Saturday, February 25, 2006


FIFTY years ago today, the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev gave a "secret speech" at the 20th Communist Party Congress that changed both his country and the world. By denouncing Stalin, whose God-like status had helped to legitimize Communism in the Soviet Bloc, Khrushchev began a process of unraveling it that culminated in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union. This great deed deserves to be celebrated on its anniversary.
This is Leftist drivel. IN FACT: Stalinism only ended with and because of Stalin's death, and the Soviet Marxist state only ended because even Gorbachev's "reforms" couldn't save a totalitarian regime which couldn't:
(1) deliver the goods or services to its people; (goods and services which the people TRAPPED under Soviet TYRANNY had recently discovered were WIDELY available in the West - recently, because of detente and because of the availability of Western TV shows in places like East Germany - and specifically shows like "Dallas" which revealed to people trapped behind the Iron Curtian that people in the Free World had better material lives than they did under a system SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to better distribute "a materially good life" to its citizens); or
(2) keep up with the US in an arms race seriously sped up by Reagan; or
(3) clamp down on genuine human liberation movements like SOLIDARITY - a genuine labor movement that developed in Poland with the help of Reagan and the Pope.
IOW: it was really REAGAN and the Pope (and dissidents in the USSR and Poland and Czechoslovakia) who defeated the USSR, and not Khrushchev or Gorbachev. And more than anyone else, it was Reagan who defeated the USSR - by rebuilding the USA's confidence and our economy and the Pentagon. (Despite Leftists like me opposing him every step of the way!)

Perhaps Khrushchev ended the death camps, but not much else; he continued the arms race, and the USSR's aggressive global hegemony. Of course he had to: the USSR DEPENDED on swallowing up little economies all over the globe to keep its otherwise non-productive economy afloat.

[YUP: the USSR was sort of like a conglomerate that wasn't really making money, but was able to keep afloat by gobbling up other smaller companies and using their cash flow to fend off bankruptcy. When the USSR no longer had a state of the art military capability or the economic resources to redevelop the military capability needed to swallow up more satellites - (because Reagan's arms build up and aggressive stance toward Soviet hegemony had severely raised the cost of this) - the USSR collapsed. Like ENRON.]

It was difficult for me - and ardent Leftist - to accept this truth. But I eventually faced the facts: Reagan and Thatcher - and HAYEK - were right. Marx - and every single solitary regime that ever followed him - was wrong. By 1977, the 1.5 MILLION Vietnamese Boat People, and 3.5 MILLION the victims of Pol Pot tipped me toward the Right (by proving that the Domino theory was CORRECT, and that Marxist tyranny evil).

And then, Deng Xiao Ping's accomplishments in China and Rao's India showed that capitalism and trade were better at eradicating poverty than protectionism and socialism. The Fall of the Wall sealed the deal for me: Even the supposedly over-achieving East Germans were fleeing Marxist tyranny. Everywhere you look socialism has uttrly failed to deliver the goods - literally and figuratively. (Nothing proves this more than the Korean peninsula: the North is impoverished and enslaved; the South free and prosperous. END OF STORY!)

YET - UNBELIEVABLY: Leftists to this day refuse to credit Reagan. Leftists like Taubman and the NYTIMES - are still in DEEP DENIAL. And, it's NO SURPRISE that these same people also deny that Bush's neo-conservatism is nothing more then the contemporary version of classical liberalism, a liberalism which was once strongly put forward by FDR, Truman, and JFK. Today, Bush is only doing what each of these these late great Democrat presidents would've done were any one of them now in office.

The Left denies this about Bush for the very same reason they deny that Reagan caused the USSR to collapse: Accepting these TRUTHS means having to admit you were totally WRONG about everything. That's a hard thing to swallow. But take it from me - you Lefties out there - once you DO IT, it's very VERY liberating! (PUN INTENDED!)

Taubman ends his "ode to Khrushchev" by writing:
In his case, it wasn't the road to hell that was paved with good intentions, but the road from the Stalinist hell in which he had faithfully served, and which he had the courage to try to transcend.
This too is PURE BULLSHIT! After trying to close the chapter on Stalin - and blame Marxism's failures and genocidal rampages on "the cult of the personality", Khrushchev RUTHLESSLY put down revolts in Poland and Hungary, and brought the world to the brink of Nuclear War by using Cuba as a nuclear missile base.

These - and many MANY other despicable acts by Khrushchev - were neither "courageous or transcendent." They were the cruel acts of a tyrant seeking to enslave humanity to an evil and ineffective creed.

Khrushchev - and every other person who ever served Soviet hegemony (like Gorbachev) should always ONLY be remembered as enemies of liberty and therefore traitors to Humanity. Taubman is flat out wrong: NEITHER KHRUSHCHEV OR ANY OTHER MARXIST TYRANT SHOULD EVER BE CELEBRATED FOR ANYTHING! Especially not for inconsequential speeches fully vetted by the Politburo and the Central Committee.

Failure to accept this simple truth - that Soviet Marxism was unequivocably evil and wrong and bad and unjust, and that ALL of its leaders were complicit in countless crimes against humanity, crimes committed decade after decade after decade - only brings SHAME ON TAUBMAN, SHAME ON THE NYTIMES, AND SHAME ON THE LEFT.

Shame but no surpirse. YUP: No shock here; the Left was a Fifth Column then - appeasing and apologizing for totalitarianism, and they are a Fifth Column now - appeasing and apologizing to today's enemies and (as this column proves - when they get the chance) yesterday's enemies, too. YUP: It's a nauseatingly nostalgic "Fifth Column Redux."


The Dubai container-ship terminals deal has ZERO impact on our national security. What company manages the off-loading, storage and on-loading ships at terminals in the USA has NO IMPACT on security.

Security is independent of terminal ownership and it is NOT even merely located at the off-loading terminal; it extends to the foreign PORT where the ship is loaded - (as it MUST if we are REALLY to be safe).

When opponents of the Dubai deal exclaim that we are "surrendering out sovereignity over our ports" (as Hillary has charged), or even argue that Dubai would "control" ANY "port" - they are simply LYING. IT IS THE BIG LIE. It is a BOGUS charge. A BOGEYMAN. PURE DEMAGOGUERY. Unadulterated bullshit.

It's NO DIFFERENT than arguing that the NSA intercept program, which ACTUALLY TARGETS INTERNATIONAL CALLS OF AL QAEDA, is a "DOMESTIC SPYING SCANDAL." It's like arguing that Gitmo is a counter-productive torture-center, or that Abu Ghraib's malpractices were widespread and reflect orders from Rumsfeld. It's like arguing that Bush wants to spy on librarians. Bullshit.

Sadly, all this bullshit really does is undermine our efforts to win the THE LONG WAR. And that's the only way these polices should be measured, judged.

If the opponents of the Dubai deal believe that ALL US TERMINALS should be managed by USA companies, then they should introduce legislation to accomplish that. (Though it's interesting to note they never objected when Clinton was president and Chian and Singapore took over terminal management within many US ports. BUT OKAY: if they feel so now, FINE. FINNY THO' that the much overrated 9/11 Commission NEVER recommended any such thing!)

Or the anti-Dubai crowd should form US companies which would bid for ALL the foreign owned terminals - WHICH IS THE MAJORITY OF TERMINALS IN THE USA. They are free to do either or both. (Leftie NJ governor Corzine is rich enough and savvy enough and connected enough to the investment community to do this himself!)

What they are NOT free to do is spread bullshit. Shame on them. Shame on Malkin and Hillary and Schumer and King and Pataki and Corzine and the rest of the LYING DEMAGOGUES.

HERE'S a link to an article about some of these demagogues


BETSY'S PAGE linked to a column by MONA CHAREN about "the [California] judge stopping the execution of a brutal murderer in California because there is the slight possibility that he may experience some pain during the execution."

This convicted murderer (Michael Morales) brutally raped, tortured and then murdered his 17 year old female victim (Terri Lynn Winchell).

This convicted murderer raped and tortured and murdered his innocent victim 25 years ago.

This convicted murderer has had 25 years of exhaustive appeals - and all of his appeals failed to clear him on any ground, for any reason.

This convicted murderer should now - ACCORDING TO THE LAW - be executed for his crimes.

If some judges and some doctors in the state of California no longer feel that they can safely and humanely execute this convicted murderer by using lethal injection, then I have a perfectly good alternative method:


After all, as we learned in the TERRI SCHIAVO case - death by forced dehydration and starvation is perfectly painless and humane.

[ASIDE: Of course, the Left would NEVER sanction an execution by forced dehydration and forced starvation on a convicted rapist murderer. That would be cruel. Execution by forced dehyadration and forced starvation is only humane when it's done to a helpless patient whose family is in a dispute as to the wishes of the patient.

Which begs the question: What is it about post-modern Leftism that make Leftists defend the rights of murderers and terrorists more than the rights of regular citizens?

I believe the answer is that post-modern Leftism is essentially an ant-Western/anti-Judeo-Christian ideology which favors anything that attacks traditional Western/Judeo-Christian civilization.

Whether the Left is FOR gay marriage, or AGAINST enemy combatant status/Gitmo/renditions/the NSA intercept program; whether it is FOR ceding USA war-making authority to the UN, or AGAINST the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance; whether it is FOR bi-lingualism and multi-culturalism, or AGAINST better illegal immigration border controls - the ONLY thing which unites ALL the Left's positions is that they denigrate traditonal Western and American values, and/or weaken our ability to defend the West and America.

Nothing could more prove their Fifth Column status.]

Thursday, February 23, 2006


I've been monitoring the MSM coveage of the Port Brouhaha, and they CONSTANTLY refer to it as a CRISIS because Bush approved, "transfer of control of six of our largest ports to a foreign country."

This is such a BIG LIE that there's really only one word for it: BULLSHIT.

Here' are the FACTS:

(1) According to DHS testimony at today's Senate Armed Services Committee Briefing, the six ports in question have 829 TERMINALS - each LEASED by the LOCAL Port Authority to PRIVATE COMPANIES.

(2) These private companies ALREADY INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

(3) P&O leases 24 of these 829 terminals, and ONLY these TERMINALS will now come under the corporate control of a corporation in part owned by Dubai - which is inarguably one of our very best allies in the LONG WAR.

(4) Our PORT SECURITY has NOTHING/ZERO/ZILCH/NADA/BUPKUS to do with who off-loads/on-loads containers in the terminals in our ports, and stores them and lades them on trucks.

Ports are owned by the locatities (like the NY/NJ Port Authority) - and they stay owned by them. The US Coast Guard and DHS are in charge of security of these ports, and they stay in charge.

According to DHS, EVERY (as in 100%) container is screened before it is LOADED ON TO A SHIP HEADED HERE, and by the end of the year 80% of all containers will be checked for radiation and/or X-rayed.

This FORWARD-BASED security is what's essential to PREVENTING a terrorist from getting a container into our ports - and not checking cargo once it's in the port -THAT WOULD BE TOO LATE.

Dubai Port World ALREADY FULLY COOPERATES with this process.

The CFIUS Committeee was UNANIMOUS in determining that this transfer of leases (for only 24/829 terminals) from a British company to a holding company in part owned by our ALLY Dubai presents NO SECURITY CONCERNS. This was UNANIMOUS; the CIA and DNI, FBI and DIA AND EVERY SINGLE INTELL' ASSET IN EVERY DEPARTMENT - Treasury, State, and DOJ and DHS ALL AGREED.

THEREFORE: This brouhaha is either PURE BS or simple DEMOGUERY. Take your pick.

Bush is right. Hillary, Schumer and Michelle Malkin are totally WRONG

If the MSM got the FACTS out - instead of merely repeating the BS - REPEATING THE BIG LIE, over-and-over, then the public would quickly agree.

(MSM stories HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE. Blog round-up HERE.)

Wednesday, February 22, 2006


Lefties are fond of calling McCarthy's efforts to uncover Soviet agents in the State Department and the US military a "witchhunt." The late and vastly over-rated playwright Arthur Miller wrote an allegorical play about McCarthyism called "The Crucible" which epitomized this meme. He set ithe story in colonial Salem. To Miller and the Left, the colonial witchhunters were analogous to the commie-hunters in the 1950'S.

Too bad the allegory/analogy is way WAY OFF - nothing more than Left-wing propaganda. WHY!? Well, as we all know, witches do not really exist - in the sense that their magic is real or that they ever presented a real threat to Christianity, or a real threat to the folks in colonial Salem. But communists were real and Soviet agents were real and American communists infiltrating the State Department and the US military were REAL. Alger Hiss was really a spy for the Soviet Union, and the Rosenbergs were really spies for the Soviet Union. The VENONA PAPERS prove that McCarthy's efforts were NOT ANYTHING LIKE A WITCHHUNT. His efforts were aimed at a REAL threat, and targeted REAL spies.

When present day Lefties - like Clooney and Moore and Sheehan - accuse McCarthy and Bush and the USA of being evil paranoids, they are essentially making the same false charges that the anti-McCarthy Left made back then, and they are essentially defending the enemy - as they did back then. Their use of the McCarthy analogy really only exposes their ignorance and idiocy. The Left and the MSM were useful idiots then and they're useful idiots now.

BOTTOM-LINE: The Left's fear and hatred of McCarthy and Bush is entirely irrational; while our fear of al Qaeda IS ENTIRELY RATIONAL. McCarthy and Bush are NOT properly called witchhunters because Soviet agents and al Qaeda are neither phantoms of our imagination or innocent people; calling the jihadoterrorist enemy a clear and present danger is not a false charge, and those who make it are not hysterically irrational paranoid "witchhunters." The Clooney's and the Moore's and the Sheehan's are the true paranoids. And their paranoia serves the enemy.

Tuesday, February 21, 2006


Israel’s envoy to the United Nations, Danny Gillerman, warned the Security Council on Tuesday of the new terror triangle of Syria, Iran and Hamas. Gillerman compared the terror axis to a “new plague” which could kick start “the first world war of the 21 century.”
Well, what else would this horrifying threesome be up to, after all, their only unique talents are for islamoterror.

EURABIAN NIGHTMARES: the darkness descends...


(1) Eurabia Scholars Gather in The Hague:
... a gathering of people for a scholarly exchange of views on the preservation of Western liberties, can no longer take place in the free West without security measures." [... ] Ever since she was forced to leave Egypt Bat Ye’or has lived in Europe. She does not intend to leave. She feels old and tired, but she urges young people to continue resisting dhimmi status. “We should not ask the moderate Muslims to save us. We have to change the present situation ourselves. That is our duty to our children and our ancestors.”
(2)The Quislings of Eurabia:
"... Tim Blair wrote that so far thirteen papers have been closed down after they published the Danish cartoons. At least twelve journalists face charges and seven are in prison. “Most media organisations have taken a stand by boldly running away,” says Blair. “Journalists can spend entire careers mouthing off about their commitment to free speech without ever having the chance to properly demonstrate it. I once had a theory that the lack of repression in modern democracies drove journalists to invent McCarthyesque threats, so much did they crave an opportunity to stare down those who would silence them. Their ideal imagined foes (I’m guessing): brutish religious fundamentalists opposed to progressive notions on women’s rights, homosexuality, art, and education. Problem is, those imagined foes were always named Falwell or Robertson or Nile (or John Paul II). Faced with fundamentalist religious demands from people bearing less familiar titles, however, the media froze.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE ENTIRE CONTINENT HAS FROZEN! No surprise here: Europeans are mostly weenies whom we have always protected; they are ripe for intimidation now because they always have been!

Islam is winning because the primary means that Islam has always used to spread the faith has ALWAYS been intimidation: they have ALWAYS proselytized by use of violence. That's why the sword figures so pominently on nearly EVERY Muslim nation's flag. That intimidation is as prevalent NOW as ever, and there are too few signs that enough Europeans are willing to fight back. That's because post-modern Europeans (as a result of the Left's fifty year war on Western Civilization and the USA) no longer have faith in liberty and capitalism, Christianity, or universal rights. They're ripe for tyranny and the fervent tyrants taking advantage of them are the islamothugs in their midst.

If Sarkozy isn't elected - and if he doesn't take HARSH measures aimed at rolling back Islamic inroads into France (like "assimilation or deportation") - then it is ALL OVER FOR OLD EUROPE. I am so sure Europe is UNDEPENDABLE that I believe that our best chance at defeating islamofascism is to demolish Iran ASAP - BEFORE Europe caves in any further.

One non-violent way to bolster our side is to DEMAND that nations which do not enforce the UN's Declaration of Universal Human Rights be relegated to observer status at the UN, and that they no longer receive ANY international aid or loans. That would banish nearly every single Muslim nation to the sidelines WHERE THEY BELONG!

If Bush had balls he'd stand up for something like this instead of the right of Arabs to run our ports!


Hamas' political leader in exile said Tuesday that Iran will have a "major role" in Palestinian affairs. ... "The Ayatollah's regime will have a major role in Palestine," Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal said in a meeting in Teheran with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki. "We trust Iran to help us deal with the challenges facing us today."
And then there's this:
"... when asked if Hamas would recognize the Jewish state's legitimacy, if Israel were to withdraw to the borders before the 1967 war, Mashaal told the gathering of Tehran University students at Shahid Chamran Hall it would not. "We will not recognize Israel at any cost," answered Meshaal, Agence France Presse reported."
The battle-lines could not be drawn more clearly. All that remains is exactly when, where and how. I expect that when Iran's nuclear assets, refineries, and miltary assets are destroyed in a preemptive attack that they will counter by attacking israel with everything they've got left, and by using ALL of their jihadoterrorist stooges. Between now and then - (between now and next winter - AT THE LATEST) - Iran will buld up the military assets of gaza and the West bank and south lebanon as much as they can. they will also fortify Syria.

Therefore, defensively (in advance of this inevitable moment), Israel must keep the borders of Gaza and the West Bank as tight as possible and keep all arms shipments to Hamas to an ablsolute minimum - (a la the KARINE A). We must also do whatever we can to get rid of Assad, and neutralize Hizballah. Jordan and Egypt will be key to the success of this. I think they will be helpful since I believe that they recognize - especially after the attacks in Amman (at the wedding) and at the beach resoprts of Egypt - that their nations are at risk, too: The jihadofascists would just as soon kill them as Israelis and Americans.

The formation of the Hamas government will be meaningless, but the Israeli election could be decisive. If the Israeli public gets more worried about Hamas, Netanyahu might very well win. Then - instead of unilateral withdrawal from sections of the West Bank, we might expect NO WITHDRAWALS, and we might see the IDF becoming more active preempting terror in the West Bank and Gaza.

BOTTOM-LINE: After Iran is preemptively whacked, it won't matter whether Kadima aor Likud or Labor is in power: ALL HELL WILL BREAK LOOSE, AND ISRAEL WILL ONCE AGAIN BE IN AN EXISTENTIAL WAR.


In 2000, France's Socialist PM Lionel Jospin was leading in all the presidential polls UNTIL he made ACCURATE comments about jihadoterrorism and Hizballah during a trip to Lebanon (in February 2000). He simply called Hizballah's attacks on Israel "terrorist attacks."

IMMEDIATELY the hard-left of his base began attacking him. This is exactly when he began a 2 year downward spiral in the polls which ended on election day (when these hard-Left parties ran AGAINST Jospin instead of endorsing him) - AND JOSPIN FINISHED IN THIRD PLACE - BEHIND CHIRAC AND LE PEN!

In France, Israel is the third rail of politics on the Left; if you support Israel "too much" then you are personna non grata to the Left, which - (like their jihadist/baathist political allies and their post-modernist/culturally relativist academic comrades) - sees Israel as an "apartheid" outpost of "Western Colonialism."

Like Jospin, Summers supported Israel too much (he opposed divestment of Israeli assets in Harvard's HUGE asset funds) and this pissed off the hard-Left of Harvard's faculty. Then, when he raised accurate but "politically incorrect" questions about gender-based bifurcation in a few academic fields, it was his death knell; the Leftist faculty agitated until they finally forced him to resign this week. THE NY SUN AGREES:
Mr. Summers has shown flashes of brilliance since taking over in July 2001 as president of America's oldest, richest, and most famous university. We were among those who cheered his willingness to confront political anti-Semitism on campus; his speech in Memorial Church, where he said the signers of a petition to get the university to divest from Israel were anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent, is one of the most important ever given by a Harvard president. When Mr. Summers came under attack for remarks on gender differences, we observed - in an editorial called "The Soul of Harvard" - that Mr. Summers's travail could not be separated from his defense of Israel.
This sad news about Summers reinforces my firm belief that today's Left - (the Left of Sheehan and Moore and Belafonte and Chavez, to name just a few who have made frequent and blatant anti-Semitic comments) - is utterly reactionary and the true home of anti-Semitism. SCRATCH A LEFTIST AND YOU FIND AN ANTI-SEMITE.

[ASIDE: Summers - you may recall - was an 8 year veteran of the Clinton Adminstration and the Treasury Secretary after Rubin. He is hardly a right-winger. But Leftists simply don't tolerate digression from the "party line." They never have. If you diverge from the "party line" on abortion or the GWOT or taxes or gun owenrship rights then you have wandered off the reservation and you risk EXPULSION FROM THE PARTY. Well, they finally succeeded in "expelling" Summers.]

UPDATE: Of course it didn't help that Summers is a Jew - and not of the self-hating Upper West Side atheistic type, either.


A British company which managed the 6 largest ports in the USA sold them to a company owned in part by the government of the UAE.

Though approved by the WH, the sale has caused a BI-PARTISAN public outcry.
Most people think it's simply nuts to have our ports managed by a foreign company, let alone an Arab company - especially in a time of war. This feeling is widespread even though the port operator is NOT responsible for port security - the US government is, (and would remain so even if this deal goes through). (More stories on the brouhaha HERE and HERE and HERE.)

I HAVE A SIMPLE SOLUTION: Let's get P&O - the current British owner - or Ports World (the impending Dubai owner) - to sell the port operations to MAERSK - a DANISH shipping company. They're one of the LARGEST shipping container companies in the world, and already manage dozens and dozens of major ports; in fact, Maersk's APM TERMINALS division is the THIRD LARGEST port operator in the world.

I think most Americans trust the Danes - and would LOVE to see the Danes get this business, especially NOW! DOWN WITH DUBAI! UP WITH DENMARK!



UPDATE: Welcome VODKAPUNDIT readers and JAWA REPORT readers! And Hotline's BLOGOMETER, too!

Monday, February 20, 2006


January 23rd: Iran shifts their assets out of Europe (they've had none in the USA since 1979).

Febrary 15th: Syria shifts out of the dollar and into the euro.

Febraury 19th: Iranian mullahs issue a fatwa approving the use of nukes against the USA in retaliation for any attack against Iran (or the ummah).

February 20th: Bin Laden and Zawahiri have now BOTH released very theatening tapes; it's a rare event when they do so simultaneously.

Are these moves in merely anticipation of a possible US/EU/UNSC move against Assad and against Iran's nuke program (such as sanctions - a move which can EASILY be thwarted by a veto by Russia of China, two nations very friendly to both Syria and Iran), OR ARE THEY IN ANTICIPATION OF A COORDINATED JIHADOTERRORIST STRIKE AGAINST THE USA AND THE EU - AN ATTACK WHICH ASSAD AND IRAN KNOW TO BE IMMINENT?

Remember: Bin Laden said that attackers are already in the USA and are planning a major attack. AND REMEMBER: each succeeding attack by al Qaeda against the USA has always been much bigger than the preceding attack. Also note that defenses in and around DC have been visibly stepped up recently.

Iran and Syria and several jihadoterrorist groups - including Hamas, Hizballah and al Qaeda and Zarqawi and al Sadr - cooperate in relation to their strategy against the USA and Israel. An attack by jihadoterrorist proxies against the USA and Israel may be what Iran and Syria and Bin Laden and Zawahiri -- WHO ARE ALL UNDER MORE AND MORE PRESSURE -- think they need in order to divert the pressure. Stay tuned.


Does anybody out there really think that Putin is negotiating with Iran over nukes?

Sheesh: he's the bastard who building the damn program for them AND selling them anti-aircraft missile systems!

Russia's current effort (which the NYTIMES describes as currently "stalled') is nothing but a HOAX and charade - A DELIBERATE STALLING EFFORT to allow Iran to get nukes.

LOOKIT: Putin is the same former-KBG agent and present-tyrant who helped Saddam sneak his WMD stockpiles into Syria before the war. We shouldn't trust him for a second. Every second we do trust him is another second Iran gets to build nukes and harden their defenses.


Waiting only strengthens their hand.


Gateway is on the story. These torchings come on the heels of 15 torched churches in Nigeria and two dozen torched churches in France during the Paris Intifada.

The churches torched in France had nothing to do with the accidental electrocution of the Muslim youths (which was used as the pretext/excuse for the Paris Intifada) - THEY WEREN'T EVEN IN PARIS! The churches in Nigeria and Pakistan had NOTHING to do with the Danish Cartoons - THEY WEREN'T EVEN LUTHERAN CHURCHES!

These attacks can ONLY be described as deliberate attacks on the faith of the West. IT'S JIHAD.

AS I'VE WRITTEN BEFORE: if non-Muslims had torched mosques then the Lefties and the MSM they control would be screaming bloody murder, calling for impeachment, and indictments in the ICC.

SO, WHAT SHOULD WE DO? These violent anti-Christian/anti-West acts MUST have consequences; we must establish a deterrence.

To that end, we should first tell the leading Muslim mullahs in each and every country that we will retaliate: an eye for an eye - and we will bomb a mosque for every church destroyed. We could show them a list of the GPS-targeting coordinates of every mosque in the world.

If this fails, we might have to offically warn the House of Saud - the protectors of Mecca and Medina: if you do not call off and clamp down on this global jihad, (shut evey madrassa and every mosque and silence every mullah that promotes jihad), then we will destroy the so called al Aksa mosque, and maybe even nuke Mecca and Medina.

Others have said this before and been met with reproach and castigation. Well, after these global inifadas I now believe that IT'S TIME THAT WE STOPPED CONSIDERING THIS METHOD OF COUNTER-ATTACKING AS "OUT-OF-BOUNDS." Letting THE ENEMY know that we will counter-attack in kind - BUT TO THE ENTH DEGREE - should be a threat that's openly on the table. That's the only way a deterrent can work.

Contrary to what Lefties and appeasers may feel, we do not "cool things down" by giving in, by surrendering our hard-won universal human rights to the threats of jihadothuggery. ON THE CONTRARY: this only encourages them to use more thuggery and threats and riots and violence.

Contrary to what Lefties and appeasers may feel, clearly setting out extremely horrific counter-measures actually LESSENS the chances of us being attacked or of there being an continued escalation of tensions.

That's why we must make a clear statement on what we will do. Lack of clarity and lack of resolve will only lead to more jihadothuggery and less freedom, to more intifadas and less peace.

Israel did not defeat the intifadas by playing nice with jihadoterrorism; they counter-attacked; they assassinated the leaders of the enemy, and they fought and fought and fought and fought back. It's time we showed the same resolve - and the same courage and the same willingness to use every means necessary and every tool in our kit.

Sunday, February 19, 2006


Most reasonable people believe that the only reason the Iranians were LYING to the IAEA for 20 years about the extent of their nuclear operations was because they were secretly developing a nuclear weapons program. WELL: If the genocidally racist and totalitarianisitically tyrannical anachronistic Iranian mullahs really want nuke weapons, why don't we give them a few of ours? We've got plenty of extra ones.

We can have the US AIR FORCE deliver some, and others can be delivered by our submarines off their coast. Heh.



Bottom-line: If Christians ANYHWERE torched 15 mosques, then the Left and the MSM would be going nuclear! IT WOULD BE ABU GHRAIB TO THE TENTH POWER!

And yet, when Muslims do it and there's hardly a peep.

One Thing this proves is how LITTLE we all expect of Muslims; yes: ALL MUSLIMS - Africans, Asian, Arab, etc; and YES: this is a generalization, but one based on case after case after case; we expect them to behave like brutal barbaric genocidal racist savages - FOR GOOD REASONS. They have routinely behaved this way in the past; they continue to.

I say: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. It is time we fought back: Europe should deport (as in SEND HOME) ALL Muslims who refuse to assimilate and obey the rules and norms of Europe. AND, I say: it's time the Free World HALTED ALL AID, LOANS, AND TRADE with any and all nations which do NOT prohibit polygamy, consanguinous marriage, and misogyny. We mustn't tolerate OR ENABLE IN ANY WAY those who sytematically disenfranchise people of their UNIVERSAL human rights becuase of their gender or religion - AS MUSLIMS ROUTINELY DO IN THE NATIONS THEY CONTROL.


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.
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.