My Anger Grows Deeper and Deeper

Its been three years since I started trying to combat left-wing lies and anti-Americanism – first with an e-mail group and, now for one year, my own weblog. I’d always been a news and political junkie, but with the blog I substantially increased my exposure to world and national issues by putting in 3-5 hours a day of research and writing. My problem is simple: every day I find myself growing angrier and angrier as I more and more discover just how extensive the web of lies and the hate-America fifth column has penetrated areas of government, public schools, colleges, the media and entertainment. Every day there are new instances of people who ought to be thanking God they were privileged to be born in this great country actually undermining the institutions and civic commitment to the country of their birth.

From the forged documents of Dan Rathergate to the Katrina lies, from the Valerie Plame-Joseph Wilson plot to the incredible, subtle suggestions from Howard Dean and Harry Reid that President Bush might possibly have been involved in a 9/11 plot, we get nothing but lies that are then amplified and spread by the New York Times and the TV networks. This is not disagreement with policy; this is criminal fraud.

And this dishonesty extends to the treatment of the only democratic country in the Middle East, Israel, a country forced to defend itself against barbaric murderers every day of its existence. The reporting by the American press in publishing doctored and stage-managed photographs over and over again, and long after their fakery was well known, and the false news reports that completely ignored the human shields being exploited by the Hezbollah leave no doubt that our press cannot be trusted. The major media have a left-wing agenda that is the driving force in all their reporting, and, with respect to Israel, that agenda is accompanied by anti-Semitism as well.

The anti-Semitism and the refusal to face facts about Islamofascist terrorism is not centered only on Israel, and I am not the only one to see this and be angered by it. A fellow blogger had this to say today:

TheAnchoressonline.com
“This is becoming an appalling habit in the press and by politicians. An Islamic fundamentalist shoots Jews in a Synagogue, and it’s some sort of random incident. An Islamic fundamentalist uses his SUV to kill people partly in front of a Synagogue, and in what would appear to be a somewhat “Jewish neighborhood” and the press takes several hours to cover the story (probably looking for the appropriate “frame,”) and until someone in authority can be found to sing out, “ROAD RAGE”! Yeah, that’s the ticket! Road rage! Mayor Newsom sees no problem, here…a “relatively young” person, obviously confused! Yes, that’s the ticket!

Omeed Aziz Popal, the poor confused youngster, is 29 years old.

Can you imagine, if someone had (God forbid!) driven a car into 14 black people, how quickly the press would have managed to cover the story? Can you imagine that Mayor Newsom would call it “road rage” and suggest that there really probably wasn’t a “hate crime” attached to the action?

What the hell is wrong with the press, what the hell is wrong with the leadership? Why are they so incapable of calling anti-semitism what it is, of calling a terrorist action what it is? Newsflash, folks, when someone decides to drive his car into people as they’re crossing the street, it’s the same as tossing a molotov cocktail at them, it’s the same as tossing a grenade. It is destructive, it kills people and terrifies communities, that is called t-e-r-r-o-r-i-s-m! Hey, guess what, fellas, we don’t need no stinking anthrax to kill and terrify…we can use our cars.”

Note: The shooting of six people happened on July 28 by a Muslim named, Naveed Afzal Haq. The deliberate car crash happened on August 29.

Yes, what the hell IS wrong with the press and with people who never have anything good to say about this country and who can’t tell the truth about anything unless it fits their preconceived agenda? The day has arrived when all knowledgeable people will get all their information about what is happening in the world only from trusted websites. Broadcast TV and newspapers will continue their downward spiral until they finally completely disintegrate. Even the just released hostages from FoxNews blather about what wonderful people the Palestinian barbarians are. I’m really angry.

More Katrina Lies and Videotape

The left and its media and Hollywood accomplices are using this Katrina anniversary once again to smear President Bush. The lies told by the Associated Press about the levees have been well documented (See “Oops, Bush Didn’t Lie, Sorry About That” on my website, in March, 2006), and as ‘Popular Mechanics’ pointed out, “In fact, the response to Hurricane Katrina was by far the largest--and fastest-rescue effort in U.S. history, with nearly 100,000 emergency personnel arriving on the scene within three days of the storm's landfall.

Dozens of National Guard and Coast Guard helicopters flew rescue operations that first day--some just 2 hours after Katrina hit the coast. Hoistless Army helicopters improvised rescues, carefully hovering on rooftops to pick up survivors. On the ground, "guardsmen had to chop their way through, moving trees and recreating roadways," says Jack Harrison of the National Guard. By the end of the week, 50,000 National Guard troops in the Gulf Coast region had saved 17,000 people; 4000 Coast Guard personnel saved more than 33,000.”

Once again the bloggers and some honest journalists have to rise up and expose these smears as the Democrat machine goes back into action. Just this week we learned that the entire Plame-Wilson affair was a left-wing media plot to discredit the President. We cannot believe ANYTHING the mainstream media says, not about Katrina, not about Bush, Cheney or Rove, not about Iraq, not about Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah, not about anything. Dan Rather, where are you?

Katrina lies and videotape
By Star Parker, Townhall.com
Monday, August 28, 2006

Spike Lee took his cameras and crew to New Orleans to film a documentary about Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. The four-hour production, which aired on HBO, is, unfortunately, about as destructive as was the disaster it depicts.

At a time when we need light and understanding, Lee has delivered darkness, anger and hatred. Those who will be hurt the most by the distorted and untruthful picture that Lee has concocted are the poor blacks he purports to want to help.

It's clear that Lee did not go to Louisiana in search of truth. He went to Louisiana to carefully construct a documentary that would support the conclusion he had already reached. That conclusion: poor blacks suffered and died as result of the indifference of a detached and racist Bush administration in general and President Bush in particular.

The film commits egregious journalistic sins of commission and omission, carefully selecting and editing footage to indict Bush, including only commentators who support the conclusions that Lee had already reached, and selectively omitting reams of information relevant to the complex truth of what actually happened.

Since Lee already knew the truth, he didn't have much need to examine material such as "A Failure of Initiative," Congress' investigation into Katrina, which shows failure and breakdown at all levels of government _ local, state and federal. It also was of little interest to Lee that primary responsibility for disaster preparation and management is at the level of local and state government, not federal.

But New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin comes off in the production as just one cool dude. He shows up at regular intervals over the four-hour production, talking New Orleans jive and being one straightforward sincere guy who was trying to do his job.

No mention is made of the hurricane simulations and emergency evacuation plans that he totally ignored. No reference is made to the famous picture of the parking lot filled with flooded school buses that Nagin chose not to use to evacuate residents in poor areas.

Central to the Katrina story is the failure of the levees. Indeed, Lee's film is called "When the Levees Broke."

But who is responsible for ignoring the warnings over the years that the levees protecting New Orleans were inadequate? Bush? Of course not.

It was Louisiana's congressional delegation that was responsible to ensure that their constituents' interests were being represented and that funds were being appropriated to fix sub-standard levees. But not a single Louisiana senator or congressman is ever mentioned or appears in "When the Levees Broke."

William Jefferson, New Orleans' congressman for the last 16 years, has been under FBI investigation over the last year under bribery charges. However, Jefferson is a Democrat and a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. To shine a light on his possible, and likely, neglect of representing his constituents' interests would have distracted from the single message that Bush was the evil genius behind this tragedy.

Of course, no mention is made of Jefferson's trip home, when he commandeered a National Guard truck in the middle of rescue efforts to take him to his house to retrieve personal property.

Given what Lee leaves out, it's particularly cheap and sick that he felt it relevant to include footage of Condoleezza Rice supposedly shopping for designer shoes at the time the disaster was sweeping New Orleans. As we know, Condi is our secretary of state, who has no responsibility for any of these matters.

After showing what appears to be a disengaged Bush, assuring that help is on the way, Lee pans, in contrast, to Harry Belafonte, who talks about the generous offers of help that came from President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.

I have written previously of the love of affair of the black left, particularly the Rev. Jesse Jackson, with Third World dictators. There is virtually no freedom of the press and speech in Venezuela. If Lee were a citizen of Venezuela and made a similar film attacking Chavez, he would disappear forever after the first showing.

Perhaps most sad is that in four hours Lee has nothing positive to say about America and Americans. No mention is made of the $700 million from private citizens and churches that were committed in the first few days of the tragedy. No mention is made of the thousands of homes across the nation that welcomed evacuees. No mention is made of the tens of thousands who have successfully rebuilt their lives.

Spike Lee clearly has little affection for the country that gives him free expression and has made him wealthy. He has produced a self-indulgent, deceitful and exploitive film about a tragedy. His message will give poor blacks more reasons to feel powerless, to feel lost, to feel that others bear responsibility for their lives, to hate, and to stay poor. Star Parker

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over"

- Joseph Goebbels

A Review of Why We Are In Iraq, Part II

“DESPITE VIRTUAL round-the-clock coverage of the war between Israel and Hezbollah, one important aspect remains poorly understood: the reaction of the "Arab street."

Turn on any Arab television channel, though, and you can't miss the rage and widespread support for Hezbollah and Hamas: streets roiling with protesters, callers to talk programs denouncing Israel and the United States, and clerics defending Hezbollah and calling for holy war.

Five years after 9/11, the West still struggles to understand the rage that pushes Arab masses to view radical groups as heroic forces of resistance. On one extreme, there are those who indict Islam or Arab culture. On the other, there are those who blame it on Israeli aggression and U.S. bias for Israel. Both are equally simplistic explanations of the contemporary Arab mindset, which stems largely from how Arab governments have deliberately nurtured this anger toward Israel -- and increasingly the United States -- for more than five decades. Providence Journal, August 25, 2006

Khairi Abaza, a former official of the Egyptian Wafd Party, is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

In part I of this series, I explained that the basic American strategy in fighting Islamic terrorism is 1. to draw the terrorists into Iraq and kill them there, and 2. to try to change the deadly dynamics and cycles of violence in the Middle East by introducing democracy and an opportunity to join the 21st century to its inhabitants. That this would be a long and messy process was well understood by anyone with an open mind and with some knowledge of the history of the area. That this also takes courage, patriotism and determination is lost on a large segment of the American population that has none of the above. I also presented in Part I an excerpt from a speech by Haim Harari, former President of the Weizmann Institute of Science, given two years ago. Here in Part II is the rest of his speech:


“A few more years may pass before everybody acknowledges that it is a World War, but we are already well into it. The first element is the suicide murder. Suicide murders are not new invention but they have been made popular, if I may use this expression, only lately. Even after September 11, it seems that most of the Western World does not yet understand this weapon. It is a very potent psychological weapon. Its real direct impact is relatively minor. The total number of casualties from hundreds of suicide murders within Israel in the last three years is much smaller than those due to car accidents. September 11 was quantitatively much less lethal than many earthquakes. More people die from AIDS in one day in Africa than all the Russians who died in the hands of Chechnya-based Moslem suicide murderers since that conflict started. Saddam killed every month more people than all those who died from suicide murders since the Coalition occupation of Iraq.

So what is all the fuss about suicide killings? It creates headlines. It is spectacular. It is frightening. It is a very cruel death with bodies dismembered and horrible severe lifelong injuries to many of the wounded. It is always shown on television in great detail. One such murder, with the help of hysterical media coverage, can destroy the tourism industry of a country for quite a while, as it did in Bali and in Turkey.

But the real fear comes from the undisputed fact that no defense and no preventive measures can succeed against a determined suicide murderer. This has not yet penetrated the thinking of the Western World. The U.S. and Europe are constantly improving their defense against the last murder, not the next one. We may arrange for the best airport security in the world. But if you want to murder by suicide, you do not have to board a plane in order to explode yourself and kill many people. Who could stop a suicide murder in the midst of the crowded line waiting to be checked by the airport metal detector? How about the lines to the check-in counters in a busy travel period? Put a metal detector in front of every train station in Spain and the terrorists will get the buses. Protect the buses and they will explode in movie theaters, concert halls, supermarkets, shopping malls, schools and hospitals. Put guards in front of every concert hall and there will always be a line of people to be checked by the guards and this line will be the target, not to speak of killing the guards themselves. You can somewhat reduce your vulnerability by preventive and defensive measures and by strict border controls but not eliminate it and definitely not in the war in a defensive way. And it is a war.

What is behind the suicide murders? Money, power and cold-blooded murderous incitement, nothing else. It has nothing to do with true fanatic religious beliefs. No Moslem preacher has ever blown himself up. No son of an Arab politician or religious leader has ever blown himself. No relative of anyone influential has done it. Wouldn't you expect some of the religious leaders to do it themselves, or to talk their sons into doing it, if this is truly a supreme act of religious fervor? Aren't they interested in the benefits of going to Heaven? Instead, they send outcast women, naive children, retarded people and young incited hotheads. They promise them the delights, mostly sexual, of the next world, and pay their families handsomely after the supreme act is performed and enough innocent people are dead.

Suicide murders also have nothing to do with poverty and despair. The poorest region in the world, by far, is Africa. It never happens there. There are numerous desperate people in the world, in different cultures, countries and continents. Desperation does not provide anyone with explosives, reconnaissance and transportation. There was certainly more despair in Saddam's Iraq then in Paul Bremmer's Iraq, and no one exploded himself. A suicide murder is simply a horrible, vicious weapon of cruel, inhuman, cynical, well-funded terrorists, with no regard to human life, including the life of their fellow countrymen, but with very high regard to their own affluent well-being and their hunger for power.

The only way to fight this new "popular" weapon is identical to the only way in which you fight organized crime or pirates on the high seas: the offensive way. Like in the case of organized crime, it is crucial that the forces on the offensive be united and it is crucial to reach the top of the crime pyramid. You cannot eliminate organized crime by arresting the little drug dealer in the street corner. You must go after the head of the "Family".

If part of the public supports it, others tolerate it, many are afraid of it and some try to explain it away by poverty or by a miserable childhood, organized crime will thrive and so will terrorism. The United States understands this now, after September 11. Russia is beginning to understand it. Turkey understands it well. I am very much afraid that most of Europe still does not understand it. Unfortunately, it seems that Europe will understand it only after suicide murders will arrive in Europe in a big way. In my humble opinion, this will definitely happen. The Spanish trains and the Istanbul bombings are only the beginning. The unity of the Civilized World in fighting this horror is absolutely indispensable. Until Europe wakes up, this unity will not be achieved." Haim Harari

Washington Post, August 25, 2006, Excerpts:

Between March 21, 2003, when the first military death was recorded in Iraq, and March 31, 2006, there were 2,321 deaths among American troops in Iraq. Seventy-nine percent were a result of action by hostile forces. Troops spent a total of 592,002 "person-years" in Iraq during this period. The ratio of deaths to person-years, .00392, or 3.92 deaths per 1,000 person-years, is the death rate of military personnel in Iraq….

The death rate for African American men ages 20 to 34 in Philadelphia was 4.37 per 1,000 in 2002, 11 percent higher than among troops in Iraq.

A Review of Why We Are In Iraq, Part I

Although the mainstream press likes to portray our President as ‘not too bright’, I would submit that he understands what the civilized world is facing, and what must be done to save it, better than any journalist or academic does, and that his rationales for a pre-emptive strike into Iraq continue to make excellent geo-political sense – even as we struggle to contain the violence that is endemic to the entire region. The opposition to President Bush’s Iraq policy can be seen as stemming from four causes:

1 opposition to any and all of the President’s policies based on blind hatred of him. No facts or logic can overcome this, and I won’t try.
2. a desire to defeat the President to gain political power. In some, this overcomes patriotism and a desire to do what is best for this country, but I will assume that some Democrats will put their country first if convinced that a particular policy is wise.
3. an unfamiliarity with the history of the Middle East and the root causes of the terrorism emanating from there.
4. an honest belief that it is a mistake, or that its goals are beyond our capability.

Let’s put aside the arguments over weapons of mass destruction and the need to protect the oil routes for a moment and focus on rationales for the invasion of Iraq that have gained much less attention and discussion – the need to break the vicious cycles that have been occurring there in that part of the world.

A great speech was given two years ago by Haim Harari, former President of the Weizmann Institute of Science. It was a very long speech, and I am going to excerpt part of his speech here and part of it in a future posting.

WorldThreats.com
"As you know, I usually provide the scientific and technological "entertainment" in our meetings, but, on this occasion, our Chairman suggested that I present my own personal view on events in the part of the world from which I come. I have never been and I will never be a Government official and I have no privileged information. My perspective is entirely based on what I see, on what I read and on the fact that my family has lived in this region for almost 200 years. You may regard my views as those of the proverbial taxi driver, which you are supposed to question, when you visit a country.

I could have shared with you some fascinating facts and some personal thoughts about the Israeli-Arab conflict. However, I will touch upon it only in passing. I prefer to devote most of my remarks to the broader picture of the region and its place in world events. I refer to the entire area between Pakistan and Morocco, which is predominantly Arab, predominantly Moslem, but includes many non-Arab and also significant non-Moslem minorities.

Why do I put aside Israel and its own immediate neighborhood? Because Israel and any problems related to it, in spite of what you might read or hear in the world media, is not the central issue, and has never been the central issue in the upheaval in the region. Yes, there is a 100 year-old Israeli-Arab conflict, but it is not where the main show is. The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with Israel. The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Moslem regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel. The frequent reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of civilians in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel. Saddam Hussein did not invade Kuwait, endanger Saudi Arabia and butcher his own people because of Israel. Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60's because of Israel. Assad the Father did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens in one week in El Hamma in Syria because of Israel. The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had nothing to do with Israel. The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had nothing to do with Israel, and I could go on and on and on.

The root of the trouble is that this entire Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard of the word, and would have been so even if Israel would have joined the Arab league and an independent Palestine would have existed for 100 years. The 22 member countries of the Arab league, from Mauritania to the Gulf States, have a total population of 300 millions, larger than the US and almost as large as the EU before its expansion. They have a land area larger than either the US or all of Europe. These 22 countries, with all their oil and natural resources, have a combined GDP smaller than that of Netherlands plus Belgium and equal to half of the GDP of California alone. Within this meager GDP, the gaps between rich and poor are beyond belief and too many of the rich made their money not by succeeding in business, but by being corrupt rulers. The social status of women is far below what it was in the Western World 150 years ago. Human rights are below any reasonable standard, in spite of the grotesque fact that Libya was elected Chair of the UN Human Rights commission. According to a report prepared by a committee of Arab intellectuals and published under the auspices of the U.N., the number of books translated by the entire Arab world is much smaller than what little Greece alone translates. The total number of scientific publications of 300 million Arabs is less than that of 6 million Israelis. Birth rates in the region are very high, increasing the poverty, the social gaps and the cultural decline. And all of this is happening in a region, which only 30 years ago, was believed to be the next wealthy part of the world, and in a Moslem area, which developed, at some point in history, one of the most advanced cultures in the world.

It is fair to say that this creates an unprecedented breeding ground for cruel dictators, terror networks, fanaticism, incitement, suicide murders and general decline. It is also a fact that almost everybody in the region blames this situation on the United States, on Israel, on Western Civilization, on Judaism and Christianity, on anyone and anything, except themselves.”
Haim Harari

Iraq is a messy place right now, but the terrorists have basically gathered here in Iraq rather than in the United States because Iraq is the battleground WE have picked to start to fight this battle, and Iraq is the place where the conditions described by Mr. Harari are starting to be changed. These changes can not be brought about without a major mess being made along the way, but before these brutes get their hands on nuclear weapons, these changes must be made. Pray God there is time and that the elites in the USA who are opposing every effort in their ignorance do not succeed. Stay tuned for the next installment, or go here to read the entire speech.

Fair Is Fair; Don’t Cloud the Immigration Issue

As all of you know from previous articles here, I want illegal immigration stopped. I want a fence built, I want a ten-fold increase in the Border Patrol, I want employers deliberately hiring illegals put in jail – and then I want put in place a fair program of earned citizenship – fair to the illegals here and fair to those who entered by playing by the rules.

However, to be completely fair about this issue, and in response to Pat Buchanan’s recent book, “State of Emergency” (I think Pat Buchanan gives conservatism a bad name), I present the following article:

Facts in way in immigration debate

By Linda Chavez
August 24, 2006, San Diego Union

Facts are stubborn things, unfortunately not nearly as stubborn as factoids. And nowhere do factoids trump facts more frequently than in the immigration debate. The latest example comes from Pat Buchanan in his new book, “State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America,” where Buchanan regurgitates factoids ad nauseam, all with the purpose of blaming Mexicans for just about everything wrong with America.

The problem is, some of Buchanan's “facts” are mere factoids. Let's take one of the most stubborn factoids to emerge in the immigration debate, one that Buchanan cites as do other commentators: 95 percent of all the outstanding homicide warrants in Los Angeles, which total 1,200-1,500, are for illegal aliens. Sounds pretty damning, that is until you try to pin down where it came from and what it means.

I've been tracking this particular factoid for a while, since it crops up over and over again, and I've even exchanged e-mails with the source, Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute. In 2004, Mac Donald wrote an article for the institute's City Journal, “The Illegal Alien Crime Wave,” in which she first used this statistic.

The problem is, the Los Angeles Police Department doesn't collect information on the immigration status of criminals, much less suspects, so there is no database on how many illegal aliens are wanted on outstanding homicide warrants. When I asked Mac Donald to provide her source, she said, “The LAPD fugitive warrants section gave me that figure.” I don't doubt Mac Donald's word – she is an old friend. Someone, Mac Donald won't say who, undoubtedly gave her this misinformation. But several calls to the LAPD elicited the same response: We don't collect such information – which was borne out by searching all available databases and talking to respected criminologists.

This particular factoid has been debunked by several sources, including the Los Angeles Times and Snopes.com, but it just won't die. And other factors make the statistic highly suspicious. In all of 2004, there were only 518 homicides in Los Angeles, suggesting that the number of outstanding warrants (no matter whom they are for) must date back over many years, unless we are to assume that all murders in 2004 were committed by at least two illegal aliens and that no one has ever been arrested for any recent homicide.

The statistics on immigrants and crime are shocking – but not for the reasons Buchanan et al. would have you believe. It's hard to pin down statistics on how many crimes are committed by immigrants (or all Hispanics, for that matter) because the Bureau of Justice Statistics (the largest source of data) collects information broken down by race and gender, but not ethnicity or country of birth. It is possible, however, to examine who's in jail or prison by nativity, which should be a pretty good proxy for determining who is committing serious crimes. And when you look at this data, the results are little short of amazing.

University of California professor Ruben Rumbaut, an expert on immigration and crime, looked at 2000 census data on the institutionalized population in the United States, most of whom are in prisons, and came up with these astonishing facts. Immigrants are far less likely to be in jail or prison than other U.S. residents (the database covers federal, state, county and local prisons and jails). Of the U.S. population of 45.2 million men ages 18-39 (those most likely to be in the criminal population), 3 percent were incarcerated, or about 1.3 million at the time of the 2000 census. But of these, blacks, whites and U.S.-born Hispanics had incarceration rates that dwarfed those of immigrants. Only .7 percent of Mexican-born males were in prison or jail, compared with 3.51 percent of all U.S.-born males, which includes 1.71 percent of non-Hispanic whites, 11.6 percent of blacks and 5.9 percent of Mexican-Americans. Indeed, for all foreign-born groups, immigrants have lower incarceration rates than all U.S.-born racial and ethnic groups do, including whites.

But these facts have yet to banish the factoid that immigrants commit more crimes than the native born. And you can bet that demagogues such as Buchanan will continue to ignore the facts and repeat the factoids.

Chavez is the author of the new book, “Betrayal: How Union Bosses Shake Down Their Members and Corrupt American Politics.”

Illegal immigration must stop, and a fairer apportionment of legal quotas must be created to prevent any one group from becoming overwhelmingly dominant in our population, but anyone who came through Hurricane Charley in South Florida knows that we would still be getting soaked daily by rain water pouring through destroyed roofs and that most of our buildings would still look like piles of rubble if it were not for the Mexican and Mexican-American workers who saved us. They were the only workers willing and able to do the work in the numbers we needed. I’m sure that the people in Louisiana and Mississippi are experiencing the same circumstances right now.

An Incredible Column by Michael Barone

I started this site as an outgrowth of my attempts to counter the hate-America nonsense being fostered by the multiculturalists and many liberals intent on destroying the foundations and institutions of this country. I am publishing this column today by Michael Barone because he says, much more eloquently than I ever could, much of what I have been trying to point out:

August 21, 2006
Our Covert Enemies
By Michael Barone
RealClearPolitics.com

In our war against Islamo-fascist terrorism, we face enemies both overt and covert. The overt enemies are, of course, the terrorists themselves. Their motives are clear: They hate our society because of its freedoms and liberties, and want to make us all submit to their totalitarian form of Islam. They are busy trying to wreak harm on us in any way they can. Against them we can fight back, as we did when British authorities arrested the men and women who were plotting to blow up a dozen airliners over the Atlantic.

Our covert enemies are harder to identify, for they live in large numbers within our midst. And in terms of intentions, they are not enemies in the sense that they consciously wish to destroy our society. On the contrary, they enjoy our freedoms and often call for their expansion. But they have also been working, over many years, to undermine faith in our society and confidence in its goodness. These covert enemies are those among our elites who have promoted the ideas labeled as multiculturalism, moral relativism and (the term is Professor Samuel Huntington's) transnationalism.

At the center of their thinking is a notion of moral relativism. No idea is morally superior to another. Hitler had his way, we have ours -- who's to say who is right? No ideas should be "privileged," especially those that have been the guiding forces in the development and improvement of Western civilization. Rich white men have imposed their ideas because of their wealth and through the use of force. Rich white nations imposed their rule on benighted people of color around the world. For this sin of imperialism they must forever be regarded as morally stained and presumptively wrong. Our covert enemies go quickly from the notion that all societies are morally equal to the notion that all societies are morally equal except ours, which is worse.

These are the ideas that have been transmitted over a long generation by the elites who run our universities and our schools, and who dominate our mainstream media. They teach an American history with the good parts left out and the bad parts emphasized. We are taught that some of the Founding Fathers were slaveholders -- and are left ignorant of their proclamations of universal liberties and human rights. We are taught that Japanese-Americans were interned in World War II -- and not that American military forces liberated millions from tyranny. To be sure, the great mass of Americans tend to resist these teachings. By the millions they buy and read serious biographies of the Founders and accounts of the Greatest Generation. But the teachings of our covert enemies have their effect.

Of course, this distorts history. We are taught that American slavery was the most evil institution in human history. But every society in history has had slavery. Only one society set out to and did abolish it. The movement to abolish first the slave trade and then slavery was not started by the reason-guided philosophies of 18th century France. It was started, as Adam Hochschild documents in his admirable book "Bury the Chains," by Quakers and Evangelical Christians in Britain, followed in time by similar men and women in America. The slave trade was ended not by Africans, but by the Royal Navy, with aid from the U.S. Navy even before the Civil War.

Nevertheless, the default assumption of our covert enemies is that in any conflict between the West and the Rest, the West is wrong. That assumption can be rebutted by overwhelming fact: Few argued for the Taliban after Sept. 11. But in our continuing struggles, our covert enemies portray our work in Iraq through the lens of Abu Ghraib and consider Israel's self-defense against Hezbollah as the oppression of virtuous victims by evil men. In World War II, our elites understood that we were the forces of good and that victory was essential. Today, many of our elites subject our military and intelligence actions to fine-tooth-comb analysis and find that they are morally repugnant.

We have always had our covert enemies, but their numbers were few until the 1960s. But then the elite young men who declined to serve in the military during the Vietnam War set out to write a narrative in which they, rather than those who obeyed the call to duty, were the heroes. They have propagated their ideas through the universities, the schools and mainstream media to the point that they are the default assumptions of millions. Our covert enemies don't want the Islamo-fascists to win. But in some corner of their hearts, they would like us to lose.

Copyright 2006 Creators Syndicate

There has never been another country like the United States of America, and when we are gone, there never will be another. There will never be another country that welcomed waves of penniless and unschooled immigrants and made them free and prosperous. There will never be another country that recognized the evils of slavery and decimated a generation of its own young men to end it. There will never be another country that fought and won a ferocious war – only to raise up its former enemies. There will never be another country that responds overwhelmingly to calamities on the other side of the world with its military and its generosity. I have such contempt for those whose narcissism or self-hatred blinds them and drives them to lash out and destroy what they are too ignorant to value, and I will go to my grave fighting to defeat them.

Profile? Definitely Yes; Generalize? Definitely Not

It’s being reported that ordinary people are taking matters into their own hands and are practicing the kind of profiling that makes the most sense. Airline passengers in Russia, Great Britain, the United States and Canada have either stopped flights or just gotten off flights when confronted with Muslim-looking young men who looked suspicious for one reason or another.

Put this together with a recent survey of highly negative American attitudes towards Muslims, and you get the sense that there is real trouble brewing for America’s Muslim communities. In my opinion it makes great good sense for security personnel to look much harder at young Muslim men because virtually every terrorist act committed in the last quarter century has been committed by Muslim men between the ages of 17 and 40.

What this should NOT mean, however, is the wholesale condemnation of Muslim-Americans. They may not be doing enough to combat terrorism, and the terrorists may be folk heroes to some, but most Muslims here and around the world are not jidadists. Americans should not forget that gangsters like Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde, and Al Capone were folk heroes to many as well, but society did not tolerate their criminal behavior. Italian-Americans, who were tarred by mafia generalizations, should be especially sensitive to the problems of the law-abiding Muslim community.

I do not agree with everything expressed in the following article, but this excerpt highlights the growing trend:

Sane Mutiny: The Coming Populist Revolt
Tech Central Station
By Arnold Kling 22 Aug 2006

"British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny -- refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed.

The extraordinary scenes happened after some of the 150 passengers on a Malaga-Manchester flight overheard two men of Asian appearance apparently talking Arabic."
--The Daily Mail, August 20, 2006

I am not a pollster, but my sense is that there has been a shift in the popular mood in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel as a result of events this summer in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, and London. I suspect that this is one of those eras where the political elites are out of touch with mass opinion. In this case, I think that the elites are mostly wrong, and I hope that they adjust.

Regarding the "mutiny" of the British airplane passengers, no doubt the elites are thinking, "Oh, what awful behavior on the part of passengers. They are ruining our effort to reassure Muslims that they face no discrimination."

Meanwhile, the people are thinking, "Look, the fact that you subject all passengers to the same humiliating searching and restrictions says that you have no idea who is dangerous and who is not. If you are that incompetent, then don't expect us to trust you when you tell us that a plane is safe."

The elites focused on hair gels and other liquids that were supposed tools of the plot. Everyone else noticed the ethnicity of the plotters. As James Joyner put it recently on TCS,

"Keeping passengers from taking nail clippers, toothpaste, and hair gel with them causes an inconvenience disproportionate to the infinitesimal gain in safety provided. Likewise, forcing people to arrive at the airport three hours early so they may stand in line to have their shoes checked for explosives is plainly silly.
It makes far more sense to harden targets and screen for likely terrorists than to treat all citizens as potential terrorists." Tech Central Station

The author is a TCS Daily Contributing Editor.

Mike Wallace Meets Der Fuhrer

In what can only be interpreted as an attempt to sink even lower than Dan Rather, Mike Wallace interviewed the Iranian nutcase, Ahamdinejad, who wants to develop nuclear weapons so he can kill Americans and Jews. 60 Minutes did get good ratings.

Mike Wallace Meets Der Fuhrer
The American Spectator, By Philip Klein
Published 8/21/2006 12:07:37 AM

In an effort to change the course of history, the U.S. government sent Mike Wallace back in time to interview Adolf Hitler before the 1938 Munich Conference. The theory was that if the legendary, hard-hitting, pit bull journalist Wallace were to expose the true Hitler in a newsreel to be shown in movie theaters throughout the world, it could tilt the balance of world opinion against appeasement, and save millions of lives. The following are excerpts from the newsreel.

WALLACE: When German Chancellor Adolf Hitler speaks out candidly -- as is his habit -- he scares a lot of people. It has been alleged by some that he is a so-called "anti-Semite," a charge based on various references he has made to Jews as "parasites," "liars," "maggots," "eternal blood suckers," and as "the mortal enemy of humanity." But, as always, the truth is more complex. The son of a customs official and a veteran of the Great War, the Fuhrer is attractive, smart, savvy, charming, self-assured and self-righteous.

(The newsreel cuts to Wallace sitting down next to the Chancellor, who speaks through his official translator.)

WALLACE (raising arm): Heil Hitler!
HITLER: Very clearly, I will tell you that I fully oppose the behavior of the British and the Americans.

WALLACE: And why is that?
HITLER: The main reason is that I sympathize with the prisoners in America and in Britain, because, as you know, I was wrongfully put in jail myself. And also, there is so much poverty in those wealthy nations, and such a large gap between rich and poor, and I was impoverished as a young adult, so I know what it's like. Whenever I see people suffering, it makes me sad.

WALLACE: Mr. Fuhrer, you have repudiated the Treaty of Versailles, reoccupied the demilitarized zone of the Rhineland, and have set your sights on the Sudetenland that some people claim is a part of Czechoslovakia. How far do your territorial ambitions extend?
HITLER: When I was young and in Vienna I wanted to be a painter. I love painting. I love the arts. I love opera and peace and sunshine and...

WALLACE: You are very good at filibustering. You still have not answered the question. You still have not answered the question. How far do your territorial ambitions extend?
HITLER: All of your questions require a book-long answer. If you want me to just finish the interview, please tell me and we can wrap up right now.

WALLACE: No, no.
HITLER: I think that you're getting angry.

WALLACE: I couldn't be happier for the privilege of sitting down with you, Mr. Fuhrer.
HITLER: I'm happy to be here too.

WALLACE: I want to ask you this directly: do you hate Jews?
HITLER: All I want to do is foster peace. We are under threat from France, Britain, and their friends in America. They all tried to keep us down after the Great War.

WALLACE: What do you like to do with your free time? When you aren't being Der Fuhrer, who are you?
HITLER: I study. I read books. I exercise. And, of course, I spend some time-- quality time--with... (man whispers in Hitler's ear).

WALLACE: What did he say?
HITLER: He said my mustache is crooked.

WALLACE: Why are they worried about your mustache? I think you look just fine. In fact, I've been thinking of growing a mustache myself. I'm just concerned people would confuse me with Walter Cronkite.
HITLER: Who's that?

WALLACE: Never mind. Is there any message you want to give the world, in closing?
HITLER: Well, please look at the makeup of the American and British administrations, the behavior of the administrations. See how they talk down to my nation. They want to build an empire. And they don't want to live side by side in peace with other nations.

(End of interview)

WALLACE: When I agreed to interview Der Fuhrer, the populist leader of free Germany, I was expecting an irrational firebrand. But the person I met was a reasonable man who I wouldn't mind having a beer with. After sitting down with Hitler for an hour and a half, I feel confident in assuring the world that this is a man who genuinely wants to achieve peace in our time and who is dedicated to working toward a final solution to the world's problems.

Philip Klein is a reporter for The American Spectator.

Olmert A Chilling Example of Democrat Leadership

I am afraid that the incompetence of the left-wing Olmert government in Israel is a chilling foretelling of what might happen if a liberal Democrat is elected president in this country in 2008. Under Olmert’s misguided tutelage and penchant for thinking one can reason with terrorists, Israel’s army was allowed to decline in training and equipment, and a peacenik was appointed Defense Chief of Israel with disastrous results.

In attempting to kill terrorists, but not harm civilians, and letting that philosophy override all other considerations, Olmert succeeded only in killing Israelis, both at home under the barrage of 4000 missiles, and soldiers in the field. By constantly changing his mind about tactics and strategy, (reminding us eerily of President Jimmy Carter and the disaster in the Iranian desert in 1979), Olmert guaranteed failure of the Israeli mission and the imposition of a ceasefire that the United States was forced to support. Until it became obvious that Olmert had no stomach for the game he was playing, the USA had stalled negotiations to give Israel a chance to complete the job they had started – a necessary one when murderous terrorists are raining death down on Israel’s civilians and capturing and murdering Israeli soldiers.

What this also reminds me of was the debacle in Somalia under the leadership of President Clinton and his hapless Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin, who refused to support American soldiers taking fire – soldiers who had been placed in an impossible situation through the incompetence of the Democrat President and his defense secretary. The soldiers ended up dead.

What this means to me is that, even though I disagree with some of his positions on social issues, I will probably support Rudy Giuliani for the Republican presidential nomination. He has shown me that he understands the war on terror and is tough-minded enough to lead it and withstand the vacuous logic and vituperation from the left. This is the overriding issue of our age.

In the Middle East, instead of attaining some measure of security from the murderers, Olmert has succeeded in moving Israel closer to a position where their only option may involve overwhelming destruction and possibly the use of nuclear weapons.

A Bloody Red Sox-Yankees Weekend

Here in Rhode Island, where I was brought up and still spend my summers, it’s not so much Democrats vs. Republicans or haves and have-nots. Rhode Islanders are divided pretty evenly between whether you are a Red Sox fan or a Yankee fan. For Red Sox fans, this past weekend has been an unmitigated disaster, as the Yankees, mostly recovered from debilitating injuries, faced an obviously dispirited Red Sox team with its team captain and on-field leader on the bench, injured. Two hapless catchers, Lopez and Mirabelli, have been trying to spell the irreplaceable and scrappy Jason Varitek, but have few hits, many passed balls and many stolen bases on the part of the Yankees to show for it. Three of the top Red Sox pitchers, Keith Foulke (reliever), Tim Wakefield and Matt Clement (starters) are also injured, along with right fielder, Trot Nixon, who was on his way to a banner year when he went down.

If you add to that a bull pen that throws batting practice when they are not walking batters, then you have the makings for the loss of five straight games to arch rival New York, most by lop-sided scores. Even young phenomenon, Jonathan Papelbon, who was blowing them out as a temporary closer in Foulke’s absence, seems to have lost it recently. Using starting pitchers nobody here had ever heard of before, Manager Terry Francona had to be operating in a state of shock as Yankee after Yankee rounded the bases, and, to rub it in, recent Red Sox expatriate, Johnny Damon, did the most damage.

It’s only five games, and it’s a long season, but Red Sox nation is also in a state of shock this afternoon; and the season looks lost. The only bright note is that most years Red Sox fans have this kind of excitement to savor. I couldn’t imagine what it must be like to be a Kansas City Royals fan.

A Letter to the Organizers of the Flight 93 Memorial

I sent the following letter yesterday:

August 20, 2006

Families of Flight 93
Mr. Hamilton Peterson, President
109 West Main Street, Suite 104
Somerset, PA 15501-2035

Dear Mr. Peterson:

Like thousands of others, I watched the movie, Flight 93, on A & E last night, and then I went to your website. I was shocked to see that the main design, the Bowl, greatly resembles a Muslim crescent, and that the memorial seems to be honoring the murderers instead of the brave passengers on Flight 93.

I will never support or visit this memorial, and it breaks my heart to see what has been done to it.

If this is being done to further some psycho-babble nonsense about reducing the Islamofascist threat to America through reason and discourse, the purveyors of such thinking show little understanding of the mind and the motives of the terrorist. Certainly our actions in saving the lives of thousands of Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo have had no effect.

Yours truly,

Russell Wilcox


Note: Their website is http://www.honorflight93.org

The Cease Fire and an American Nuclear Strike on Iran

My article on the meaning of the Middle East ceasefire and the failure of the Israelis to complete their mission speculated that it could lead eventually to a nuclear weapon being used by the Israelis on Iran. It seems to me that one might conclude from the following opposing article (its author says that the real losers were Syria and Iran,not Israel) that the events of this summer have actually laid the groundwork for the USA to bomb Iran with nuclear weapons. I agree that there is no way that an American president can stand by and allow the Iranians to develop nuclear weapons, not with the threats being made by the Iranian government against Israel and America and against the backdrop of the terrorism Iran has been sponsoring in Iraq and in Lebanon. If the Iranians cannot be dissuaded or prevented from acquiring such weapons, and if conventional weapons cannot take out their nuclear facilities without suicide missions by our pilots, then the unthinkable becomes thinkable.

Article:

Michael Freund, THE JERUSALEM POST, Aug. 15, 2006
Right On: The real blunder in Lebanon

Not since Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait has a Middle Eastern leader made such a grievous strategic mistake, both in underestimating his foe and miscalculating the impact of his own course of action.

Inexperience at the helm combined with hesitation and uncertainty produced an unmitigated fiasco, one that raises serious questions about whether this person is truly fit to lead.

While many might view the above description as referring to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his handling of the war in the north, there is in fact another figure in the region, one to whom it would appear to be even more applicable. And that person is none other than Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Sure, Teheran and its ally in Damascus are no doubt celebrating Israel's agreement to the dubious UN cease-fire. If you listen carefully enough, you can probably still hear them clinking their glasses together as they toast the damage that was done to the Jewish state.

Over the course of a month, their nasty little proxy group in Lebanon managed to fire some 4,000 rockets at Israel, inflict grave damage to its economy and send a third of its populace into bomb shelters. They killed 156 Israelis, wounded more than 3,000 others, and pierced the country's aura of military invincibility.

But at the end of the day, these achievements, if one can call them that, will end up exacting a heavy price from Syria and Iran. Inevitably, the trouble they have stirred up in the region over the past month is bound to boomerang right back at them.

Indeed, by transferring advanced rockets and weaponry to Hizbullah, Teheran and Damascus have just unwittingly proven one of the Bush Administration's central contentions regarding the need for preemptive action against rogue states in the global war on terror.

The two countries have demonstrated that they are ready and willing to share missile systems with a terrorist organization, thus strengthening the case that they must be prevented from obtaining weapons of mass destruction at all costs.

This very point was at the heart of an important speech made by US President George W. Bush last October in which he outlined America's strategy for fighting terror across the globe. Speaking at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington, Bush made clear that, "we're determined to deny weapons of mass destruction to outlaw regimes, and to their terrorist allies who would use them without hesitation."

Furthermore, he stated, "Any government that chooses to be an ally of terror has also chosen to be an enemy of civilization. And the civilized world must hold those regimes to account."

THUS, BY supplying weapons to Hizbullah, Syria and Iran have inadvertently provided concrete evidence for all the world to see of just how dangerous the combination of "outlaw regimes" and their "terrorist allies" can be.

In this respect, Israel is fortunate that the conflict erupted when it did, because had it occurred in another five or ten years, who knows what types of horrific weapons might then have been found in Hizbullah's arsenal.

And so, by inciting the start of hostilities last month in an effort to divert the world's attention from their nuclear program, Iran may actually end up achieving precisely the opposite.

Through their actions, Iran has just made the case, better than the most eloquent of Washington press spokesmen ever could, as to why they pose a grave and immediate threat to the entire free world with their obstinate pursuit of nuclear weapons. And it is this very same argument, which the Iranians have just unwittingly bolstered, that Bush may one day soon choose to make in justifying the need for possible military action against Iran to stop their drive toward nuclear weapons.

In other words, to borrow Lenin's phrase, Iran and Syria may have just sold the rope from which they themselves will eventually hang.

Moreover, the violence of the past month has also been an educational process of sorts for both the American and Israeli publics, underlining in very stark terms the danger posed by Iran and Syria.

Their intractable opposition to the West, and their willingness to wreak havoc on Israel and its citizens, only served to highlight their status as a menace that must be tackled as quickly as possible.

So if Bashar Assad and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad thought that igniting a war along Israel's northern border would somehow help them to save their own skins, they may soon find out just how sorely mistaken they were.

And, like Saddam, their blundering adventure abroad may yet come back to haunt them sooner than they imagine.

I have friends who have relatives in Iran – friends and relatives who have nothing to do with this madness. I also know enough about Iran to know that there are large population groups there who do not support what this madman, Ahmadinejad, is saying and doing there – including some groups who want desperately to develop a close and friendly relationship with America. I would be numb with sorrow if America had to resort to a military strike to prevent Iran from getting its hands on nuclear weapons, BUT THIS TERRORIST NATION CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THEM.

Carter Appointee Gives Special Rights to Americans She Kills

If there was ever any doubt in the mind of a moderate or a conservative that the extreme left has totally taken over the mainstream press in this country, that doubt should have been completely erased by listening to a tape run by Rush Limbaugh on his radio program Friday. The tape contained several clips of left-wing TV and radio talking heads (including Bob Schieffer of CBS) making comments about the Michigan District Court judge’s incredible decision regarding the NSA program of eavesdropping on the conversations of foreign Al Qaeda with accomplices in the USA. Each of these commenters said things like, “a defeat for President Bush”, “shows President Bush committed an illegal impeachable act”, “a defeat for President Bush’s war on terror”. What nonsense.

I would point out that Presidents Carter and Clinton issued similar executive orders during their presidencies, and they were not even wartime presidents. I would point out that the latest terror plot to blowup in flight several jets bound for America was uncovered partly through the use of these NSA intercepts. I would point out that Judge Anna Diggs Taylor is giving special rights to Americans that would be dead if it were not for this program. I would point out that there has not been another 9/11 in this country in five years because of programs that she would dismantle. I would point out that even the liberal Washington Post has labeled her decision, “poorly reasoned”.

Excerpts:

Judge Rules Against Wiretaps
NSA Program Called Unconstitutional
By Dan Eggen and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, August 18, 2006; A01

A federal judge in Detroit ruled yesterday that the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional, delivering the first decision that the Bush administration's effort to monitor communications without court oversight runs afoul of the Bill of Rights and federal law.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ordered a halt to the wiretap program, secretly authorized by President Bush in 2001, but both sides in the lawsuit agreed to delay that action until a Sept. 7 hearing. Legal scholars said Taylor's decision is likely to receive heavy scrutiny from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit when the Justice Department appeals, and some criticized her ruling as poorly reasoned.

Ruling in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and other advocacy groups in the Eastern District of Michigan, Taylor said that the NSA wiretapping program, aimed at communications by potential terrorists, violates privacy and free speech rights and the constitutional separation of powers among the three branches of government. She also found that the wiretaps violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law instituted to provide judicial oversight of clandestine surveillance within the United States….

The NSA declined to discuss Taylor's ruling or whether it had suspended any surveillance activities. The office of John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, also declined to comment….

Several dozen lawsuits have been filed around the country challenging the program's legality, but yesterday's ruling marked the first time that a judge had declared it unconstitutional. Experts in national security law argued, however, that Taylor offered meager support for her findings on separation of powers and other key issues.
"Regardless of what your position is on the merits of the issue, there's no question that it's a poorly reasoned decision," said Bobby Chesney, a national security law specialist at Wake Forest University who takes a moderate stance on the legal debate over the NSA program. "The opinion kind of reads like an outline of possible grounds to strike down the program, without analysis to fill it in."…

ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero called the decision "another nail in the coffin" of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism strategies. "The judge very clearly points out that this, at its core, is about presidential powers," he said.
Washington Post

This case was brought by the ACLU and by CAIR, and the ACLU attorneys are reported to be Muslims, one of whom has previously admitted to contributing to the Hezbollah. Thus we can add more reasons to oppose these evil organizations, and put an end to this madness. If you want a complete background on these attorneys and the litigants, go here.

The United Nations Is a Fraud and Will Kill Us

I have previously called for the United States to withdraw from the United Nations and sponsor a successor organization among non-terrorist supporting states. The value of a place to to meet and talk has been greatly overshadowed in recent years by a bureaucracy gone wild, rampant corruption, complete ineffectiveness, support for terrorist states and movements, and a policy of approving any action that damages the United States or Israel.

I encourage my readers to click on the GOPBloggers site to explore the piece I am presenting below, because it is loaded with reference links that I could not transfer. Each statement in this piece is backed up by a source you can trace and judge for yourself.

"The UN Is Nothing More Than an Enabler of Violent Islamists, So America Must Withdraw"

GOP Bloggers, Jonathan R. on August 3, 2006

"If the UN ever served a useful purpose, that role is now gone. Its peacekeepers are manifestly not effective at peacekeeping, whether as spectators for mass slaughter in Rwanda and Bosnia or observing a terrorist group's massive arms build-up, but they are clearly adept at mass rape of children. So the "peacekeeping" function of the UN is no reason to keep it around and there is little else of value the organization does that cannot be handled through other multilateral arrangements.

But it is not merely that the UN does little good. It is now an active player in the war that radical Islam has declared against the dar al-Harb and it has lined up with radical Islam. This is not an opinion but rather the only conclusion that can be reached by watching its reaction to actions on both sides of this war. When the forces of radical Islam deliberately target and kill civilians or publicly execute prisoners, in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions, the UN is silent. But when a Western nation sacrifices its own troops to abide by the laws of war or provides terrorist prisoners with the full range of Geneva rights that they have not even earned, the UN pronounces itself outraged.

When a Western member state, whose freedom and liberty are so renowned that it is a beacon throughout the world and attracts more immigration than any other country, expresses doubts about the UN's competence, the UN explodes in anger. But when a radical Islamic member state repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly calls for the destruction of another member state and the mass murder of its citizens, the UN remains silent.

The UN's ambulances are used to transport radical Islamic terrorists and its financial operations are used to fund radical Islamic terror. When Arab Islamists slaughter black Muslims, the UN is paralyzed. But when Israel defends itself against an act of war, there is nothing but ritual denunciation. When violent Islamists deliberately use UN personnel as human shields, there is no condemnation until Israel's counter-fire accidentally hits the UN post there is reflexive condemnation of Israel.

I have resisted the temptation to call for the American withdrawal from the UN in the past, because I thought there remained some value in at least having a forum in which dialogue could take place. But it is now an undeniable fact that the UN has gone beyond mere corruption, incompetence and ineffectiveness. It is now an active player in defending, excusing and legitimizing radical Islam, which is the most mortal danger faced by Western civilization. For America to continue to morally, politically and financially support this UN is not only wrong, but it runs counter to our strategic national security interests. America must withdraw from the UN, and start a new organization that is explicitly open only to those nations that share our philosophy of liberty and pluralism. As long as we work with the UN, we aid our own enemies." GOP Bloggers

Now that cowardly France has once again stabbed us in the back (remember what they did to Colin Powell and to the USA just prior to the UN resolution on Iraq?) and withdrawn their offer of 5000 soldiers to disarm Hezbollah (they are now offering 200 and no disarming), what we actually have in France is a European representative of Islamic terrorism on the Security Council. This is another reason to add to all those cited to quit the UN and develop a responsible world organization. I would propose that initial membership be limited to the Coalition of the Willing.

In the Middle East Where Do We Go From Here?

Both sides in this, just the latest of several Middle East wars – always started by Muslims dedicated to the extermination of Israel, are claiming victory, and Condy Rice is trying to put the best face she can on the cease-fire agreement. There is no question in my mind, though, that Israel’s incompetence placed the United States in an untenable position, and we had to cut our own losses by agreeing to a cease-fire that, at least, sounds pretty good, but we know full well that the Lebanese Army will be completely ineffective in disarming and controlling Hezbollah, and that the UN force, mostly consisting of Jew-hating French, will look the other way as always.

We tried to give the Israelis the time to get the job done and destroy the Hezbollah, even though we were paying a terrible price in Iraq as Iraqi Shia did the only thing centuries of indoctrination told them to do – support their fellow Shia with demonstrations and violence – and we were losing the support of those Sunni Arabs (notably Saudi Arabia and Egypt) who also did not want the Hezbollah, backed by their mutual enemy, Iran, to win.

August 17, 2006
Can Israel Survive This Catastrophe?
By David Warren
Realclearpolitics.com

“The war was an unavoidable disaster for Lebanon. It ends in a worse disaster: the victory of Hezbollah. The great majority of Lebanese who want nothing to do with Hezbollah must now live in a country that the terrorist organization will soon take over. They have the force of arms, and as Mao Tse-tung correctly observed, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." It is why the ruthless can prevail on this planet, and why it is never a mistake to confront them too early.

For Israel, the war was equally inevitable. No freely-elected government can stand and watch its citizens attacked and terrorized. For years Hezbollah had been dropping Katyushas into Israel's northern farms, without response. Since the year 2000, Israel had depended upon a final border with Lebanon, agreed by all parties through the U.N., in the hope of containing the problem. Finally Hezbollah performed a provocation larger and cockier than Israel could ignore. The capture of two IDF soldiers, infinitely more than the killing of six, was calculated to force a response. Israelis are rightly horrified at the thought of their own sons and daughters falling captive to such animals. Mere death they are accustomed to….

But now the ceasefire is a catastrophe for Israel to harvest, and Lebanon to share. And it was Israel's fault. Not for trying to destroy Hezbollah, but for failing to do so. A weak and stupid prime minister, Ehud Olmert, spent five crucial weeks changing his mind about what he was doing. The entire ruling establishment exposed itself as crippled by "political correctness", trying to fight against an enemy like Hezbollah, with the chief object of limiting civilian casualties.” David Warren

So where are we now? Let’s look at two comments William Bennett made on his radio show yesterday morning:

—The U.N. passes a resolution calling for Israel to withdraw, Israel begins withdrawals and Hezbollah’s soldiers are not disarming, they are shooting fireworks, driving around Southern Lebanon with their arms in their cars’ front seats, Israel does not get its kidnapped soldiers back, more land for peace in the form of Shebaa Farms is now on the negotiating table, Lebanon’s defense minister says the Lebanese government will not disarm Hezbollah…

—We were told Hezbollah was a state within a state. Does anyone doubt that Hezbollah is actually stronger and more popular than the Lebanese army that is now to patrol South Lebanon? The main state is Hezbollah, it can fairly be said, with the Lebanese government quite possibly subordinate to it: The state within the state is Lebanon, not Hezbollah. The PM of Lebanon has said supportive things of Nasrallah, the president, and Speaker of Lebanon are Syrian puppets and the newest, most popular fighting force in the Middle East is Hezbollah. William Bennett

I’m afraid that the following sequence of events has just become more likely: the Israelis will replace Olmert with a hard-liner, the Hezbollah will rearm with more powerful missiles from Iran and begin firing them into Tel Aviv, Israel will warn Iran to disband Hezbollah or suffer enormous consequences, and Tehran will then be leveled with a nuclear weapon. Before that, all that we have worked and sacrificed for in Iraq will come apart as an emboldened Iran steps up its involvement in Shia inspired violence, essentially splitting Iraq into three territories.

Oh No! Guns Don’t Kill People; People Kill People

The following article that pushes their anti-gun agenda appeared yesterday in the New York Times. I have juxtaposed excerpts from two other articles that reveal the facts that law-abiding gun owners know instinctively. Sometimes refuting the logic of liberals is like shooting fish in a barrel. No pun intended.

FIRST ARTICLE:

August 14, 2006
Editorial, New York Times

Shoot First — No Questions Asked

If ever a law was designed as a get-out-of-jail-free card for the trigger-happy gun owner, it’s one that comes to us via the gun lobby and the State of Florida. The law, passed in the last year in 15 states and being considered in eight others, allows the extraordinary use of deadly force when a person simply doesn’t want to back away from a confrontation.

There are legitimate kill-or-be-killed situations, but those are defensible in court already. There seems little reason to legally enshrine the right to maim or kill in response to a perceived threat. These laws do just that, and already a creepy picture of “Death Wish”-style justice is emerging.

In one case, a retired police officer shot twice and seriously wounded an apparently unarmed neighbor who had knocked on his door in a dispute over the number of garbage bags put out for collection. The shooter will remain free as long as his self-defense argument holds, and it well may.

The contorted logic of these laws reverses the notions that favored flight over fight and held deadly force to be a last resort. The Florida law holds that a crime victim may “stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary.” To defend homes and vehicles, an owner can wield lethal force with a freedom not granted to the police.

Redefining lethal force is bad enough, but it also comes with near-automatic immunity from prosecution and civil lawsuits. Florida’s law is a sick cousin of the work of the gun lobby on Capitol Hill, where it has successfully protected the interstate traffickers of guns used in crimes. And it is the evil twin of laws passed in 38 states that allow concealed weapons. After all, what good is packing heat if it just stays in the holster? New York Times

SECOND ARTICLE: (Excerpt)

Bush: Florida crime rate down to lowest level since '71
By BRENT KALLESTAD
Associated Press Writer

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Florida's crime rate dropped for the 14th straight year in 2005 to its lowest mark since 1971 because of tougher laws, increased financial support from the Legislature and law-abiding citizens with guns, Gov. Jeb Bush said Tuesday.
"This report shows that staying tough on crime works," said Bush. "Law abiding citizens that have guns for protection actually probably are part of the reason we have a lower crime rate."

The crime rate, compiled by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, decreased 3.7 percent from 4,855 crimes per 100,000 people in 2004 to 4,677 crimes per 100,000 people last year. The total included 881 murders, 12,230 rapes and 75,204 vehicle thefts.

In 2005, the state's law enforcement agencies reported 838,063 crimes compared to 850,490 in 2004, a 1.5 percent decrease.

Last year Bush signed a bill that allows people who feel threatened on the street, in a bar, at a ball game — or just about anywhere — to "meet force with force" to defend themselves without fear of being prosecuted.

"You send a real powerful signal when you know the citizen has a good potential of being armed and doesn't have to back off anymore," said John Birch, president of the Illinois-based Concealed Carry, Inc...

THIRD ARTICLE: (Excerpt)

NRA-ILA

The Case For Repealing DC's Gun Laws

TWENTY years ago, local politicians in the District of Columbia thumbed their noses at Congress, the 14th Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection of the laws," and the rest of the United States, and began conducting a social experiment of their own design, against the city's law-abiding residents. The experiment, unlike anything known elsewhere in America, took the form of the multi-faceted Firearms Control Regulations Act, imposed by the D.C. Council in 1976. The measure prohibits the possession of a handgun that was not registered with city police prior to Sept. 24, 1976 and re-registered by Feb. 5, 1977. It also requires the registration of all privately owned firearms and that firearms kept at home be rendered useless for protection by being "unloaded, disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock or similar device."

The results of the experiment have been catastrophic. Hundreds of innocent lives have been lost, including many who might have been able to defend themselves if only allowed to. District neighborhoods have been subjected to a degree of crime-inspired terror unheard of almost anywhere in our country. Congress should end this experiment, by abolishing the District's un-American gun laws and in their place adopting for the nation's capital a set of laws consistent with federal laws and the laws of the 50 states. Let's examine the evidence against D.C.'s gun law.

• D.C.'s homicide rate has soared since the city banned handguns in 1976. Homicide had been declining in D.C. before the ban, but increased after the ban was imposed. By 1991 D.C.'s homicide rate had risen more than 200%. By comparison, the U.S. homicide rate rose only 12% during the same period. D.C.'s homicide rate is more than double the rate when its handgun ban took effect. (FBI, Metropolitan Police of the District of Columbia)…NRA

Even though sensible Americans have been largely successful in getting rid of stupid gun control laws (38 states have now reinstated right-to-carry permits), we must not relax our vigilance or stop working to overturn them. The left-wing is always there in the shadows ready to spring.

CAIR Does It Again

I have pointed out several times in the past that CAIR is an organization that claims to be concerned only with the rights of Muslims here in the U.S., but which supports world-wide terrorism in many ways. Right after the discovery of a plot by Muslims to blow up American jets on their way from Great Britain to the U.S., CAIR had this to say:

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 8/10/06) - A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group today expressed concern over President Bush's use of the term "Islamic fascists" in a news conference about the arrest of 21 suspects in a plot to bomb airliners flying between Britain and the United States.

In a letter to President Bush, Parvez Ahmed, board chairman of the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) wrote in part:

"American Muslims have consistently condemned all acts of terrorism, whether carried out by individuals, groups or states. We repudiate anyone who plans or carries out a terrorist act. The American Muslim community remains dedicated to the protection of our nation's security. . .

"Unfortunately, your statement this morning that America 'is at war with Islamic fascists' contributes to a rising level of hostility to Islam and the American-Muslim community. Just today, Gallup released a poll indicating that four out of ten Americans feel 'prejudice' toward Muslims.”

Nowhere in their statement, or in any other statement, did CAIR condemn this plot to blow up our airplanes – despite their statement that they condemn “all acts of terrorism”.

They are correct, however, in mentioning the poll results. In fact, the situation for Muslims in this country is getting much worse than even CAIR suggests. These were the complete results of that poll:

Nearly four in 10 Americans admit having feelings of prejudice against Muslims living in the U.S. – and are in favor of having Muslims carry a special ID, a new Gallup poll reveals.

Also, 22 percent of those surveyed said they would not like to have a Muslim as a neighbor.

Among the findings of the late-July USA Today/Gallup poll:

• 31 percent of respondents said they would feel nervous if they noticed a Muslim man on their airplane flight, and 18 percent would feel nervous about a Muslim woman flying with them.

• Less than half – 49 percent – feel that Muslims living in the U.S. are loyal to this country.

• 34 percent believe American Muslims are sympathetic to the al-Qaida terrorist organization.

• 40 percent of respondents said they believe Muslims in the U.S. are not respectful of other religions, and 44 percent said Muslims are too extreme in their religious beliefs.

• A slight majority – 52 percent – believe Muslims are not respectful of women.

• 39 percent said the U.S. should require Muslims to carry a special ID, and 57 percent believe they should undergo more intensive security checks at airports.

• 39 percent said they "have at least some feelings of prejudice against Muslims,” 59 percent said they did not, and 2 percent had no opinion.

Opinions are different, however, among Americans who are personally acquainted with a Muslim, the poll disclosed.

For example, only 10 percent of those who know a Muslim said they would not want one as a neighbor, and 24 percent believe Muslims should carry a special ID – compared to 50 percent among those who don’t know a Muslim. Newsmax.com

I would suggest to CAIR, that if they truly want to improve and protect the rights of American Muslims, they and all Muslims should rid this country of the Mullahs preaching hate against America, Israel and Jews, expose the groups that are plotting here to kill Americans, stop apologizing for the brutal acts committed by Muslims almost every day, cooperate with this country’s efforts to defend itself, and stop opposing the profiling of young Muslim men at airports and mass transit stations. All of the acts of terror carried out against Americans for the past 38 years since Bobby Kennedy was murdered have been carried out by Middle Eastern Muslim men between the ages of 17 and 40, and around the world there have been 5581 acts of murderous barbarism carried out by Islamic fascists since 9/11.

We continue to believe that the great majority of Muslims here and abroad are peaceful people who only want the same future for their children as the rest of us. However, they are the front line in the war on terrorism, and their inaction is hurting their own cause and killing us.

Tips For Web Surfing

In the upper left-hand corner of my weblog there is a box labeled “Search This Blog”. Any article I’ve ever posted can be found by entering key words. For example, any article that was written by Ben Stein or which mentions him will be returned by entering the words, ben stein, and clicking on “Search This Blog”.

In the lower right of my weblog there is a list of websites called “My Bloglines Site Feeds”. This is a list of every website that I monitor automatically on an hourly basis. When I go to my Bloglines page, any site that has been updated during that hour is shown along with the number of article-updates that have been posted there. If I check in twice a day, say, all the sites with updates since my last check-in are listed. I merely need to click on the site name to see ONLY the updates.

You don’t need to be a news junkie like me to use this service to save lots of time. If you monitor just a few sites (like weather and special interest sites for example), this technique will be useful to you. I have reposted below an earlier article I wrote on how to set up this capability. Try it; if you don’t like it you can always take it down.

How to Make Your Web Surfing 10X Faster
If you know all about RSS and Atom, this will be a waste of your time, but if you never heard of these site feed protocols, this article may be of interest, because it will make your web surfing much faster, more efficient – and almost professional. Many web sites and web logs automatically generate a file whenever they are updated. That is, whenever a new report, headline or article is posted, a special file is exported. In doing so, these sites follow either an RSS or an Atom protocol – both of which usually can be read by certain programs called newsreader-aggregators, or just, aggregators. These RSS or Atom files cannot be read by normal browsers; you need to have an aggregator to gain access to these automatic feeds.

If you have an appropriate aggregator, and if the web sites you normally surf have such site feeds, you can list each and every site on a single page on your screen. Whenever one or more of your preferred sites is updated (with news, weather, new products, technology announcements, legal briefs, new cartoons, jokes, whatever), that fact is noted alongside the name of the site or sites. If you then click on the site name, the new updates pop up on your screen – usually in a side window. Once you have clicked on the site name to look at the updates, the site name changes to show that you have seen the most recent updates. Instead of going from web site to web site to see if there is anything new and interesting for you to see, all of the sites are in one window – and show at a glance which have updates and which have not, since the last time you checked.

Most of these aggregator programs charge a rental fee or a downloading fee. However, one of the reasons I am writing this article is that I have recently discovered and now use a free web site which is itself an aggregator. Instead of having to pay for and download an aggregator program, you need only to go to this site and register to use it.

On my own web site, “From Sea to Shining Sea”, just under my profile at the right, is a small white and blue banner that says “Subscribe with Bloglines”. If you click on the banner, it will take you to Bloglines, the aggregator web site; it will establish “From Sea to Shining Sea” as your first site subscription (my site generates an Atom site feed); and it will permit you to register.

After you register, you can set up any and all web sites you wish to monitor (providing they have RSS or Atom site feeds), and off you go. The link to directions for setting up (subscribing to) a site is in the lower left hand corner, and the easiest way is to use what Bloglines calls an “Easy Subscribe Bookmarklet”. Once you have set up the Bookmarklet in your Favorites or Bookmarks, when you visit a favored site again, just click on the Bookmarklet, and that site is subscribed automatically. From that point on, any updates to that site will be noted. Updates to your Blogline account are performed hourly, and surfers with slow internet connections will find that the feeds load much faster than do the complete web pages they used to load. Happy surfing.

Professor William O. Beeman

There was another column by Professor Beeman of Brown University in the Providence Journal the other day. He often has columns published in the Journal, and they all have the same message regardless of what part of the Middle East he is addressing: we shouldn’t get too upset about the fact that the Islamacists want to kill us because they have some grievances arising out of mistakes made by western powers in the past.

These thoughts by liberal journalists and college professors are not helpful.

Yes, Britain created many of the problems we are trying to cope with in Iraq when it created a country with three peoples historically hostile to one another.

Yes, France created many of the problems in Syria and Lebanon because of the way it ruled the area for years.

Yes, we created hard feelings with Iran when we regarded Mossadegh as an unacceptable ally of the old Soviet Union when they were our main concern, and yes, it caused hard feelings when we supported Saddam in his war against Iran.

Yes, the Islamacists hate us for supporting the right of Israel to live in peace in the tiny country they occupy in the midst of those whose only desire is to kill them all and eradicate their country.

Yes, yes, yes. These helpful reminders from liberals tell us not to be too harsh with the tiger since he only wants to eat us because he is hungry. I say to liberals, wake up; we have to deal with the situation as it exists today, and we have to take whatever steps are necessary to defend ourselves and our culture from barbarians who want to kill us all and drive the world back to the seventh century.

The Bush Administration strategy in the war on terrorism is to capture or kill and disarm the terrorists while encouraging friendly relations with peaceful Muslims and the development of democracy in the Arab world. It is the only strategy that makes any sense. When critics point to the problems in Iraq, I would point out that there have been hundreds of times in our history when events looked bleak, from the Revolution to 1812 to the Civil War, Kasserine Pass, Guadalcanal, the Bulge and Anzio. We have always won out because we persevered and did whatever it took. Today we are faced with the longest and, possibly, our toughest fight of all time. If we unite and stick it out, we will probably win. If we continue to be divided, we might easily lose our freedom, our way of life, our standard of living, our country and our lives.

I Really Detest Leftist Philosophy

What is happening right now in Mexico is a perfect example of the little-kid tantrum those on the left throw when they don’t get their way – when they lose. Leftists in Mexico have shut down the government because they lost an election they thought they should have won. They are so good, they are so smart, they are so sure they have all the answers, it’s not possible that the electorate would look at their past failures and present actions and decide to vote against them. This is behind the “selected not elected” nonsense that has led to a 6 year long, concerted effort to defeat any and all initiatives coming from the Bush Administration. This is behind the unbelievably nasty vitriol constantly being heaped on President Bush and also now on Secretary of State Condalessa Rice. Nazi, Hitler, murderer, worse than Stalin, leader of a 9/11 conspiracy – these are all terms we hear every day coming from the left.

As I write this column, the Brits are arresting 24 Islamists who tried to blow up several airplanes headed for the United States with a liquid explosive mixed with common, ordinary liquids like shampoo, members of a Hezbollah cell are being rounded up in Dearborn, and there is a report that a British intelligence agency delayed informing our CIA about the terror plot because they feared leaks from liberals who still work there. I wonder what it is going to take before our nation’s liberals wake up to the fact that we are at war, and start thinking about our country first.

Most of us were liberals in college, but at some time we grew up. If you are a liberal, why didn’t you?

This piece by James Lewis of the American Thinker captures well what liberals have done to us:

The Habit of Betrayal
August 9th, 2006
The American Thinker

“‘Very Soon, This Stain of Disgrace [i.e. Israel] Will Be Purged From the Center of the Islamic World – and This is Attainable’ —- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, October 26, 2005

”’Imam [Khomeini] said: ‘This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.” —- Ahmadinejad in speaking to The World Without Zionism conference, Tehran, October 26, 2005

“The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake.”—- Richard Cohen, Washington Post columnist

When the Boomer Left first came to power in the Seventies they told us that cheating on your marriage made you sexually liberated. The divorce rate soon doubled and tripled, followed by millions of abortions. I’ve long thought that the waves of feminist rage that followed a few years later came from that first treason of the Boomers: In spite of sexual “liberation,” Leftist women felt utterly betrayed and abandoned, over and over again, until rage was the only feeling left. It was the first big betrayal of the modern Left.

Then the same voices shouted that single-parent families were okay for kids; Dads were expendable; the welfare state would do the job. Soon Black families that had stayed intact over generations of Jim Crow were falling apart. Next, the Left proclaimed that drugs were good for you, that Black-on-Black crime was the result of racism, and that Ronald Reagan made AIDS. When children became unteachable and the schools went steadily downhill, the Teachers’ Unions decided that their real job in life was teaching self-esteem, no matter what the kids actually did.

Easy betrayal is the hallmark of the Boomer Left, both in the United States and Europe. In the Netherlands you can have your divorce in three days Why not drive-through spouse disposals? Sort of like a car wash, except you can kick out your spouse at the other end. The Netherlands has pioneered drive-through brothels, after all. Stay tuned.

Across the Channel, Britain cannot rid itself of thousands of known foreign terror suspects—- because they claim the right of asylum, with the passionate support of the Prime Minister’s wife, Cherie Blair, a “civil rights lawyer.” Was anybody surprised when fifty people were blown apart by a squad of suiciders on the London Underground? Nobody asked Cherie Blair to apologize. Nobody called it a betrayal of country—- that’s old Victorian language. Besides, the Labour Party is busily hacking away at Britain’s sovereignty anyway.

No country in Europe can control the inflow of Muslim immigrants, large numbers of them imbued with a hatred for European values. European elites oblige, by constantly betraying their own traditions through multiculturalism. The perverted message is: So you want to hate and despise us? You’re right!

Meanwhile back in the States, we are taught that trespassing aliens are actually “undocumented,” as if they had forgotten their wallets in Tijuana by some slip of the mind. The warm welcome of a generous Mexican host used to be Mi casa es su casa”—- my house is your house. Today Mexicans have learned to shout “Su casa es mi casa!” Your house is now ours, and don’t you forget it, Anglo swine. And nobody calls this a betrayal of American values, even though we are a country of legal and often passionately pro-American immigrants.

So when the New York Times explains that the First Amendment bestows on itself the right to betray national security secrets to jihadists who are even now killing our soldiers in Iraq, nobody seems to notice that this is treason in any sane society.

And when Richard Cohen, whose name at least appears to be Jewish, begins a recent Washington Post column with the proclamation that “Israel is a mistake”—- right in the middle of a Hizb’allah Blitz, when 3,000 missiles are exploding over the heads of Israeli civilians huddling in bomb shelters—- nobody seems to notice anything odd.

On the Left, the habit of betrayal has now become so ingrained that loyalty to friends and country, commitments to wives and children, even the ability to speak freely in the universities, all those fundamental civilized values have simply been ridiculed and trashed.

And when a Democrat President is caught with his pants down, being serviced by a young Jewish intern while discussing the dispatch of American troops on the phone with a Congressman, and another time when Yassir Arafat awaits a meeting with him, the Lefties in the media launch a deafening defense. Yes, feminists had hollered about sexual harassment for decades, but that didn’t apply to Democrats. A female reporter publicly volunteered to service Mr. Clinton herself, as long as he stood for unrestricted abortions. Bill Clinton slapped his wife with the most shameful public insult any First Lady has ever received. Hillary must still burn with shame and anger when she thinks back to those days; but she will never admit to an unfashionable feeling of betrayal of her marriage. Like the original feminists, she is converting her seething rage into a run for power.

A few days ago New York magazine took up Richard Cohen’s slogan that Israel is a mistake, thereby endorsing genocidal madmen like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—- who just happen to be building nukes for that very purpose. The sentence “your nation is a mistake” means “you should never have been alive; destroying you is morally justified.” Why American Jews don’t riot in the streets is a mystery. If Richard Cohen said the same thing about Zimbabwe, he would be out of a job. And good riddance.

Cohen has now gone on to whip up the slogan of an Iraqi civil war, because just a little betrayal is never enough. If Israel goes down to defeat, followed by Iraq, Mr. Cohen might presumably throw a big party. It’s election time, after all, and a disaster for American policy in the Middle East is meat and potatoes to the Left. They will fake one if it doesn’t happen. How they hate their country.

Few civilized values have not yet been betrayed by the Left. Which is why the American people, bless them, see the weird old Boomer Lefties as increasingly alien to their own deepest beliefs and values. The habit of betrayal can only get you so far, before people start to take notice.” The American Thinker

James Lewis is a frequent contirbutor.