Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    February 2026
    S M T W T F S
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘war’

Justice requires a disproportionate response

Posted by Richard on July 19, 2006

On Tuesday, I mentioned Neo-neocon’s post about the danger of proportionality. Well, Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna wrote brilliantly about this nonsense of proportionality on Monday:

If you could cut through all the Kofi-speak to the heart of the matter, what do you think would be a “proportionate” response to the provocations Israel has endured? Do the Israelis have to fire Qassam rockets into Gaza at Hamas? Do Jewish kids have to strap on bomb belts and blow themselves up in Ramallah?

As someone recently said, it’s like a bank robbery — when the call comes in that three men are robbing a bank, then the cops can only send in three patrolmen to stop them.

Or imagine that you’re woken up in the middle of the night by a burglar in the living room. You grab your twelve-gauge and creep down the stairs very quietly. But when you flip on the light and surprise the burglar, he’s armed with only a knife! What do you do? Why, you drop the shotgun, rush to the kitchen, and rummage through the drawers for a knife. And not just any knife — it has to be no longer or sharper than the one the burglar has!

The contemptible blather about "disproportionate response" comes from people who refuse to distinguish between the aggressor and the victim — who remain morally neutral as to which one ought to prevail, and thus believe that "fairness" requires each to have an equal chance.

I'm a fan of disproportionate responseFor those of us who insist that there is no right to rape, mug, burgle — or murder (again!) six million Jews — the concept of proportionality of response is a moral abomination. The correct response to aggression is whatever is necessary to stop it, to punish the aggressor, and to prevent repetition of the aggression in the future. The correct response to Islamofascism is to wipe it out.

Decent people, of course, do their best to minimize harm to innocent bystanders — and the extremely low number of deaths, given the number of air strikes and artillery bombardments, makes it clear that Israel is taking extraordinary measures in this regard. Perhaps too much so.

It’s not only unwise, it’s downright wrong to stay your hand so much that the aggressor might win — or survive to prey on more victims in the future. Don’t those future victims have just as much claim on your concern as the bystanders today? More so, in my opinion, if the bystanders aren’t so innocent — and that’s certainly the case for most of the "civilian casualties" counted up by the media in southern Lebanon. These are the people who support Hezbollah, store Hezbollah weapons in their houses, and cheer on and resupply the Hezbollah fighters — likely, their brothers and sons — firing rockets from their doorsteps.

I’m joining the good Baron, and saying to our friends in Israel, "Bring on the Disproportionate Response!"

UPDATE: Welcome, visitors from The Atheist Jew — please have a look around. You may see some post titles in the left sidebar that interest you.

UPDATE 2: The latest version of the proportionality complaint, blathered about endlessly on MSM outlets on Thursday, is the disparity between the number of Israeli deaths and Lebanese deaths (which are almost all Hezbollah deaths). The morally neutral "fairness" advocates object to the fact that Israel wages war more effectively than Hezbollah!

Would these asshats like to see an international Handicapper General, a la Harrison Bergeron, reduce the effectiveness of Israel’s weapons, tactics, and troops so that they don’t have an unfair advantage over the genocidal maniacs on the other side?

If you’re not familiar with Kurt Vonnegut’s short story masterpiece, Harrison Bergeron, click that link and read it right now.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments »

Are we rescuing Hezbollah supporters?

Posted by Richard on July 18, 2006

The U.S. is promising to evacuate 1,000 Americans per day from Lebanon, starting Wednesday, but some people who ought to know are expressing concern about just who it is we’re rescuing. Brigitte Gabriel, whom I wrote about before, grew up as a Lebanese Christian and experienced Islamist persecution and violence first-hand throughout her youth. Now head of American Congress for Truth, she expressed concern that the media coverage is giving us a false picture:

I am speaking with Lebanese Christians in Lebanon and they are all fine. Israel is not bombing them or their towns. Israel is bombing the Shiite radical strong holds. This is what the news is not telling you. Israel bombed the airport, the port and the bridges to Syria because they are used to transport weapons and support to Hezbollah. …

As sad as I feel watching what is happening in Lebanon, it is absolutely necessary to support Israel to kill the cancer that has spread and is killing the Lebanese body. Israel is not targeting civilians. Israel is targeting terrorists. Israel has launched 3000 air strikes on Lebanon since the beginning of the Operation and inflicted only 122 casualties. If Israel’s intention was to kill civilians you would have seen many more civilian deaths than only 122. They are being extremely careful, even dropping flyers and urging civilians to leave before they bomb. These casualties are terrorists and terrorist families and sympathizers.

Please read the below article from Debbie Schlussel. She hits the nail on the head. Not all American-Lebanese there are terrorist sympathizers. There is a minority of Christians vacationing there too. However the majority of the Muslims have connections to Husballah.

The Debbie Schlussel article she referred to argued that we’re about to rescue a lot of Hezbollah supporters. Schlussel, a Michigan attorney, columnist, and talk show host, is an expert on radical Islam and especially knowledgeable about the Islamists in and around Dearborn, MI (she once infiltrated a radical mosque there disguised as a Muslim woman). In this new article, she argued (emphasis in original):

One thing is lost in all the press coverage of the whining Americans who went to Lebanon of their own accord and now want us to pick up the tab to get them out.

THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS IN LEBANON ARE HEZBOLLAH SUPPORTERS.

Most of them are Shiite Muslims, many of whom hold dual U.S. and Lebanese citizenship. Many are anchor babies born here to Muslims in the U.S. illegally. Some are illegal aliens who became citizens through rubber-stamping Citizenship and Immigration Services (and its INS predecessor) coupled with political pressure by spineless politicians.

Of the 25,000 American citizens and green-card holders in Lebanon, at least 7,000 are from Dearborn, Michigan, the heart of Islamic America, and especially Shia Islam. These 7,000 are mostly Shi’ite Muslims who openly and strongly support Hezbollah. Ditto for many of the rest of the 25,000 that are there.

Many of the 7,000 plus Detroiters in Lebanon are active in Dearborn’s Bint Jbeil cultural center (the Lebanese American Heritage Club also features mostly Hezbollah fans). Bint Jbeil is a Hezbollah-dominated city in the South of Lebanon, a frequent destination of Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, who is very at home there. Bint Jbeil is a frequent source of shellings on Northern Israel.


Given this information, and the fact that several Shi’ite Muslim Lebanese U.S. citizens from Dearborn have been indicted and/or convicted of laundering money to Hezbollah, is it a good idea to rush to bring 25,000 such persons back to the U.S. at a time when Hezbollah is at war against our strongest U.S. ally? Does the fact, that Hezbollah numerous times–and especially now–has announced veiled and not-so-veiled intentions to attack Americans on U.S. soil, make the case to quickly bring these terror-sympathizing Americans back to U.S. soil? …

Schlussel seems to be something of a shoot-from-the-hip type, so she may be painting with too broad a brush regarding the 25,000. But her credentials suggest that she knows what she’s talking about regarding the Dearborn Islamic community and its radicalism and support for Hezbollah. Her concerns ought to be taken seriously by our government.

Do the U.S. embassy staff and the American military realize that they may be be about to save some Hezbollah members from their well-deserved fate? That some of the people they’re going to evacuate tomorrow may have been firing rockets at Israel yesterday? That they may be about to transport Hezbollah terror cells into the U.S. at taxpayer expense? Do they have any safeguards or screening mechanisms in place to prevent this?

Just wondering.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

The war for public opinion

Posted by Richard on July 18, 2006

Neo-neocon made an important point yesterday about civilian deaths in Lebanon. Yes, Hezbollah has been storing rockets in civilian homes and apartments, and launching them from just outside. But Iran (which calls the shots) and Hezbollah aren’t doing this merely because they’re indifferent to civilian casualties — they’re doing it because they want civilian casualties:

Hezbollah is well aware that if, by taking out the missile launchers, Israel kills Lebanese civilians–which is every bit as much Hezbollah’s goal as the initial killing of Israeli civilians by the rockets themselves–then, as sure as day follows night, this fact will be reported heavily by the Western media (mostly without the all-important background context), flashed around the globe, and widely condemned. Civilians are not only expendable on the part of the terrorists, they are important and vital tools–stage props. …

Read, as they say, the whole thing. Then, in the context of this Hezbollah tactic, consider her earlier post about the danger of "proportionality" in war. Israel — like the U.S. in Iraq — gains nothing by fighting cautiously, half-heartedly, and timidly. The Islamofascists will make sure, via their tactics, that even a cautious and measured response results in sufficient collateral damage for their propaganda purposes. Heck, I suspect that if there weren’t enough collateral damage, they’d secretly create it.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Standing with Israel — and Bush — in NYC

Posted by Richard on July 17, 2006

I heard Pamela of Atlas Shrugs on Rush a few minutes ago (mid-afternoon; he’s on tape-delay here in Denver). She talked a mile a minute. Rush pleaded with her to slow down several times. Pamela had just come from the Stand with Israel rally in New York, and she was just bubbling over with excitement and enthusiasm. Apparently, tens of thousands attended. She’s got a post up with a zillion pictures and some video clips.

The big news item from the rally, the thing that had Pamela so excited when talking to Rush: Elie Wiesel thanked God for President Bush. People cheered. In New York City. 🙂

UPDATE: Pamela’s post has been updated with, among other things, the news that the transcript of her call is on Rush’s website. Check it out — she was terrific. Also, she has links to some LGF posts dealing with the crap at the DailyKos thread that she told Rush about.

Meanwhile, the AP story of the event mentioned Elie Wiesel, and even had a brief quote, but ignored the pro-Bush remark (what a surprise). The NYTimes version of the event might lead you to believe it was a Hillary Clinton rally. It never mentioned Wiesel.

UPDATE (7/20): You know, it just burns me up that this story has been completely ignored. If you’ve been living under a rock and don’t know who Elie Wiesel is, Google him. On the subject of the Jews, their enemies, and their survival, this man probably has more moral authority than any person alive — and a Nobel Prize to back it up. And yet, a Google News search for "elie wiesel thank god bush" returned four hits — one from the Jerusalem Post, and three reposts of the same New York Post story (Google chooses not to index the New York Post itself as a news source). This is ridiculous and disgusting, and there’s no excuse other than political bias. There should have been headlines, dammit:

Elie Wiesel Thanked God for President Bush!

This man has moral authority, you Bush-hating moonbat asshats, and what he said should give you pause and cause you to rethink your sick, hate-filled worldview.

OK, I feel better now. I’m going to finish my Buffalo Trace and go to bed.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Palestinian madness

Posted by Richard on July 17, 2006

Two recent columns about the Palestinian situation are must-reads. David Horowitz, in his FrontPageMagazine column, began with a bit of hyperbole (but you can’t blame a guy for slamming the Euroweenies and UN), pulled no punches in describing the insane and dysfunctional nature of Israel’s enemies, and proposed a drastic, but humane, solution:

Americans need to take a hard look at what is going on in the Middle East, because it provides the clearest picture possible of the war we are in. On one side are al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbollah, Syria and Iran and their allies: Russia, France, Greece, and the UN majority. On the other is the only democracy in the land of Muslim and Arab terror. The origins of this front in the war on terror are crystal clear: the desire of the Muslim terrorists — the elected majority among Palestinian Arabs and the occupying Shi’ite army in Lebanon, backed by Syria and Iran — to destroy Israel and push the Jews into the sea.

The war reveals the impossibility of a Palestinian state and the necessity of a civilized occupying force in a region that is populated by a people who have been terminally brainwashed into an ideology of hate, which makes their self-government a crime waiting to happen.

By all means, go read the rest.

Milder and gentler, but in some ways even more striking, is Youssef M. Ibrahim’s To my Arab brethren, an open letter to the Palestinians:

Dear friends, you and your leaders have wasted three generations trying to fight for Palestine, but the truth is the Palestine you could have had in 1948 is much bigger than the one you could have had in 1967, which in turn is much bigger than what you may have to settle for now or in another 10 years. Struggle means less land and more misery and utter loneliness.

… You fire ridiculously inept Kassam rockets that cause little destruction and delude yourselves into thinking this is a war of liberation. Your government, your social institutions, your schools, and your economy are all in ruins.

Your young people are growing up illiterate, ill, and bent on rites of death and suicide, while you, in effect, are living on the kindness of foreigners, including America and the United Nations. Every day your officials must beg for your daily bread, dependent on relief trucks that carry food and medicine into the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, while your criminal Muslim fundamentalist Hamas government continues to fan the flames of a war it can neither fight nor hope to win.

This one, too, deserves to be read in full. In fact, it ought to be printed up in Arabic on millions of flyers and air-dropped over every Palestinian town, village, and 60-year-old "refugee camp."
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Enough is enough”

Posted by Richard on July 17, 2006

Earlier this evening, I attended the the Denver Jewish community gathering to show solidarity with the people of Israel. I’m happy to say that support for Israel is strong in Denver. The sanctuary at the BMH-BJ Synagogue looks like it normally seats maybe 250-300. They brought in all the extra chairs that could be squeezed in. Then they took down a partition to an adjoining room.

All the local news media were there, and the two reports I saw later both said over a thousand attended. Sounds about right to me. And although it was a predominantly Jewish crowd, there seemed to be a pretty good number of us gentiles, too. We were the folks looking a bit lost and awkward during the Hebrew parts, not sure when it was OK to applaud or what to do during the prayers and singing.

The program had some moving moments. Someone read a letter from former Denverites living in Israel describing the rocket attacks on their town. A young woman read a poem, partly in English, partly in Hebrew, about what life has been like for far too long in Israel. It began:

Another siren wails. Just an ordinary day.
Was it anyone I know?
How can life go on this way?

Two Israeli soldiers were there — they’re part of some exchange program or something; I didn’t catch the details. They seemed so terribly young! I want to say "a boy and a girl," but that wouldn’t be right — I’m pretty certain that everyone wearing the uniform of the IDF is a man or a woman.

One of the speakers was Dr. Shaul Gabbay, a professor at the University of Denver’s Graduate School of International Studies. Dr. Gabbay has written books, scholarly papers, and op-ed pieces about peace in the Middle East, and he reminded the crowd that he’s always been a "glass half full" person, someone who thought peace was possible and negotiations worthwhile. This is no "neo-con" or warmonger. He said he feels for the innocents on both sides, and he’s saddened by the death and suffering among the Palestinians and Lebanese. Then he said quietly, "But tonight I say — enough is enough."

I’m proud to say that I began what soon became a long, loud standing ovation.

Enough is enough. I stand with Israel.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Show support for Israel

Posted by Richard on July 15, 2006

[Bumped back to the top] The following event is in Denver. I’ll bet there’s a similar event in your community. Why not find it and attend? You don’t have to be Jewish to hope that the side of civilization, reason, enlightenment, and modernity prevails over the forces of barbarism, nihilism, death, and destruction.

We Are One
with
The People of Israel

Denver Jewish Community 
ISRAEL SOLIDARITY GATHERING

     this Sunday evening

 JULY 16th      6:30 – 7:30 pm  

BMH-BJ Sanctuary

560 S. Monaco Parkway

            Bring your family, bring your friends                      

Please pass this vital information on to your contact list
 

Bring all who are concerned about Israel  

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Does Hezbollah have Saddam’s drones?

Posted by Richard on July 15, 2006

UPDATE (7/15): As Emily Littela used to say, "Oh. That’s different. Never mind!" Initial reports were wrong. Apparently, the Israeli ship was hit by a sophisticated, radar-guided Iranian missile. Apparently, Iranian Revolutionary Guard troops are aiding Hezbollah, which lacks the sophistication and skills to use such a weapon without help.

An Israeli warship off the Lebanese coast apparently was severely damaged by an unmanned drone carrying explosives (emphasis added):

BEIRUT, Lebanon — Hezbollah rammed an Israeli warship with an unmanned aircraft rigged with explosives and set it ablaze Friday, Israeli military officials said, after attack jets smashed Lebanon’s links to the world one by one and destroyed the headquarters of the Islamic guerrilla group’s leader.

The Israeli warship, which had been carrying several dozen sailors, was towed to Haifa after suffering heavy damage. The fire was put out after several hours. The military confirmed news reports that four sailors were missing and said a search for them was underway.

The Israeli army said the source of the attack was still under investigation. But military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the probe, said the ship had been targeted by an unmanned drone.

The explanation indicated Hezbollah has added a new weapon to the arsenal of rockets and mortars it has used against Israel.

I wonder if Hezbollah’s drone looked like this:

Iraqi drone (UAV) with 25-ft. wingspan
Or like this:

The one on the left is, I believe, a Quds-10, the 25-ft.-wingspan drone that Hans Blix’s weapons inspectors discovered in March, 2003. Secretary of State Colin Powell included it in his testimony to the U.N. about the Iraq threat, arguing that it could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons. U.N. weapons inspectors were quite interested in Iraqi drones because Iraq had experimented with using them to deliver chemical weapons in the 80s. It may have a range greater than 150 km. (93 mi.).

The one on the right is a smaller, 12-ft.-wingspan "prototype" drone that the Iraqis trotted out to reporters immediately after the U.S. made public Blix’s discovery, claiming it was what the fuss was about. Reporters and commentators subsequently dismissed Powell’s claims, pointing out that the (smaller) drone couldn’t carry much more than a video camera, batteries, and electronics and was little more than a big model airplane.

Well, guess what? Even with just line-of-sight control (such as in a model airplane radio controller you could buy at Radio Shack), either drone could easily be flown into an Israeli ship a few miles off the Lebanese coast. The larger plane could obviously carry more high explosives, but even the "toy" on the right could probably carry 10-15 lbs., enough to cause a serious fire and damage on a small warship.

I wonder how many drones Hezbollah has and what size they are. You think Hezbollah’s drones were built in the Palestinian National Drone Factory? Me neither. I’m guessing they come from either Iran or Syria. Either way, don’t you think there’s a good chance that the "country of origin," as those little labels put it, was Saddam’s Iraq?

(HT to Jan of Denver for reminding me about Powell’s drone testimony.)
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

I’m standing by Israel

Posted by Richard on July 14, 2006

I’ve sent the following brief message to comments@whitehouse.gov:

Mr. President:

This is no time for waffling or ambivalence. Do not join the spineless Euroweenies calling on Israel to "stop hitting back."

We must unequivocally stand by Israel against the Islamofascists!

Thank you.

I’ve also signed the following letter by the Anti-Defamation League:

Dear Secretary-General Annan:

On the eve of the first session of the new Human Rights Council in Geneva, you rightly said: “I hope we are not going to see a situation where the Human Rights Council focuses on Israel, but not on the others.”

Sadly, that is exactly what has happened. The obsession with Israel which discredited the old Human Rights Commission has been transferred to the new Human Rights Council. We have had a resolution condemning Israel but ignoring Palestinian acts of terror and violence. Condemnation of Israel is to be a fixed item on the agenda at all future Council meetings.

We urge you to speak out again. Tell the Human Rights Council that its fixation with Israel is not acceptable. Make the Human Rights Council understand that its agenda should be about promoting human rights, and not the narrow interests of its member states, many of which themselves have appalling human rights records.

Mr. Secretary-General, if we cannot have a Human Rights Council which does not make a mockery out of the noble concept of human rights, then perhaps we should not have one at all. The choice is clear: reform or disband.

And I’ve made a donation to Magen David Adom — the Red Star of David, Israel’s counterpart to the Red Cross.

Please join me in any or all of these modest steps. Israel is fighting not just for its own people — it’s fighting for Western Civilization against the forces of darkness and barbarism. Decent, civilized people everywhere must stand by Israel.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Biased reporting

Posted by Richard on July 13, 2006

Thomas Sowell:

The same newspapers and television news programs that are constantly reminding us that some people under indictment "are innocent until proven guilty" are nevertheless hyping the story of American troops accused of rape in Iraq, day in and day out, even though these troops have yet to be proven guilty of anything.

We all need to understand the fraudulence of the claim that these media liberals who have been against the military for decades and who have missed no opportunity to smear the military in Iraq are now in the forefront of "honoring" our troops by rubbing our noses in their deaths, day in and day out.

Troops who have won medals for bravery in battle — including one soldier who won a Congressional Medal of Honor at the cost of his life — go unmentioned in most of the mainstream media that is focused on our troops as casualties that they can exploit.

A recent study by the Media Research Center found that the three big broadcast news networks — CBS, ABC, and NBC — ran 99 stories in 3 and 1/2 hours about the investigation of charges against Marines in the death of Iraqi civilians in Haditha last November.

These remain unproven charges in a country where people on the side of the terrorists include civilian women and children who set off bombs to kill American troops and who can set off lies to discredit those that they do not kill.

But the same networks that lavished 3 and 1/2 hours of coverage of these unproven charges gave less than one hour of coverage of all the American troops who have won medals for bravery under fire.

Every newspaper and every television commentator has a right to criticize any aspect of the war in Iraq or anywhere else. But when they claim to be reporting the news, that does not mean filtering out whatever goes against their editorial views and hyping unsubstantiated claims that discredit the troops.

Those troops deserve the presumption of innocence at least as much as anyone else.

You think Sowell exaggerates about the bias? Look at how little media coverage there was of Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester. She was the first woman ever awarded the Silver Star for actual combat (previous female Silver Star recipients, in WWII, were battlefield nurses) and a genuine hero.

You’d think the gripping story of the battle, the heroism and skill of Hester and her comrades, and the historic nature of her achievement would make this a compelling "man bites dog" news story, wouldn’t you? Well, you’d be wrong. As a commenter at the QandO post about Hester observed:

By the way, notice where in the WaPo the story appeared:

PAGE A21.

Now, if SGT Hester had put her panties on the head of a terrorist detainee, this would be on page A1 for the next several days. Instead, she gets A21.

Compare the number of stories, column inches, and broadcast minutes devoted to the heroic Hester with the coverage afforded to Jessica Lynch — a victim — and Lynndie England — a villain.

Google results (quotes included in search strings):

"Lynndie England" — 364,000 (plus 37,700 for the misspelling, "Lyndie England")
"Jessica Lynch" — 578,000
"Leigh Ann Hester" — 18,400
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Identifying India’s enemies clearly

Posted by Richard on July 12, 2006

In my earlier post about the 7/11 attack on Mumbai, I noted that it wasn’t just about Kashmir, even though a Kashmiri Islamist terror organization seemed to be responsible. Dr. Walid Phares’ new article, The Jihadist War Against India, provides much more detail about the "Laskar" (or "Lashkar") organization responsible and its connections to al-Qaeda, other organizations, and the global Islamofascist movement (bold emphasis added):

The main “movement” that starts in Pakistan and stretches into the Indian province of Kashmir is Laskar-e-Taiba, which was founded in the late 1980s by Hafiz Mohammad Saeed. … In reality, the “Laskars” are another form of Kashmiri Taliban whose aim is to establish an Emirate in the Indian province of Kashmir before joining forces with the Islamists of Pakistan and the Taliban of Afghanistan to create a massive and powerful “Jihadi Principality” in south Asia stretching from Iran to China.

The Laskar Taiba is under the ideological auspices of a Wahhabi-style foundation in Pakistan, the Markaz Dawa ul-Irshad, also created in the late 1980s. Some reports conclude that the “Dawa” is the mother ship, while the “Laskar” is the army, or one of its armed branches. In the jungle of south Asia’s Islamic fundamentalism, networks are intertwined but well connected. … As in the case of Chechnya, the Islamists hijacked the “ethnic cause” and transformed it into a jihadist onslaught. The “Laskar” and their supporters inside Kashmir and the rest of India have in reality moved the center of their struggle from classical separation from India to the establishment of a Taliban regime in northern India, whose real objective would be to radicalize India’s 100-million-strong Muslim community. Reports indicate that this penetration is now embodied by the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), accused by Indian sources of being an associate of the Laskar. Hence, the “Talibanization” of Kashmir’s issue has become the dominant threat to India and by ripple effect also to President Musharref Pakistan. For the second internal enemy to the aggregation of all jihadists from Waziristan to Kashmir is none other but the president of Pakistan. They believe he is “not helping them enough against India,” as they claim on their websites and, obviously, on al-Jazeera.

But above the clouds of the Pakistani-Indian magma, Osama Bin Laden has issued his mortal fatwas against the south Asian “infidel.” In at least their last four messages – audio or video – aired on al-Jazeera or posted on al Sahhab website, Osama bin laden and Zawahiri blasted the Hindus as an abhorred enemy. Lashing out against one billion Hindus in the subcontinent, not distinguishing between governments and individuals, the chief Jihadists ordered their henchmen to shed the blood of the Indian masses on ideological grounds.

Here again, after the U.S., Spain, Britain, Russia, and other target nations of terrorism, India will have to declare the identity of the criminals, not only in term of their names and the names of their organizations, but the name of their ideology and its content. The more jihadists widen their bloody fault lines against the international community, the more they will isolate themselves among “infidels” and Muslims alike.

I’ll say it again — the enemy isn’t terrorism. That’s a tactic. The enemy is a global jihadist movement of Islamofascists. Their beef isn’t about Iraq, or pictures of the prophet, or U.S. imperialism, or Kashmir, or some unspecified slight in Indonesia or one of the hundreds of other places they’ve struck. Their beef is that everyone isn’t a devout Muslim obeying their 7th-century laws — or at least a submissive and respectful dhimmi.

Everyone — Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, atheist, whatever — who refuses to convert or submit must either be prepared to fight or to die.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Today, we are all Indians

Posted by Richard on July 12, 2006

According to New Delhi Television (NDTV), Indian government sources said the Mumbai (Bombay) train attack was the work of Lashkar-e-Toiba, a Kashmiri Islamist terror organization with ties to al-Qaeda, working with the Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). The toll in the series of blasts now stands at 183 killed and 714 injured. (UPDATE: The Breaking News page linked above has changed. The referenced story is now here.)

Obviously, this attack wasn’t about Iraq. But it wasn’t just about Kashmir, either. It was part of the jihadist quest for world domination. A Washington Times editorial said it well:

Years ago, before the onset of the war on terror, Lashkar-e-Taiba enjoyed an undeserved reputation for focusing on Indian targets in Kashmir, which allowed some to conclude that the group should be of secondary interest to outsiders. The reputation was not deserved because the group had in fact begun striking targets outside Kashmir, and because its ideological affinities to al Qaeda, its direct ties to the global jihad and its hatred of Israel, India and the United States were well known. But it allowed the group to hold on to the nominal perception that its aims and purview were primarily regional, and thus primarily a problem for India.

No more. That was all but assured with the nuclearization of the subcontinent, confirmed by the parliamentary attack in 2001 and then by the destabilizing effects of subsequent attacks in Delhi and Bombay, which shattered whatever was left of the "Kashmir-only" image. Today the tragic Bombay bombings — designed to demoralize one democracy’s hub of finance and culture — underscore that fact, illustrating how fully the group has converged with the international jihad.

This attack must not be allowed to ratchet up tensions between India and Pakistan, which many Indians accuse of secret support for the terrorists. One early positive step was the Pakistani Foreign Ministry’s strong condemnation late on Tuesday. Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf augmented the message: "Terrorism is a bane of our times and it must be condemned, rejected and countered effectively and comprehensively." Pakistan must help India identify and apprehend the terrorists.

It might even take a cue from Europe. "We are all Americans now," some said after the September 11 attacks. Today, we are all Indians.

That NDTV page has a place where you can post a message of support or condolence for the people of Mumbai. (UPDATE: When the Breaking News page updated, the comments posted to the previous story went away, and I don’t see any archive or other way to access them now.)

I was heartened to see that a number of the commenters "got it" regarding the global war against the Islamists, and invoked Israel and the U.S. as examples to emulate. Here’s a sampling:

Terrorism is greatest threat to humankind in this era. We all collectively should stamp out this evil from society.

My heartfelt condolences for the breaved families. This is the high time INDIA should adopt ISRAEL policy. Eye for an eye.If you kill innocent people we will kill you. …

It’s sad that in a country which always supports peace against violence ,these sort of attacks keep happening again & again.The only way to solve this problem, is the american way of fighting against the terrorism. …

Ours soft state policy towards terrorist has proved fatal. … Can we learn from US and Jews ? Just kill the killer wherever they are.

Why India doesn’t retaliate to these as US did. It became annual act in mumbai, it seems terrosists are making annual function in mumbai by bombing the city

 Its time now for Indian government to follow the path of ISRAEL. … Its time now for INDIA to change its ANTI-TERRORISM policy & therefore its foreign policy too. …

… We should learn from Israel and take stern action against them.

Its high time we gave up being pussy cats and became like Israel.

Hmm. Maybe all of us who take the threat of Islamofascism seriously should adopt the slogan, "We are all Israelis now."
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

If this were WWII…

Posted by Richard on June 29, 2006

Go read Bill Smith’s wonderful satire at TCS, Times Reveals Enigma Codes:

WASHINGTON (SatireNewsService) — Yesterday, September 11, 1943, the New York Times reported that allied cryptanalysts had been, for several years, decoding top-secret Axis war messages. The Times story revealed that thousands of code-breakers working in a suburb of London had broken Germany’s Enigma military codes.

I especially liked this bit:

Peace groups and administration critics lauded the Times’ decision to publish the story. "This administration has performed numerous illegal acts during this illegal war," said Norman Chomsky, professor of phrenology and astrology at MIT and a leading critic of the American and British war efforts. "We have attacked Italy, which never attacked us. We have illegally sold arms to the British, we have illegally targeted Admiral Yamamoto for assassination, we have illegally jailed and executed so-called ‘German spies’ without benefit of trial. This administration is far worse than the regimes of Hitler, Tojo or Mussolini. It is drunk on power."

Wickedly funny. RTWT.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 3 Comments »

Calling evil evil

Posted by Richard on June 22, 2006

Ralph Kinney Bennett at TCS characterizes perfectly the monsters who brutally tortured and killed Pfc. Kristian Menchaca and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker — and, in passing, those who ignore, excuse, or refuse to judge them:

This is the routine evil of those worse than beasts.

This is the routine evil that beheaded Daniel Pearl, and Nick Berg; that left Van Gogh dead on a street in Holland.

This is the routine evil that still wraps itself in the garb of a religion while leaving young students bound and shot beside their bus and innocent women and children blown to bits in the market place.

The routine evil that draws comfort from the ignorant maunderings of a Murtha or a Sheehan; that somehow escapes the diligent moral radar of Human Rights Watch.

The routine evil that finds shelter in partisan "talking points" about the war and the shameless babble of armchair thumbsuckers about "reciprocity" with Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo.

The routine evil of men with a vision of a world of subjugated women and mindless children, ignorant of all but blood and suicide and revenge.

This is the routine evil that dreams of cyanide gas in subways and thirsts for a nuclear weapon.

This is the routine evil that some still think can be embraced into civility, "brought into government," tamed away from its loathsome imperatives.

This is the routine evil that will not be ignored and must be exterminated.

Bravo.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Is Murtha losing it?

Posted by Richard on June 21, 2006

While waiting (in vain) for Blog-City to come back on line last night, I read some transcripts from the Sunday news shows. Tim Russert’s interview of Rep. John Murtha is just unbelievable. I used to think his anti-war rhetoric was political posturing, but now I wonder if it’s something more — something sad. I wonder if Murtha’s mind is beginning to go. He is, after all, 74 years old.

What else would explain how a Marine Corps veteran with a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts could hold up the ignominious U.S. withdrawal from Somalia (see Black Hawk Down) as a good example? What else would explain the semicoherent, disjointed rambling that characterized the entire interview?

Regarding the current state of affairs in Iraq, Murtha said:

It’s worse today than it was six months ago when I spoke out initially. When I spoke out, the garbage wasn’t being collected, oil production below pre-war level—all those things indicated to me we weren’t winning this, and it’s the same today, if not worse. Anbar Province. There’s not one project been done in Anbar Province. Two million people live there. They have no water at all, no oil production, they have no electricity at all in that province where is the heartland of the defense. The first six months we went in there, no—there—not a shot was fired, so it shows you how it’s changed.

It’s getting worse. That’s why I feel so strongly. All of us know how important it is internationally to win this war. We know how important. We import 20 million barrels of oil a day—we use 20 million barrels of oil. We know how important, international community. But we’re doing it all ourself, and there’s no plan that makes sense. We need to have more international cooperation. We need to redeploy our troops, the periphery. What happened with Zarqawi could have been done from the out—it was done from the outside. Our planes went in from the outside. So there’s no reason in the world that they can’t redeploy the troops. They’ve become the targets, they’re caught in the civil war, and I feel very strongly about it.

Asked about Rove’s "cut and run" charge, Murtha said he wanted to "change direction" and cited Beirut and Mogadishu as examples to follow:

Now, let’s, let’s—give me, give you an example. When we went to Beirut, I, I said to President Reagan, “Get out.” Now, the other day we were doing a debate, and they said, “Well, Beirut was a different situation. We cut and run.” We didn’t cut and run. President Reagan made the decision to change direction because he knew he couldn’t win it. Even in Somalia, President Clinton made the decision, “We have to, we have to change direction. Even with tax cuts. When we had a tax cut under Reagan, we then had a tax increase because he had to change direction. We need to change direction. We can’t win a war like this.

Later, he reiterated those examples:

The trouble is it keeps getting worse and they don’t want to admit they made a mistake. You just have—at some point you got to reassess it like Reagan did in, in Beirut, like, like Clinton did in Somalia, you just have to say, “OK, it’s time to change direction.”

Beirut and Mogadishu — bin Laden said it was those two events that convinced him the U.S. was weak and vulnerable. And Murtha wants us to emulate them. Incredible.

Russert asked about the killing of al-Zarqawi, and Murtha said in part:

Well, it was a military accomplishment from outside the country. We, we bombed, we bombed it. The, the information came from the Iraqis to the Iraqis to the U.S., and then we bombed where he was. And it—so it came from the outside.

I’ll tell you, here, here’s the problem we have in, in this kind of a war. First, first of all you’ve got our troops in the green zone. President says, “OK, I’m going in. And it was nice to see a democratic country—a democratic organization in operation.” It’s in the green zone. It’s a fortress. They’re not out in, in the public. They’re—they cannot go outside the—when I first went to Iraq, you could drive any place. As a matter of fact, when I found the 44,000 body armor shortages I was out in the division in the field. When I went to Anbar—but now you can’t go outside the green zone. So, so—the, the government’s inside the green zone. So they’re, they’re where Saddam Hussein was.

Then, then let’s take the prison situation. We, we pass in the House and the Senate a veto-proof legislation that they shouldn’t veto and then the president says, “Well, we’re going to continue the same policy.” Now what does that say? We’re fighting a war of ideals and ideas. It’s no longer a military war. We have won the military war against their, their enemy. We toppled Saddam Hussein. The military’s done everything that they can do. And so it’s time for us to redeploy. And Iraqi—only Iraqis can settle this.

When pressed by Russert about where to "redeploy" our troops, Murtha suggested:

REP. MURTHA: Kuwait’s one that will take us. Qatar, we already have bases in Qatar. So Bahrain. All those countries are willing to take the United States. Now, Saudi Arabia won’t because they wanted us out of there in the first place. So—and we don’t have to be right there. We can go to Okinawa. We, we don’t have—we can redeploy there almost instantly. So that’s not—that’s, that’s a fallacy. That, that’s just a statement to rial up people to support a failed policy wrapped in illusion.

MR. RUSSERT: But it’d be tough to have a timely response from Okinawa.

REP. MURTHA: Well, it—you know, they—when I say Okinawa, I, I’m saying troops in Okinawa. When I say a timely response, you know, our fighters can fly from Okinawa very quickly. And—and—when they don’t know we’re coming. There’s no question about it. And, and where those airplanes won’t—came from I can’t tell you, but, but I’ll tell you one thing, it doesn’t take very long for them to get in with cruise missiles or with, with fighter aircraft or, or attack aircraft, it doesn’t take any time at all. So we, we have done—this one particular operation, to say that that couldn’t have done, done—it was done from the outside, for heaven’s sakes.

Okinawa. 5000 miles from Iraq, through Chinese and Iranian air space. Well over 20 hours round-trip flying time, with multiple refuelings — "it doesn’t take any time at all." That’s just bizarre.

Russert asked what the effect would be on the fall elections if the Dems were successfully portrayed as the "party of cut and run":

Well, I think the public would have to be portrayed as cut-and-run if you talk about the Democrats being portrayed—every place I go, people understand what I’m saying. The public has been away ahead. For instance, when I came to Congress in ‘74, I remember distinctly the public—they said we, we’d only win a few seats, we had a two-to-one majority at that time. We won all five of the special elections that year, we lost—we—when Vice President Ford’s seat—only had it for two years, but we won that seat. Then in, in ‘94, when the public turned against the Congress, we thought we’d lose 18, we lost 52 seats.

So, you know, it, it’s easy to them to try to spin the fact that it’s not going to happen. And I think we do have to have legitimate proposals. I think we have to talk about a lot of things besides the war itself, but the war has such a ramification, such—the debt itself is $8.4 trillion dollars. How we going to pay for this? Obviously, we’re going to have to adjust taxes from the higher level, there’s no question about it if you’re going to—unless you want your children and grandchildren paying for this. So we—a lot of problems we have to face. It’s an individual thing. Some areas it’s not as popular as others, but in the long run, a lot of people have changed their mind. It’s changed dramatically from the way it was today, and I think most—well, two thirds of the Democrats agree with my position now.

Surely, the man’s mind hasn’t always worked like this. I may express low opinions of Congress from time to time, but I don’t think you can serve 32 years there without the ability to express coherent and complete thoughts. I don’t think a rational person, fully in touch with reality, would insist that there’s no power or water in Anbar province, or suggest "redeploying" from Iraq to Okinawa and just dismiss concerns about response time.

I suspect that Murtha is descending into senile dementia, and I think a mental status exam and complete clinical evaluation are in order. My sympathies to the Murtha family. But I hope someone intervenes soon, before he embarrasses himself, the Congress, and this country any further.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »