aug 10, 2006 - 12:03 pm 5. David Thomson:Never, never, underestimate the importance of the race factor. Ned Lamont is a guilt tripped white liberal. The Islamic nihilists are mostly dark skinned. This fact alone discombobulates folks like him. It would be so much easier if our enemies predominately had blue eyes and blond hair.
Aug 10, 2006 - 12:23 pm 6. TheRealSwede:Some of them may wake up along the way Roger, but most are beyond that. They will forever rationalize every atrocity as the fault of those of us who would resist.
Aug 10, 2006 - 12:30 pm 7. freetotem:Yes, I think the narcissim label fits. The evidence for this mounted today when post-election analysis showed that the closer to the affluent Connecticut coastline you got, the higher the percentage of voters went for Lamont. Blue collar Dems farther north tended heavily toward Liberman.
Now, perhaps this is an indication of the higher levels of discernment among the wealthier (and presumably more educated) denizens of Connecticut’s more affluent parts. But, being a native Northeasterner myself and therefore having observed this species in its native habitat most of my life, I think it has everything to do with fashion and group think. I think these people wear their politics like jewelry. Investment bankers cutting each others’ throats by day, but demonstrating their radical hippy roots at cocktail parties. Like Hollywood. They make perfect bedfellows for the KosKidz wack jobs who contend that today’s news stories from Britain are mere fabrications by neocons to distract attention from…them. And their spectacular victory yesterday.
Narcissists of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but the chains of whatever shred of reality consciousness you have left.
Aug 10, 2006 - 12:58 pm 8. Roger:Posted for Jamie Irons via email:
Roger,
When I first saw your headline, “Berserk Narcissists,” I thought you were referring to the plotters whose attacks were just foiled.
Malignant narcissism is a necessary (but not sufficient) feature of the terrorist “mind.” Narcissism is a failure of empathy, at the most profound level.
But I think the appellation applies equally well both to the terrorists, and those politicians and their supporters who refuse to recognize the danger that the terrorists present, for the very reasons you cite.
Jamie Irons
Aug 10, 2006 - 1:21 pm 9. Skookumchuk:It may be that the West will split before the war is won. It depends on how long the war continues and on how ferocious it becomes. The West could fracture in several ways. It might split geographically, with portions of Europe becoming like Yugoslavia in its last days, having de facto autonomous areas each with their own culture and law. And split culturally, in that some institutions and social groups – like portions of academia – will either sit out the conflict because they don’t see their society as worth saving, or will become marginalized because they can’t contribute anything meaningful to the war effort. A war conducted by others having different values. It is often pointed out how war accelerates technological change. Less mentioned is that war can also accelerate societal change. Assume ten or twenty more years of this. Will our universities be the same? Will our media culture be the same? I think that at some visceral level, our cultural elites recognize this now, which partially explains their reactions to events.
Aug 10, 2006 - 1:33 pm 10. onecent:It’s the silly versus the serious. Forget about converting these fools. We only need a little over half in percentage points, as the Bush years have demonstrated, for the serious citizen to continue doing what needs to be done to stop Islamofascism. Every election counts.
Aug 10, 2006 - 1:42 pm 11. Terrye:skook:
They will think it is worth saving the moment they are personally inconvenienced. After all it is all about them.
Aug 10, 2006 - 1:44 pm 12. AndyS:An incoherent post!
Lamont drew votes because of his opposition to the Iraq war.
The events in Britain do nothing to make that war seem a better idea. If anything, the foiled plot demonstrates that good policework is quite effective in stopping terrorism. It points out the futility of killing Iraqis when plots are being hatched in Britain, and more generally, the silliness of the “fighting them over there” idea.
Nobody believes that terrorists “can be reasoned with”. However, it seems obvious that broad support in the world, including that of the majority of Muslims, is essential to the defeat of terrorists. The ill-conceived actions of the Administration have cost us that support, and in so doing have deeply damaged our chances to limit or stop terrorism.
Worst of all, the war in Iraq at this point is being fought for reasons of domestic politics above all else. It is becoming increasingly clear that no positive outcome can be expected. Yet all we hear is “stay the course” and “finish the job”, rather than any clear statement of strategy or any reasonable real-world objectives. That’s because any of the increasingly miserable options we have to bring our involvement in Iraq to a conclusion involves painful admissions that the Administration is unwilling to make.
And that brings us back to this post. What exactly does it argue for? Nothing practical — just a vague war against “hundreds of millions”! Keeping up the pretense of a useful war in Iraq has required a constant escalation in rhetoric, to the point where posts like these urge us to set ourselves in opposition to 15% of the world’s population. Wouldn’t it just be easier to admit that Iraq was a bad idea in the first place?
Aug 10, 2006 - 1:46 pm 13. Kevin Peters:Roger:
Aug 10, 2006 - 1:51 pm 14. clarkstooksbury:The one track mind of the BDS crowd is stunning. They have jumped so quickly upon the “this is not real terrorism, it’s a Rovian ploy to distract from the Lieberman loss” it makes ones head spin. They view everything thru their “evilBushmorongenius” glasses and have a single answer for everything. “It’s the jooos,Rove, Bush, oil conspiracy.” The most jaw dropping conspiracy I have heard is that Oliver Stone and the release of his movie is involved with the Bush disinformation campaign.
AndyS:
Aug 10, 2006 - 3:17 pm 15. Skookumchuk:Thanks for saving me the trouble.
These years, maybe this decade, are a time when we as a society attempt to answer some basic questions. Many things will be tried in this war and some will succeed and others will fail. And in those successes and failures will be written the answers to our questions. The questions we all have, whether we are liberals or conservatives. Are they able to accept democracy? Yes or no? Are they able to be tolerant? Yes or no?
Not answers in an objective sense, which are always some variant of “well, it depends…”. Not in that social scientist kind of way. I’m talking more about the deep assumptions that the members of a Western society will feel in their bones to be true about Islam.
All of our half-baked policies and our loud arguments are attempts to answer. Yes or no?
Aug 10, 2006 - 3:28 pm 16. Peg Kaplan:The really scary part to me, Roger, is the folks on the left who actually believe that the tales of terror are being fabricated by GWB & Co. to further themselves politically.
I am not talking only the Kos Nut Kids. I know successful businessmen, well educated mature adults who buy into the Kool-Aid program. Everything they see on the TV is Made Up so that more Republicans can get elected.
Almost as scary as the terror itself.
Aug 10, 2006 - 4:08 pm 17. Terrye:Domestic politics? In Iraq? And hear I thought that suicide bombers and Hezbellah and AlQaida all had to do with terrorism.
Aug 10, 2006 - 4:10 pm 18. Fred Z:I’m slowly starting to consider Derbyshire’s ‘rubble makes no trouble’ position.
Most non-Israeli mid-easterners appear to be low IQ savages. They fall for fables and myths even stupider than those western liberals fall for. 72 virgins indeed. Not even a left coast liberal would dare to suggest that the lowest white trash red state hillbilly would fall for that one. The mid-east does not produce much except crude weapons and dirty streets. Beirut looks bad after the bombing. It did not look so great before. Dirty, grubby, irregular with litter everywhere. Corrupt and foul.
They have little potential to cause us real physical harm. Ignore them but let them know that if they trouble us by terrorism, recruitment of our young and stupid, or otherwise … rubble. Perhaps make some rubble in Iran and Syria to show we mean it.
Gunboat diplomacy was used for a long time because it worked.
Aug 10, 2006 - 4:56 pm 19. Bostonian:AlanS, I’m sure that there isn’t even a slight chance that you will understand this, but I will try.
Our goal in Iraq was to kill terrorists and to recruit allies, people securely on the side of civilization, fellow stakeholders in democracy. And like or not, this is what is happening over there.
Consider that the very act of enabling Iraqis to vote is, to the Islamofascists, an act of war against Islam. (Why do you think the terrorists were shooting Iraqi poll workers?!)
The Islamofascists do indeed hate us for our freedoms, they consider democratic secular rule an abomination to be resisted by any means necessary, and they oppose all democracy everywhere. (In stark contrast, Iraqis poured out to vote in gigantic numbers. Did that even register with you?)
Furthermore, the Islamofascists oppose any civilization that does not resemble their Islamic fantasy–and their opposition is violent and random, meant to terrorize people from all walks of life, all over the globe. Theyíre beheading schoolteachers in Indonesia, blowing up commuters in Europe, shooting schoolchildren in Beslan, and randomly terrorizing people with no connection whatsover to the US or to US actions.
Theyíre bullies, actually. And theyíre barbarians in the truest sense of the word, because they so utterly oppose civilization.
To defeat bullies (aka terrorists), we absolutely need the help of people worldwide, to stand up for individual rights, to stand up for freedom of speech, to stand up for freedom of conscience, and to help us defeat the ideology that opposes all those things.
And it is not easy to stand up (let alone provide material help) when the bullies are pointing guns at you. (Just how far do you think the Enlightenment would have gone if a minority of Europeans had randomly beheaded anyone with views too ìradicalî?)
In other words, we must fight the bullies and we prove that we do really mean it, so that more people are willing to stand up on the side of civilization instead of meekly hoping it will all go away.
It is time to stop pretending that alliances between rulers of countries somehow prevent genocides, despotism, anti-democratic radicalism, and other miseries for the residents of those countries. Decades of history prove otherwise.
Aug 10, 2006 - 5:18 pm 20. Josh:Props to W for actually publically identifying the enemy today as Islamic Fascism. Using the overly generic “terrorists” seems to lead far too many people to believe that somehow the situation with the IRA in Northern Ireland is a good point of reference here… When CAIR responds by going into a tizzy, there’s a darn good chance you’ve said or done something right.
Aug 10, 2006 - 5:31 pm 21. snowpea:If the plane attacks had succeeded, with casualties approaching the scale of 9/11, would much of today’s new and improved Left now be concluding that Bush and Co. had destroyed the planes, or allowed the planes to be destroyed, as an anti-Islamic propaganda ploy?
Aug 10, 2006 - 6:35 pm 22. photoncourier.blogspot.com:“Ned Lamont is a guilt tripped white liberal”…although his kind of liberal naivete is often put down to guilt, I don’t think that is really usually the operative factor. These people don’t usually feel *guilty*; they feel *superior* and they want the rest of us to feel guilty.
C S Lewis analyzed the psychological mechanisms involved very astutely.
Aug 10, 2006 - 6:46 pm 23. Syl:AndyS
Your post is a symptom of failure of imagination and inability to connect dots that reveals the weakness of the Dem position.
First, police work is only as good as the tools employed and the Dems are in perpetual opposition to those tools including the Patriot Act and NSA domestic terrorist surveillance. The Brits aren’t working under the same constraints the Dems wish to foist on our own counterterrorism efforts.
So your attempt to praise police work as the solution is empty since you fail to support the very tools required to get the job done.
Second, Iraq presents a microcosm of the muslim world in general. The majority of the Iraqi people defied death to cast their votes for a representative government. It’s the spoilers who are causing all the trouble for us and the Iraqi people. The hardcore ex-baathists, the sunni extremist and al qaeda types and the fundamentalist shia, egged on by Iran, are killing fellow muslims.
The way to win the hearts and minds of the muslim world is to have victory in Iraq by helping the Iraqi people secure their country from the violent elements.
The way to lose those hearts and minds is to abandon the majority of Iraqis who simply want to live their lives in peace.
Democracy is a process and it takes time for the newly empowered citizens to learn the lessons of their freedoms. The Palestinians elected Hamas and are paying the price. The Lebanese chose not to disarm Hezbollah. The Iraqis are learning that their own militias have to be disarmed as well. And we are staying to help them do that because they’re not ready to do it on their own.
The process is a long one and the rewards won’t be felt for a generation or two (or even more). But eventually the muslim world will reject the violence and fight for peace. I don’t want to think of the consequences if they fail to do so.
In the meantime the jihadis hate us. There is absolutely nothing we can do about that! We can only hope to show the muslim world that their own worst enemy is themselves and use all the tools in our arsenal to keep our country safe.
Aug 10, 2006 - 7:22 pm 24. vnjagvet:From the information we have so far, the young men who were plotting this abominable atrocity are neither poor nor oppressed. All are muslim, but all are living the lifestyle of upper middle class British young adults. Scarcely the “ghetto” life.
Apparently, except in tactical emulation, they are neither equipped, trained nor supplied by al Queda.
These facts do not fit the left’s narrative so they are ignored, even by its more articulate and civil spokesmen like AndyS.
People like the would-be British bombers are motivated by their warped view of nirvana, and they think their extreme tactics, if successfully carried out will eventuall intimidate enough of us in the West to annihilate Israel and impose a Islamic hegemony in from Afghanistan through North Africa to Spain.
This is not coming from me. It has been announced by virtually all of the vocal leaders of this virulant form of Islam from Hussein to Bin Laden to Zawahiri to Zarqawi to Ahmadinejad to Nasrallah. And it is announced in tapes suicide bombers make before they blow themselves up in markets, street corners, busses and other places where innocents congregate.
AndyS, these facts are indisputable. Why do you ignore them?
Aug 10, 2006 - 7:48 pm 25. Mark Razak:AndyS,
So explain to me how Ned Lamonts cut and run policy is going to help us fight terrorism? Explain how cut and running is going to win us more Arab friends. Cut and running will not win us more Arab friends; it will earn us their derision. When the thousands of Iraqis who chose to work with us in spite of our past propensity to cut and run, are rounded up and executed as collaborators, how many Arabs will cooperate with America now? Would Mr. Lamont and the people who voted for him even care? Or is that also entirely the fault of George W. Bush? Explain to me how abandoning Iraq to its fate will not be a tremendous psychological boost to radical Islam; that the collapse of Iraq will not be viewed by Muslims as proof that radical Islam is the only force capable of defeating the world’s lone superpower?
No one believes that terrorists can be reasoned with? Bullshit. Everyday the world demands that Israel negotiate with groups who boast loudly about their desire to rid the Middle East of Jews. Explain how Hamas and their ilk cannot but be encouraged by the Daily Kos (Mr. Lamont most famous backer) endorsement of a unilateral US arms embargo on Israel? I am sure that the Russians will then cancel their $1 billion arms deal with Iran and that Syria and Iran will refrain from re-arming Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. After all, unilateral arms embargoes worked wonders in Bosnia.
A little off-topic but why is that the Left lectures us about how Islamic terrorism is due to America`s support of Arab dictatorships and then demand that we negotiate, accept and give aid to North Korea? Would not North Koreans view this as American support for their oppressors? If North Koreans engage in terrorism against Americans would their actions be, at least, understandable?
No AndyS, Mr. Simon`s post was coherent. The narcissism he talking about is the narcissism of deluded leftists whose only concern is to gain power. Leftists who lectured us about failure to have a plan and then who fail to think about the consequences of THEIR actions, or much more likely, failed to think about them because they just don`t give a damn. Because George Bush must be defeated by any means necessary. All other priorities have been rescinded.
Aug 10, 2006 - 8:19 pm 26. Lem:Lets not forger the NYT (and LA Times defense) irresponsible disclosure of programs design to track the money these savages wire to recruit, plot and carry out dastardly deeds.
What a difference a day makes. I can only imagine the pressure put upon Joe Liberman (one of the most decent man in Washington) to “tone down” his message lest he appear to close to fear/war monger Bush. And here we are, the very next day not doubting, indeed betting on Joe’s reelection given the very circumstances that were said to be his demise.
Thank God Joe Liberman did not follow the Spaniard model; blindfold secured, elected the appeasers who’s policy of weakness has only served to embolden more terror. By AndyS logic (posted above) Israel’s incursion into Lebanon and the clearing of that threat is foolhardy too. Right AndyS? We should just sit back, relax perhaps?
If we could only clone Joe, with the ease Jajj cloned smoke over Lebanon, more courageous representatives aware and able to see the reality of terror for what it is – nothing to fog over with political spin.
Aug 10, 2006 - 8:41 pm 27. alteris:In regards to AndyS,
I can understand where you are coming from on the Iraq War. Any foreign missions where Americans are placed on the line should necessarily be questioned seriously.
The problem, as I see it, is that a rather illiberal tradition holds far too strong a position in Islamic cultures today and has for quite some time. Not to say that all Muslims are or have been subscribers to such a philosophy (the farthest thing from it, from what I have read), merely that in stark contrast to the West, ideas basically centering around a religious case against human liberty get serious support. This was the case in the West once, of course, and thankfully we have moved beyond this. Defeating terrorists one after another is never going to end the threat to western liberal democracies – there are more than enough Irans and Bin Ladens to spawn them – the “battle for hearts and minds” will. Not to make them view the US or any other state as a friend (though that would be a nice side effect), but rather to change perceptions of the world from a Hobbesian place of division, of misery, of fear that needs an imposition of heavy-handed order to a place of opportunity, potential, and progressive development demanding liberty as its highest political end.
I’m far from being an adequate solutions guy on it all, but I think I’ve got a fair idea of where things need to head. How can the Islamic world develop culturally to in effect no longer be at a war of ideas with the West? How did the West develop historically, from Athens to the Scholastics to the Renaissance to the Enlightenment and beyond (and just about everything in between) and how do trends in the Islamic world compare? By understanding the nature of the “clash of civilizations”, ours can win it by fighting effectively and transforming the very nature of the clash. Will Iraq further this end? Will crushing Hezbollah? Will confronting Iran?
As for the means, I’ll offer what little thoughts I can. War by itself will not win the day. But neither will pacifism. Islamic fascism can be buried just as soundly as its ancestor, but an alternative (liberal democracy in Islamic civilization) must be both seeded, and empowered (at times, as an effect of war) to reach its true potential and bear the fruits of peace. You do, however, need to seed it first. And that’s a task capable of just about anything other than a government.
Aug 10, 2006 - 11:34 pm 28. Gary Rosen:I didn’t vote for a Republican for President until 2004. But of all my previous votes, the one I’m the most embarrassed about and ashamed of is my vote for Jimmy Carter in 1980 – not even Clinton or McGovern.
Like the Lamont voters, I was college educated and thought of myself as a “smart guy”. The stereotypical “Reagan Democrats” were blue-collar workers with a high school education, maybe less. But they saw what I could not see and understood what I failed to understand. So much for my college education.
Aug 11, 2006 - 12:56 am 29. syn:Gary I can relate.
I am a college-educated former liberal actress who believed the fulfillment of self-indulgent narcissistic celebritism was the greatest acheivement one could endeavor. Through my work I even spent years perpetuating the Great Society myth. I was so selfish that I am ashamed to say I missed the entire Reagan Revolution. It took me 40 years, when 9/11 came, around to finally understand what I had failed to see all my life.
Which explains why I now adhere to what Reagan stated long ago:
“Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom, and then lost it, have never known it again.”
I hope it is not too late for me to help change the destructive mistakes myself and my generation has made because I now see that Roger’s daughter and her generation is going to pay a heavy price for my ignorant failure.
Aug 11, 2006 - 7:14 am 30. priornavalperson:Lamont’s position on the War on Terror, et cetera, is actually hereditary. His great uncle was Corliss Lamont, who in the 30’s and 40’s, took the same position inregards to Hitler and Stalin that His grand nephew now takes in regards to the War on Terror and its various theatres of war. Indeed, if my memory serves me correctly, Corliss Lamont continued to oppose US entry into WWII after the Pearl Harbor attack.
Aug 11, 2006 - 7:44 am 31. markus:As far as I can tell, only in America are politicians and their pajama-clad cheerleaders trying to use this week’s foiled terrorist attack for political gain. Tony Blair and Labour, even more unpopular than Bush and the Republican Party, have avoided any ludicrous attempt to link this to “the broader war on terror”, or to the mess in Iraq.
Mainly, I guess, because British voters, unlike many Republicans and “independent” eoconservatives in the USA, would find such tortured connections repulsive.
Just remember, this cuts both ways. Having the Unitary Executive accuse Ned Lamont voters of giving direct encouragement to Al-Qaeda, might bring out some of the otherwise discouraged Republican base in November. But it all fires up the not-so-discouraged Democratic base as well.
Aug 11, 2006 - 11:18 am 32. vnjagvet:markus, your point is opaque.
“Tony Blair and Labour, even more unpopular than Bush and the Republican Party, have avoided any ludicrous attempt to link this to “the broader war on terror”, or to the mess in Iraq. ”
I can see how this is not connected with Iraq. But no one is arguing that it is, are they?
I cannot see how it is not connected with the war on terror. What could possibly be more connected than this incident?
Aug 11, 2006 - 2:06 pm 33. markus:vnjagvet — “I can see how this is not connected with Iraq. But no one is arguing that it is, are they?”
Roger says that the foiled terrorist plot is bad news for the Lamont campaign. He says “no one looks dopier today” than Ned Lamont voters. Lamont of course is not at all against protecting America from Islamic terrorism, of which this event is obviouly an example. He is against, as Andy S. points out, continued US occupation of Iraq. That’s his platform, and that’s why he beat Joe Lieberman last Tuesday.
So — for the UK arrests to be bad for Lamont, this would be because Connecticut voters, as a result of this foiled criminal plot by what appears to be native born citizens of that liberal democratic country known as the United Kingdom, are now convinced of the need to redouble our efforts to build a liberal democratic society in Iraq!
Aug 11, 2006 - 4:13 pm 34. photoncourier.blogspot.com:Markus…”(Lamont) is against, as Andy S. points out, continued US occupation of Iraq. That’s his platform, and that’s why he beat Joe Lieberman last Tuesday.”
He is also against serious efforts to deal with the threat of a nuclear Iran.
It’s not all that difficult for people to extrapolate from the damage terrorists can do with non-nuclear weapons to the damage they could do with nuclear ones.
Aug 11, 2006 - 4:30 pm 35. AlanC:To all of you that believe as this says:
“I can see how this is not connected with Iraq.”
Let me say that you are idiots. What was the big liberal whine after 9/11? “You should have connected the dots!”
Anyone that doesn’t think that all of the Islamofascists aren’t related to Iraq is blind in one eye and can’t see out of the other.
Every piece of Islamic fascism, whether Saddam, Osama, JI, the brotherhood, Hezbollah, Beslan, etc., etc. is ALL related to Iraq.
It is not a cause and effect relaionship anymore than every strand of wool in a sweater has a “cause & effect relationship with each other, BUT, theyt ARE related.
We are in a war against the forces that would install the great Islamic Caliphate complete with Sharia across the world, killing any infidels that might complain.
Iraq was a large piece of this with the continual violation of the terms of the ‘91 cease fire and the flouting of all those UN resolutions. The proximate worry was that Saddam’s WMD would be placed in the hands of terrorists. The GOAL was & is to plant a cancer cell (individual freedom & democracy) in the heart of the beast.
This is not a war against one king and one kingdom. Not even against one nation-state, nor even an alliance of same (see Axis powers of WWII).
This is a war against an overarching, nascent, theocratic despotism which is made up of many disparate but inter-related pieces from the MILF in the Phillipines to the GSPC in Algeria, to the loners and self constructed cells in Atlanta, Toronto, Birmingham, London, etc.
The internecine warfare among the various Islamic factions will be held, more or less, in abeyance until the war of civilizations is won. Then Osama and Ahmaneedastraitjacket and Hassie Nassie will turn on each other. Their view is me against my cousin, but my cousin and I against the world.
Wake up!!!!!! We are the world and all those loosely related cousins are together in their hatred for us and our ways. They don’t need to be closely coupled to strive for the same goals.
I’m not going to be a dhimmi, are you?
Aug 11, 2006 - 5:30 pm