IS THE WEST CAPITULATING TO THE ENEMY? 3 NEWS ITEMS INDICATE THE ANSWER IS "YES!"

ITEM #1 - From JUSTIFY THIS! news from Paristanbul:

Thirteen people, all members of a dangerous and extremely violent gang, have been arrested following an investigation into the murder of a young Jewish man in the Paris area, French police announced Friday. ... The victim was burnt and cut on 80 percent of his body, died of his wounds as he was taken to hospital.

... the head of the gang has been identified as the 26-year-old Youssef Fofana, a Black Muslim who is calling himself "brain of the barbarians." He is already known to the police services as "extremely dangerous."...

"We think there is anti-Semitism in this affair," Rafi, Ilan's brother in law, told the European Jewish Press. "First because the killers tried to kidnap at least two other Jews and secondly because of what they said on the phone," he added. "When we said we didn't have 500,000 euros to give them they answered we should go to the synagogue and get it," Rafi stressed. "They also recited verses from the Koran. We didn't know what they were saying but the police told us."

Yet the French police deny that this was an anti-Semitic crime. (Lots more at JUSTIFY THIS! go there and RTWT.) Sheesh. This epitomizes denial.

ITEM #2 - from BRUCE BAWER via DR. HELEN, (hat tip Professor Reynolds):

In Bruce Bawer's new book, While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within, the side effects of the appeasement of Muslims by the Danish government are clear--as their government pumps more and more welfare money into the pockets of disgruntled Muslims, the rate of violence against "infidels" there increases.

Bawer points out that in Denmark, Muslims make up only 5% of the population but receive 40% of welfare outlays. Many of these immigrants are told by their leaders that Muslim law gives them the right to "cheat and lie in the countries that harbor them." They are told to view the benefits they receive as jizya--the tributes that "the infidel natives of Muslim-occupied countries are obliged to pay to Muslims in order to preserve their lives."

And the welfare offices in Denmark can be the setting for violence--termed "culture clashes" by Danish journalists. "Some clients lay waste to social security offices and hit social workers--not out of frustration but because they've learned that bullying gets them what they want. The Danish government is not repressive; welfare workers tend to be sympathetic and eager to help. Many immigrants perceive this as weakness, and exploit it, 'tyrannizing' the social workers." The Danish solution? More PC behavior--get translators to translate not only between languages but between cultures. Yeah, that will work.

ITEM #3 - from POWERLINE:

On the one hand, the culture editor of Jyllands Posten eloquently explains why he published the Mohammad cartoons. On the other hand, the Telegraph reports that Muslim clerics in Britain believe that they have won the debate: "They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not."

Karen Hughes's speech at the U.S.-Islamic World Forum suggests a certain capitulation in the American government as well. Together with capitulation comes the art of saying what is referrred to in Book IV of Gulliver's Travels as "the thing which is not":

Recently, the Palestinian people had an election and voted for change. I want the Palestinian people to know that America shares your hope for a better life and your dream of a state of your own living side by side in peace with Israel, and we are working to help you achieve both. These three items demostrate why Europe is LIKELY to fall into dhimmitude, if not drfit culturally into becoming an outright Muslim continent: They are unwilling to confront the enemy.

You cannot defeat an enemy you deny exists. And denying the nature of the enemy won't ever change the nature of the enemy. It effectively means you have surrendered to them. We need to be MORE confrontational and MORE demanding of the enemy, NOT MORE ACCOMODATING. We need to attack the enemy, not appease them. delaying the inevitable will only increase the costs and worsen the damages.

"FASTER, PLEASE!" should be our motto, "not sorry we offended you" or "sure, you can have as many nukes as you want!" or "we weren't really serious when we said terrorist groups had to be dismantled in the occupied territories."

Maybe we could lose the war aganist islamofascism, but losing a fight is better than surrendering - which is what I see happening more and more in Europe and the MSM and from the Bush Adminstration (as the Karen Hughes quote and the "Qatar/US port deal" seem to prove).

What will it take before we pull out all the stops and truly attempt defeat the enemy (instead of continiuing all the half-assed half-measures)!? LIKE: why in the hell haven't we counter-attacked Assad and Iran's because of their interference in Iraq!? Why didn't we ASSASSINATE al Sadr - who had a moderate cleric rival MURDERED within weeks of Saddam's ouster!? AND WHY DON'T WE JUST BOMB THE HELL OUT OF ALL SUSPECTED TALIBAN/AL QAEDA HIDEOUTS IN AFGHANISTAN AND WAZIRISTAN!?

There is only one reason why we are fighting with one hand behind our backs: to appease the "muslim moderates." This is stupid. "When people see a weak horse and a strong horse they are attracted to the strong horse." We are behaving like a weak horse lately. And it is emboldening the enemy.

I fear what it will take to make us fight back with all we've got. And I fear it will come too late. TIME IS NOT ON OUR SIDE.

We MUST bring Assad and Iran before the UNSC IMMEDIATELY, and if-an-when these multilateral diplomatic measures fail to change the facts on the ground, then we need to take unilateral military action - immediately. Postponing the inevitable only aids the enemy.