Thousands in Egypt rally for Palestinians

This is starting to get comical. I don't think our government could be that stupid...but maybe they are.

LMFAO!!!!! Chronic problem is right!

If they want to fight I'm sure Hamas has a few AK's laying around now since everyone is in hiding now.

"The U.S. supports Egypt with weapons and soldiers, so our government is paralyzed and unable to do anything," said worshipper Mahmoud Abu el-Bashir."

Which is exactly why they are not living in conditions like Palestine. You may not want to bite the hand that feeds you. Cut off US aid, and watch Egypt turn into a sand dune like Palestine.

If their so dedicated to the jihad, why don't they walk their fannies across the desert and help a little. Heck Israel could a few more targets. So much jihad and so many whom are cowards.

" 'The U.S. supports Egypt with weapons and soldiers, so our government is paralyzed and unable to do anything, said worshipper Mahmoud Abu el-Bashir."
-- from the article above

Robert comments as follows: "That's the best argument for the jizya to Egypt that I've heard in a long time. I doubt, however, that it will ultimately hold true."

I don't think it is an argument for the Jizyah of foreign aid. Mahmoud abu el-Bashir, like the other hysterics in hysteria assembled, or like those Cairene crowds that began to chant and rant in mid-May 1967, he has no idea of what Israel can do, if attacked, to Egypt. Nasser did not understand this in May, 1967. And at intervals Egyptian governments forget this, and go to war, and though the Americans saved them in 1973, they surely realize that if they try anything again, the entire Sinai will be lost, and for good. It will not be yielded a third time -- not went most of it became "Egyptian" only in 1922 (something we all tend to forget, don't we?).

The only reason Egypt does not go to war is for the same reason Syria does not go to war with Israel. It can't afford to lose. Mubarak likes the nearly $2 billion in Jizyah he receives, bu if he were convinced that Israel were weak enough, his tanks would be moving and his planes flying today. Why do you think Egyptian scientists were discovered to be collaborating with the Iraqis? Why are they working today on certain projects? Why, a year or two ago, was Egypt the third largest purchaser of foreign armaments, after China and India?

What keeps the peace between Egypt and Israel is certainly not the Camp David Accords. And is not the American Jizyah (that just helps give the ruling elite extra pocket money, and earns even more hatred from the Cairene masses for the United States, and not only for the mistaken reason believed in by Mahmoud Abu el-Bashir above). It is the IDF, the only effective keeper of any Arab-Israeli peace.

should be- use a few more

This is fantastic news. The Egyptians truly love the Pali's!

"People inside the mosque say they will die to save Palestine, but our governments don't do anything to help," said Mohammed al-Zaeem, 36, a visiting Syrian."

OK - that was a bit hopeful of me. What they are saying is that they love "Palestine" - a land mass to be reclaimed for dar-al-Islam. The weren't actually expressing a love for the Palestinian people.

But here's an idea for the morally warped Muslims and their fellow travelers on this planet:

Save the Palestinian PEOPLE! It's really really easy to do (provided one cares about human beings as compared to the goals of the jihad). Look how huge Egypt is as compared to Israel and the Pali "territories":

http://www.infoplease.com/atlas/country/egypt.html

The Israeli's managed to take in something like 1 million Jews fleeing the ME into that small territory. How about the Arab world prove their equal love for the Pali's by taking them in?

What? Not enough room you say?.

Try to even find Israel on this map of the ME and think of the shame on Arab Muslims that they can simply find no room for the Palestinians, considering that the Israel's have taken in millions of refugees.:

http://www.mideastweb.org/maps.htm

If, as Muslims claim, this is merely an issue of concern for the PALESTINIAN PEOPLE" - then please, some regular Muslim poster (or even reader here) here - explain to us why no Muslims in that vast Arab world are willing to take in these Pali refugees - these people whom Muslims claim to care so very much about? Especially given the fact that the Israeli's have welcomed with open arms such a much larger proportional number of Jews into their tiny, tiny country. I hate to say it Muslims - but the Jews are putting you guys to shame in the "compassion" department.

So Muslims - what is your excuse to find no room for these Pali's? Could it possibly be that you have been lying all along about the underlying nature of this whole conflict? And lying about the the fact that it really isn't about your concern for the Pali's as human beings at all? Could it be that all you Muslims worldwide are merely brutally USING the Pali's as "shock troops" (Hugh's recurrent term to describe this madness) in a JIHAD against Israel?

Could it be that you Muslims actually couldn't give a flying f***k about the Pali's?

Could it be that the one people on this earth who have demonstrated more concern for the Pali's as human beings (showing a ridiculous amount of restraint, treating wounded Pali's in their hospitals - people who want them wiped off the face of the earth), are, in point of fact, the Israeli's?

And doesn't that just burn you Muslims up? Having to face the bare facts that it is the Israeli's - those you despise - who are have demonstrated more genuine personal love for the Pali's than any of you Muslims who give so much empty lip serive to your supposed concern for these people?

Come on Muslims. Let's see your "compassion" for the Pali's as individual human beings. If you actually cared about them, you would obviously absorb them into your VAST land masses. You have plenty of room and you know it. Prove your "love" for the Pali's. Show them the warm embrace of the "ummah". Sort of how you proved your love and affection for the largely Muslim victims of the Asian tsunami through your generous Muslim donations which far outstripped the pathetic donations of the evil kuffirs. Cause Islam is all about love and peace. Yeah.

The IDF is doing this world a great service. The world just doesn't know it, and probably never will.

CAIRO, Egypt - Several thousand protesters at one of Cairo's main mosques called Friday for holy war against Israel to help the Palestinians in their conflict with the Jewish state."

They are so concerned for "oppressed Palestinians" and all the while Arabs are engaged in the mass murder of Negro Africans in Darfur. Evict the "Palestinians" and give the land to the Africans.

Egypt better not let all those ancient monuments crumble. They will prove to be the only way that they keep from getting bombed into the stone age with the other Muslim nations one day.

Or maybe even the Sphinx won't be enough deterence. I guess it all depends on the level of attrocity that we undergo in the next "big attack".

Still, there's something pathetic about a Superpower that lacks the will to use said power right now. Like eunuchs for the Sultan's harem, that's what Western nations are becoming: lots of muscle, little brains and no b-- well, you know.

And Israel just sits in the middle, under constant threat of extinction. How many more years/decades/centuries is this dance going to play out? How much insanity do we have to suffer while the Muslims just become a larger, more angry, more desperate, more farspread, more evil force in the world?

Btw, the whole "Palestinian issue" is and has always been nothing more than a propaganda tool for the Arab-Muslim nations, and a direct extension of their terrorist arms. They will always seek the genocide of the Jews. They have for 1300 years, they did in WW 2, they did in 2 direct attacks on Israel in the 20th century and they certainly have no reason to stop in the current climate.

There never was a Palestine. It's all a damn lie, just like Islam.

Caroline-

The issue is not the issue-as you well know. The issue is Dar-al-Islam and the extermination of Israel. The Pals are pawns in the game-as you know.

The whole thing reminds me of a scene from the movie The Godfather. Paulie (similar to Muslims re Israel) likes to talk about extermination. But things don't turn out as Pal Paulie plans....

PAULIE'S VOICE
They're clean. They told me they exterminate them
CLEMENZA'S VOICE (as Rocco laughs)
Exterminate? That's a bad word to use: exterminate! Get this guy. Watch out we don't exterminate you [laughs]
PAULIE'S VOICE You think that's funny, or what?
CLEMENZA'S VOICE (laughs with Rocco) Hey, Paulie -- [In Italian: Did you fart?]
PAULIE'S VOICE Hey, Rocco, what did you do?
ROCCO'S VOICE (laughs) Not me -- nothin' -- it wasn't me
PAULIE'S VOICE (laughs) It's gotta be him, then...
CLEMENZA'S VOICE
Pull over, will yah? I gotta take a leak.
[Paulie pulls over, and Clemenza gets out to relieve himself. Rocco shoots Paulie three times as we hear a variation of the "Title Theme" music]
CLEMENZA (back at the car)
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.

Genesis 21:9 But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, (Ishmael)......Islam has been Mocking the Jews a long time.Like little boys who want better toys...I sat Watching Islam in 1979 in disbelief that grown men could act so childish...Amazing The Koran frys the brain and makes Evil Zombie men like some 1950's sci-fi movie. This needs to STOP...Take out Hamas..Wipe them off the face of the Earth...Send in the Mossad and take out Hizbullahs leaders and Blow the weapons to hell...Send Islam a message...GO TO HELL!

Ahhhh! Those wonderful fun filled "youthful" Friday evenings. Really makes one whack nostalgic. High-school football, live music, shopping, killing Jews, dating, opps... wait a second

/sarc

Mahmoud Abu el-Bashir's dreamy belief that the government of Egypt has been bribed by the Americans not to make war on Israel, when what any Egyptian ruler must worry about is another June 10, 1967, and what it would do to his rule, is discussed at another thread under DhimmiWatch.

The last two postings, in reply to someone who insists that Egypt is peaceful because of that "bribe" and that "bribes" similarly are what may be needed to encourage sectarian and ethnic divisions within Islam (and therefore, in his logic, why do I overlook their value, their efficacy, their necessity?).

The two replies to the two related questions (why Egypt does not go to war, why bribery is dismissed as a useful instrument of sowing discord and division in the camp of Islam?) are below:

Posting #1.

"Hugh writes: 'What keeps Egypt from making war, in the military sense -- in every other sense Egypt has not stopped making war against Israel even for a second -- is fear of Israeli counter-attack, and fear of losing, and never getting back, the Sinai. That's all.

No it's not. That never stopped them before. They got totally clobbered by Israel in 1967 but that didn't stop them from trying for a rematch only six years later in 1973. And with their surprise attack, they very nearly succeeded that time."
-- from a poster above

That "never stopped them before"? In May 1948 the Arabs attacked the nascent state of Israel, 600,000 Jews with no arms (the rifles they had had, given them by the British during the war because the British knew that the Jews of Palestine would help fight the Germans, and they did, volunteering for the most dangerous, suicidal missions in Syria, Iraq, and Egypt, were taken back by the British after the war), and certainly thought they would win. They learned a lesson. That lesson, which was to avoid all-out assault, was then over time unlearned, and in May 1967 Nasser showed that he believed that this time the assault would be successful. The Arab fiasco that followed kept the peace, for a while -- until 1973. And in that case, Israel pulled things out only after a few days and heavy losses, but that it did pull things out, that it could, without the Nixon-Kissiner saving of Egypt's Third Army from complete destruction by Sharon, taught Sadat a lesson. The lesson was to use wiles and smiles to win what could not be won by war, and that is exactly what he did in offering that "peace" that consisted of Israel handing over tangible assets, the Sinai, and Egypt promising merely to refrain from hostile acts and to encourage friendly relations which, of course, the Egyptian government had no intention of doing, and never did.

Israel's military might "has never stopped them [the Egyptians]before?" Are you crazy? Do you really think that the defeat of 1967 did not, for a long period, stop not only Egypt but the rest of the Arab countries, from attacking, did not make them realize that they would have to be more patient, try to wear Israel down with an economic, diplomatic, and every other kind of siege, but not with an all-out military assault? A lesson can be learned, and was, but that doesn't mean that it remains vivid, and the lesson was not "we must never attack Israel again" but rather, "we must not attack Israel until we have sufficiently weakened it so as to have a chance of success." By 1973, Sadat and the Syrians thought they had a reasonable chance of success if they launched a surprise attack on Yom Kippur. And they were right. They almost pulled it off.

For you to keep telling me, and others, that you think Egypt has deserved its $60 billion, for you to deny the obvious malevolence of Egypt toward Israel, not merely in its television programming (a multi-part series based on "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is not exactly fulfilling the solemn commitments under the Camp David Accrods), but in the thousands of rifles, and explosives and other materiel smuggled, without the Egyptians being perfectly aware, for years, through tunnels dug from Egyptian-controlled Sinai right into Gaza, and in the refusal to allow Egyptians to travel to Israel, Mubarak's refusal to meet with his Israeli counterpart in Israel, and in so many other ways, all shows that Egypt has failed to live up to its quite modest promises under those Accords.

Egypt in 2004 was the third largest spende on foreign arms, after China and India. Why did Egypt buy $7.5 billion in arms? Why does Egypt continue, if its people are so impoverished, to spend billions on arms? You tell me why.

Why are we supporting a corrupt and vicious regime, one that has locked up Ayman Nour, that closes blogs and arrests the bloggers, that permits assaults on Copts, that protects the Sudan from any effective intervention in Darfur? What is it you think that $60 billion has bought us? Has it bought Egypt's honoring the Camp David duties? Has it changed Egypt's attitude toward Israel, official and unofficial, in the press and in the poopulation? Suppose back in 1979 the Egyptians really had decided to end hostile propgaganda and to try to encourage friendly relations toward Israel, as it was supposed to, as it was required to, and had done that for the past 27 years?

And what about the fact that Egyptians are among the most anti-American people in the entire Middle East-- far more so than the Iranians, who get nothing from us? In fact, only in Jordan, the other big recipient of American aid, is the hatred of Americans more widespread.

A lesson here, perhaps? Since Arab states are all despotisms (save for Iraq, but in Iraq the returns are not yet in, the government not yet settled), anyone who gives aid to that government will be contributing to that despotism. And besides, Muslims do not react as non-Muslims do to American aid. They are not grateful for it. They expect it. They demand it. They are outraged if the Infidels even so much as hint at cutting it. And it is for that reason alone, that all aid to malevolent Egypt should not be cut, but eliminated entirely.

It is importnat for Infidels and Muslims alike that all examples of the Jizyah be ended. Important to establish a healthy relationship, one that does not inadvertently mimic, even re-establish, the 1350-year-old Jizyah paid by dhimmis, non-Muslims subjugated to Muslim rule. It is important for Muslims to earn their own living, and not, in Dar al-Harb or Dar al-Islam, to be allowed to soak the Infidels. Not by exploiting, as in the countries of Western Europe, all conceivable benefits offered by the state, and then some. Not in the Muslim countries themselves, by managing either to impose a disguised Jizyah on non-Muslims, as happens in Malaysia, or by extracting from non-Msulim taxpayers in Infidel lands foreign aid which is merely a different kind of disguised Jizyah.

The very idea that it is money that is buying Egypt's "peace" is not only false, but raises a different question. If the only way that we can buy "peace" from Egypt, and prevent it from attacking Israel by bribing it, what does that tell us about Egypt? Anything? Nothing? What does that say about Egypt as a "peaceful" country, as a country that honors its treaty commitments?

Posted by: Hugh at June 30, 2006 04:28 PM

Posting #2.

"Hugh, your position here is inconsistent. You say that you want to see Muslim factions (Shi'a, Sunni, insurgents, governments, etc.) disunited amongst each other because it may weaken the overall Islamic jihad against us. Fine. If it costs billions to bribe some of these Islamic factions to keep them from uniting and maybe even turn them on one another, that's money well spent. It's a fraction of what we've spent to build "democracy" (whatever that means) in Iraq."
-- from the same poster, and same post, above

What kind of "bribe" is necessary to make the Shi'a resent their treatment, under Saddam Hussein, before Saddam Hussein, all the way back to the beginning of modern Iraq, when Shi'a tribes were in revolt, against the idea of being ruled by what was essentially a Sunni-run govenment? What kind of "bribe" would be needed to cause the Sunni (Wahhabi) rulers of Saudi Arabia, and its people, to despise the Shi'a, to regard them as inferior, to treat them the way those Shi'a have been treated in Al-Hasa province? What kind of "bribe" would be necessary to get Osama bin Laden to praise Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, Sunni Arab "warrior," who repeatedly urged Sunnis to treat the Shi'a as "rafidite dogs" and "Infidels"? What kind of "bribe" would be necessary to get the Shi'a who constitute 70% of the population of Bahrain to chafe at the Sunni Arab ruler who presumes to rule? What kind of "bribe" would force the Sunnis in Lebanon to begin to look with fear and horror at the Shi'a Hezbollah, with their black balaklavas and Kalashnikovs, and their threat to overturn the old political arrangements in Lebanon? What kind of "bribe" would be necessaary to force the Sunnis in Afghanistan to attack the Shi'a Hazara? What made them do so under the Taliban -- was someone bribing them? And what about all the attacks on Shi'a mosques and other institutions, and even individuals, by Sunni terrorists who have been targetting Shi'a for years? Did they need a "bribe" to do that? Tell me what bribes, by whom, where and when.

And it is the same for the ethnic divisions presented by Islam, a belief-system that has universalist pretensions but really is a vehicle for Arab supremacism. What kind of "bribe" was necesary for Saddam Hussein and his Arab army to massacre 182,00 Kurds? What "bribe" was required to force the Arab League, and all the other supposedly indignant Arab rulers, to shut up entirely, to say not a word, in protest against those massacres? What kind of "bribe" was necessary to force Arab Muslims to kill non-Arab Muslims in Darfur? What kind of "bribe" was necessary to make the Arabs in Algeria treat the Berbers with contempt, and deny them the right (until recently) to speak their own, Berber, language, to maintain their own, Berber, customs, and to get a reasonable share of the wealth in a country which, after all, once was inhabited by Berbers, and invaded by Arabs?

No "bribes" are necessary at all. You are ignoring 1350 years of Islamic history. For the division between Sunni and Shi'a goes back to the late 7th century. And Arab supremacism (the taking of an Arab name by converts, the prostrating toward Mecca, the emuliating in every way the customs, manners, and behavior of 7th-century Arabs, and above all one particular Arab, is not a later addition to Islam -- it is part of Islam itslf.

Posted by: Hugh at June 30, 2006 04:48 PM

Frank: "The issue is not the issue-as you well know. The issue is Dar-al-Islam and the extermination of Israel. The Pals are pawns in the game-as you know.
The whole thing reminds me of a scene from the movie The Godfather."

Good one. Seriously, though, is there any MORE perfect an analogy one can draw for the Islamic concept of the "jizya", than the Mafia and their protection racket? We even get the "eye for an eye" thrown in for good measure!

At this point I am beginning to entertain the historical question as to how much of the BAD the west has learned, we might not have absorbed from Islam? Not only the Mafia but the Crusades (a sort of reverse or defensive jihad), the brutality of the Inquisition and the Spanish conquistadors in the New World, the concept of "assasination", Hitler's holocaust etc etc...Oh - even that legendary monster "Dracula" - Vlad the Impaler - who was basically fighting fire with fire against the savage Muslims. (Either we got all this from the Muslims or Islam itself merely encapsulates all the very worst of human nature - and either way - what does it matter when one can't even figure out which is the chicken and which the (thoroughly rotten and putrid) egg?)

I know the "issue is not the issue". But still - a liitle piece of me retains the hope that even if Muslims are deaf to what is really going on, there might be an infidel out there somewhere who is capable of looking at that map of Israel vs the VAST VAST Middle East, and capable of appreciating the absurdity of the Muslim (and their fellow travelers) talking points on this conflict (those poor helpless Muslim victims, if we only solved the plight of the Pali's (that "final solution") - all this pesky terror stuff would simply go away) - and capable of putting 2 and 2 together. I suppose one can always hope in any case.

Caroline-

That's a great thought. I never thought of it before but Islam is a protection racket-not unlike that of Al Capone and Murder Incorporated. It fits.

In this story Muslims show up and promise protection to Dhimmi storeowners for jizya. If the Dhimmis do not cooperate (in Israel or elsewhere) the store gets blown-up. (Al Capone and Vito Coreleone are dressed as Muslim clerics.)

The movie is called The Five Families of Dar-Al-Islam-and has a puppet-master-cleric manipulating the puppet strings (a la The Godfather book) of a "Palistenian" puppet. The Palestinian is Fredo.

Cleric and puppet pal converse about a coming visit to a "protected" dhimmi...

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?ei=UTF-8&p=godfather+theme&b=3&oid=00000000000008b9&rurl=hills.ccsf.cc.ca.us&vdone=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fvideo%3Fei%3DUTF-8%26p%3Dgodfather%2Btheme&vback=Results

More than 3,000 people packed Al-Azhar Mosque

I posted about this

3K protesters in a 13M City?

Can someone say

"Not with a Bang, but a whimper?"

Caroline-

Islam-the game...

http://www.ifilm.com/player/?ifilmId=2717243&refsite=7063

These protests do prove that they are a very small minority of extremists.

Over 80 million Egyptians, only 3k show up for a protest against Israel? My HS basketball games have more people in the crowds.

Big blow to all the paranoid racists here that think all Muslims are TERRARAIRSTS!

What keeps the peace between Egypt and Israel is the IDF, the only effective keeper of any Arab-Israeli peace.
Posted by: Hugh at June 30, 2006 08:23 PM
+++++++++++++++

is this the reason that the mops and the cult of islam does not attack Israel???

No Muslims have attacked the United States in 5 years...

Answer this: What is more threatening to your life here in America?
a. choking on lollipops
b. getting struck by lightning
c. illegal immigrant killing you (there are over 100k illegals in prison)
d. Muslim extremist terrorists

From an above poster: "These protests do prove that they are a very small minority of extremists.

Over 80 million Egyptians, only 3k show up for a protest against Israel? My HS basketball games have more people in the crowds.

Big blow to all the paranoid racists here that think all Muslims are TERRARAIRSTS!"

---

Um..nice try, but you probably aren't aware that Egypt is one of the few secularly influenced nations in the Middle East. In fact, Communists worked very hard for many years to steer Egypt away from Islam, but without much success. The Muslim Brotherhood reigns supreme in the underbelly of Egypt.

Also, in a nation that survives because of international tourism, do you honestly believe that we're going to see the truth in numbers from Egyptian protests? Don't be naive. These Muslims are no different then all the rest -- if the cameras are rolling, they make less noise, but if you catch them in the local mosque or behind closed doors, it's an entirely different story.

And you said the key phrase that blows your entire ly misguided ploy out of the water: "paranoid racists". Race has nothing to do with it. Muslims come in all shapes and colors and are in every country in the world.

The Qur'an teaches the terror. The Qur'an teaches the hate. The Qur'an teaches the racism. The Qur'an teaches the sexism. The Qur'an squelches modernity. The Qur'an preaches tactics of taquiyaa. The Qur'an calls for the jizya. The Qur'an tells Muslims that it is their right and duty to dominate the world.

Another taqiyaa poster from above put forth this question : No Muslims have attacked the United States in 5 years...

Answer this: What is more threatening to your life here in America?
a. choking on lollipops
b. getting struck by lightning
c. illegal immigrant killing you (there are over 100k illegals in prison)
d. Muslim extremist terrorists

----

You left off :

e. Westerners (or Muslim agents) that spin tired and uneducated (or deliberate) propaganda with the sole goal of desensitizing people to the real threat that Islam poses for the world.

Foehammer, All I see in those verses that you very educated and cultured (HAHA!) posters copy and paste are very vague and prove nothing about a religion that encompasses over 1.3 Billion people. Believe it or not (and I'm sure close-minded simpletons like you won't), Christianity has much blood and terror throughout its history. In fact, 6 MILLION Jews were killed by someone other than the 'evil' Muslims who seem to be responsible for every crime in history in your views. Think about it, 6 million killed and here we are talking about 'all' Muslims being terrorists because of a couple isolated terrorist attacks that kill numbers that don't aren't even comparable to the secularists and Christian fundamentialists that have killed in the name of their religion.

It is a minority of extremists. Don't kid yourselves.

"only 3k show up for a protest against Israel..."
-- from a poster above

The reason for this is not sweetness-and-light, but rather the appearance, in force, of the Egyptian police. Why? Because the rally-cum-mosque-attendance was sponosred by the Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood, and if others had been allowed to appear outside the mosque, which was full, it might have lead to disturbances, chiefly against the corrupt, and therefore "Infidel" Mubarak, and Mubarak has no desire to let these crowds get out of hand. He must remember May 1967. Nasser whipped the crowds up, and then the crowds whipped Nasser up.

What if tens or hundreds of thousands of people started to demand action by the Egyptian government? Can that government admit that "we aren't strong enough to attack Israel yet"? Would a maddened crowd accept that as a reason?

No wonder they are keeping a lid on things. And the same is true in other Arab states. They don't dare let things get out of hand -- the regimes will be the first to go.

It was a military coup that brought Nasser, Naguib, and others first to power. It was a military defeat that caused Nasser's loss of face and premature death. It was the Ikhwan that killed Sadat. It is the Ikhwan now enraged at the Family-and-Friends Plan of Mubarak. What would you do, if you were Mubarak? You'd keep those demonstrations to a minimum.

In Jordan, the same thing. Abdullah was assassinated. Hussein survived many attempts; his autobiography bore the title "Uneasy Lies the Head." Remember the assassination of Prime Minister Wasfi el-Tal, with his murderers bending down to lick his blood? How many other attempted murders and coups have been attempted in Jordan? If you were King Abdullah, wouldn't you keep those demonstrations to a minimum?

In Saudi Arabia, where a single family, the Al-Saud, has been steadily stealing much of the country's oil wealth for the past half century, and where it now faces domestic terrorism (that the Saudis call "hirabah" and then others, whose enthusiastic pushing of such a word for use bgy the Americans -- such as M. Jim Gerard -- want that word used to describe Muslim attacks on Infidels,not merely Muslim attacks on corrupt Muslim regimes), they can't allow such gatherings, for in the end the crowds, if they were to be allowed, would end up denouncing the the princes, princelings, and princelettes of the House of Saud.

But that does not mean that the hysteria and hate is not there. It is. It won't go away. Nothing can make it go away, for the Infidel state of Israel is simply intolerable. But of course, so too are all the Lands of the Infidels that remain as yet unsubmissive to Islam. But Da'wa and demographic conquest, may succeed where terror cannot. Unless, of course, the Western world, or a sufficient number of people in that world, come to their senses in time.

When the Israeli's demolish the Pali positions in Gaza today, or 'Arik's' push accross the Suez in 73(recall his banadaged head in that famous photo), or Americans pummeling into Kabul or Baghdad in minutes, or was that a few days? it strangles the Islamic psyche.

For Islam preaches a singular ideology of the divine power of Allah, the inevitable crushing of the Jew, the crusader, and, even more, of the bravery of the Muslim warrior, sword in hand. True, they are good against defenceless Armenian merchents, or Nick Berg or Danny Pearl. And, to be fair, who kills innocent Americans better than the Religion of 'peace.' Exhibit A. 911. Yes, they are good at slaughtering us, hiding behind their double talk and black mask, puffing their chests for the internet video.

But, the audacity, the sheer bravado of a bunch of cowardly sons of apes and monkeys from Tel Aviv locking down a million plus shahidi Jihadis, their leaders hiding in caves, their fighters probably hiding in an elementary school. Why, it is almost too much too take.

Something happens in moments like these; 'they' get a clear reflection in the mirror. For a second, their is no 'soaring' Jihadi poem or video, just a scared coward looking back at him. This 'truth' is too much too bare for Islam. For it is one thing for a million Shias to kill a million Sunnis. It is one thing papa Assad to kill 10000 plus Islamists in Syria, rolling over their heads with tanks(CNN missed that). But, it is quite another thing for the cursed and lowly Jew, outnumbered more than 50 to 1 to thrive in every possible manner: culturally, armed forces, bravery, intellect, medicine, film in a midst of Islamic stagnation. It is quite another thing for the Jew to stand upright, inflict revenge, render fear into the hearts of the reflection of Mohamed . . . PBUH. Yea, right.

It is a minority of extremists. Don't kid yourselves.

Posted by: Arian at July 1, 2006 12:06 AM

More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

http://xrl.us/Spannish

More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland.

http://xrl.us/Irlend

What about the 80million of the Hindu Kush

http://xrl.us/Hindu

Then there is the Muslim Turkish genocide of Christian Armenians.

http://xrl.us/Armenian

I could go on and on the point being Arian your argument is facile. Islam has more blood on its hand than any other ideology you sad little brain can conjure up.

The point of this site is to raise people’s awareness to the fact that the ideology that perpetrated the above atrocities is an integral part of Islamic doctrine.

Do you think for one second there would not be another holocaust of the Jews if the Muslim countries thought they were powerful enough to get away with it. Do you think that if the numbers were in Islam’s favor across Europe there wouldnt be mass slaughter as they introduce shaira and force everyone to either convert or die.

It is you that is kidding yourself.

Elsewhere posters have speculated about the negative influence of the Muslim invasion on Spanish culture (the brutality of La Conquista -- or the nightmarish Spanish Inquisition). It's an interesting idea, I wonder if anyone is aware of any writer that has explored this thesis?

It's interesting to note that Sicily too was occupied by Muslims (though for a shorter period than the Iberian peninsula) and it too became a hothouse for a particular virulent culture based on twisted notions of "honor", murder, extortion, terrorism, and revenge. La Cosa Nostra -- the Mafia -- as referred to above by Caroline.

Today we see our own modern cultures under assault by primitive Islam -- the effects are felt even when Muslim populations are as small as 1/2% in our domain -- (the level in the USA today).

While Muslims show great pride and arrogance, and often cite this 'influence' as a reflection of the power and potency of their barbaric religious culture -- I'd suggest that Islam is more akin to an extremely toxic poison or dangerous pathogen -- one which, even in small doses, can begin dissolving the sinews and infecting the nervous system of the target culture. It takes only a dragm of poison or the tiniest microbes to make a grown man sick or even to kill him. Islam degrades the well being of the target culture and her citizens much in the same manner as chronic exposure to toxins and pathogens do to individuals.

While such situations are manageable if the exposure is tiny enough, what is the critical tipping point when Islam in the West goes from a chronic problem to an acute one? Muslims have only been present in any appreciable size in the US for about 3 decades. (I think this is true for Europe as well?) Their numbers are now five to twenty times as dense in many parts of Europe today. While the sickness they have caused so far has been of a chronic seeming nature, events such as 9/11, or 7/7 clearly represent the onset of severe and acute health problems for the West. Will we respond to this acute phase of Islam in our domain in time to save ourselves? Will we deal with the problem of Islam soberly and aggressively enough to turn back it's negative influence before we are degraded or worse, killed from exposure?

Anyway -- as for aid to Egypt, I'd love to see it stopped. I'd also love to see us independent of ME oil. I'd love to see the world with different energy alternatives to fuel our lifestyles and our advances and our economies and our wealth producing societies -- I'd love to see Islam disappear from our realm. But we live in a real world. I have several problems with the way this argument is consistently framed here:

I disagree with that portion of the argument against aid to ME regimes which frames it as 'jizya' or a manifestation of our 'dhimmitude'.

By the definition at the left side of this page, this state of "dhimmitude" (and, one can infer, the subsequent demand for 'jizya' under dominant Muslims once their supremacy is secured over us) is described thus:

"Dhimmitude is the status that Islamic law, the Sharia, mandates for non-Muslims, primarily Jews and Christians. Dhimmis, "protected people," are free to practice their religion in a Sharia regime, but are made subject to a number of humiliating regulations designed to enforce the Qur'an's command that they "feel themselves subdued"

We are NOT under a Sharia regime. To the extent that Egypt suffers from Sharia -- it is a de facto arrangement, not a de jure arrangement. It is downright deranged to suggest that Egypt "protects" us in any manner, or that she dominates us in any manner, or that our payments to Egypt are anything other than a form of leverage exerted by us over them, however imperfectly manifested. The fact that we are rewarded so abysmally for our aid is a topic well worth discussing, but the conceit that this is dhimmitude or jizya is betrayed by the reality on the ground. This argument of 'jizya' opacifies our understanding.

In addition, when the argument is put forward that withdrawing this large and imperfect lever of US influence over Egypt would result in Arab and Muslim mayhem, or that such mayhem and internecine turmoil would be purely to our benefit, the arguer ignores the fact that such a vacuum created by our withdrawal would be filled by extremely sinister players. Entities like Russia, China, or the Zealot Muslim fascists would fill any such void we created -- We should never ignore the evil and horrible forces which have always circled us, looking for opportunities to take advantage of any weakness we display -- foreces who would occupy any theater in the ME we evacuate, and work from that vantage point to harm the US in conjuction with the Arabs. This has been the game for over 6 decades.

But who could argue that the status quo is extremely unsatisfactory today? Something must be done -- something must change. Nevertheless, putting forward murky theories or inaccurately tossing terms around like 'jizya' and 'dhimmitude' do little to forward the debate about what really needs to be done. I reject the fantastic construct that withdrawal of US influence from the ME in the manner suggested would result in anything but a serious degradation of our security, and global security as well. Our ruthless competitors are working for this very goal as we speak -- why do you think they flout our every move in the ME?

Arabs would be extremely thrilled to make oil and arms alliances with the likes of the Russian and Chinese regimes -- they are kindred spirits -- all of them crave a weakening of the West, all of them treat their citizens like cattle or slaves, all of them lust after controlling the spigots of Capitalism's blood and dictating the terms of our humiliation. Why would we ever play into their insidious plans for our demise?

Arian: (Interesting choice of nicks by the way -- but I won't bother jumping to conclusions that are already obvious to everyone here.)

"....and I'm sure close-minded simpletons like you won't."

Hugh just did an expert job of spelling out even more reasons why the protesters are not larger in number. Are you going to also call him a simpleton?

Please. Indulge me. Let us all read how everyone here that doesn't buy your lies is a simpleton, Arian.

Laughable.

Abu America-salahudin-lionheart-Kahlid bin Nutsack has changed his identity again. He's not a troll. He's a damned chameleon.

And I'm pretty certain he's not an Arian.

jsla, interesting post. "Islam degrades the well being of the target culture and her citizens much in the same manner as chronic exposure to toxins and pathogens do to individuals."

Islam's power to degrade the modern West in the ways you (and also Hugh) suggest would stand little to no chance of succeeding, were we, the modern West, not already significantly degraded by our own home-grown virus, PC multiculturalism.

If it is Abu America-salahudin-lionheart-Kahlid Arian bin Nutsack I am sure we will see a quick change of topic or a switch to another sock puppet.

jsla said

While the sickness they have caused so far has been of a chronic seeming nature, events such as 9/11, or 7/7 clearly represent the onset of severe and acute health problems for the West. Will we respond to this acute phase of Islam in our domain in time to save ourselves? Will we deal with the problem of Islam soberly and aggressively enough to turn back it's negative influence before we are degraded or worse, killed from exposure?

This is a good question; if you want my 2 cents the only way the West will survive is if there is a sharp increase in nationalist politics, particularly in Europe. We have seen overtures in this direction from a few European countries but the hooks of leftwing multiculturalism are firmly imbedded into the flesh of Euro-politics and dont look like they will let go any time soon.

The US may still stand a chance, but if the globalists within the Republican/democratic parties continue with their policy of dissolving the borders of the US things might get just as ugly here.

Well, I moved to Texas with much of the danger from the Globalists in mind, km. Texas can become its own nation in a matter of weeks if push comes to shove. It's all on the books, ready to roll from what I've read. Very old legistlation that dates back to the fights with Mexico has never really gone away. Texans learned lessons from hardwon independence and they will not just toss away the American dream and sovereignty like some might like.

"We have a chronic problem in the Arab world; policies don't reflect what the people want. People inside the mosque say they will die to save Palestine, but our governments don't do anything to help," said Mohammed al-Zaeem, 36, a visiting Syrian."

By all means let the Egyptian govenment help them "...die to save Palestine..."! What a screamer! I don't think they know what they said! Take up your AK's and come to Gaza, the IDF needs the target practice. I am SURE they will be glad to help ya'll find your way to Paradise!

The Arab world makes for GREAT comic theatre!

The Hobo

The more I think the more I realize that Islam is to a Muslim what drugs are to an addict.

"The more I think the more I realize that Islam is to a Muslim what drugs are to an addict."

The godless damned Ummah.
As the saying goes "Misery loves company".

Just for laughs:

on the evening news today from Berlin I saw a Mohammedan with his hijabbed wive and daughters passing themselves off as fanatical German soccer fans!!!

wearing hijabs in the colors of the German flag!!!!

What a screamer!

any buyers?

Sheik,
Are you sure they were his daughters and not some of the 9-14 years old members of his harem ?

You are right, Arjun, one can't be sure...

who knows...????

or, you mean, like the guy in singapore, doing his daughters, oh noooohhh!!!!???

But that does not mean that the hysteria and hate is not there. It is. It won't go away.

It hasn't in some 1400 years after all, so why anyone in their right mind would believe it would defies reason.

Hugh is absolutely correct on this one!

Nothing can make it go away, for the Infidel state of Israel is simply intolerable.

Hugh nails it again! The entire Camp David accord was engineered on fallacious reasoning -- its conclusion will be decided on the battlefield.

But of course, so too are all the Lands of the Infidels that remain as yet unsubmissive to Islam.

This is merely a restatement of historic fact; the purblind Infidel leaders delude their masses and themselves by willfully ignoring this painful reality!

But Da'wa and demographic conquest, may succeed where terror cannot. Unless, of course, the Western world, or a sufficient number of people in that world, come to their senses in time.

Indeed! Will they? I don't think they will frankly, because that would require courage and a fight! Most modern Infidels can't stomach that fact.

I recollect a political cartoon I saw during the 1967 or 1973 war – can’t remember which one; it portrayed Golda Meir responding to a Rabbi or someone.

The cartoon caption read: “Prayers I got; what I need are more F-4 Phanthoms!”

Some things never change; I think Hugh, and the IDF are the only ones willing to admit it.

The ECONOMIST, a British publication, has EURABIA on its cover this week with and Eifel-tower crowned by the Islamic half-moon.

Hopeful as always I bought it, just to find another load of camel-dung and appeasement mixed with wishful thinking...

Nothing addresses the 'real' problems, nothing even touches the pulse, the tenets of Islam, the 'immutable Koran', the belief-system that stifles growth, typical PC crap and guess what?

All of it written by ................? The writer seemed to be unwilling to put his name to it...

The Economist frustrates, insults in its unbearable lightness and stupidity....

Check it out!!

By the way, Hugh: I sent you and Robert an e-mail hoping you would comment on it....

Caroline asks: "explain to us why no Muslims in that vast Arab world are willing to take in these Pali refugees - these people whom Muslims claim to care so very much about?"

Probably because the Arab world remembers how the Palestinians behaved in Jordan. Their violence and radicalism threatened the stability of Jordan and the Hashemite rule there. There was a major civil war in 1970; King Hussein of Jordan was forced to live in a bunker and broadcast his status to the world on shortwave radio. Finally Jordan managed to expel the Palestinian insurgents in what the militants labeled "Black September" (yes, that's how that terrorist organization got its name).

If an Arab state took in the Palestinians, they would be exactly what the influx of Muslims has been in Europe: An alien people and alien culture with no loyalty to the host country, and who would overthrow the host government if it did something they didn't like.

Arian-

Your attempts at moral equalivancy ("you too do bad things"-LOL) is a bore and a diversion from facing the fact that 1) Islam is intolerant-supremacist religion(right now)in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Muslim world. Question: How can you ask for equal rights anywhere in Dar-al-harb when you do not give them to non-Muslim minorities in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Muslim world?

Further, 2) Arabs are busy exterminating Negro Africans in Darfur as you are concerned about so-called oppression of "Palestinians". Question: Why are there no Muslim demonstrations in Egypt on that (the mass murder of Negro Africans in Darfur)?

Address these two questions without playing the dishonest diversion ("you too do bad things") game. I'll bet you can't be honest but will play the "you too do bad things" diversion game.

Hugh writes: "Mubarak likes the nearly $2 billion in Jizyah he receives, but if he were convinced that Israel were weak enough, his tanks would be moving and his planes flying today....Why, a year or two ago, was Egypt the third largest purchaser of foreign armaments, after China and India?"

Hugh, you're contradicting yourself again. It took only 6 years from 1967 to 1973 for Egypt to sufficiently rebuild its forces to launch another attack on Israel. And if the U.S. had not sent in emergency aid to Israel after the Egyptian attack, Egypt's surprise attack might well have succeeded.

And yet, with Egypt now the "third largest producer of foreign armaments," as you claim, it seems to have taken them from 1979 till 2006 (27 years!) for another military buildup and yet they still don't think they're strong enough to do it?

In the period from 1948 through 1979, we had four Egypt-Israel wars in 31 years, an average of one war every 8 years. In the 27 year period from 1979 through 2006, we haven't had even one war.

Obviously there's another factor at work here besides just military deterrence. The 1979 treaty between Israel and Egypt has held, it has put a real damper on Egyptian military ambitions, and any aid the U.S. gives to keep the Egyptian army and government pigeonholed is money well spent.

You constantly call for dividing the Muslim world against itself, hoping to pit Sunni against Shi'a and so on as a way of weakening the overall Islamic jihad against us. But you're not willing to spend any money toward that goal. How is it supposed to happen then, waving a magic wand?

km writes: "We have seen overtures in this direction from a few European countries but the hooks of leftwing multiculturalism are firmly imbedded into the flesh of Euro-politics and dont look like they will let go any time soon."

If the European Constitution becomes a reality, then those hooks will never let go. The European Constitution will seduce Europeans into accepting transnationalism as a way of life and rejecting nationalism once and for all. (This will also include absorbing Britain into a continental Europe dominated by Franco-German multiculturalism and anti-Americanism.) And the Muslims will capitalize on that to spread their influence and dominance, just as they have capitalized on multiculturalism for the same purpose.

This is just one of many good reasons why the European Constitution must never come into force.

We should not be giving money to any Islamic nations. This is hardly up for debate at this point.

We should take that same money we give to Egypt, et al, and use it to build fences along America's borders, to fund better schooling in the States, to build more advanced weapons systems, to help defend allies like Japan, Taiwan and Israel, and countless other possibilities.

The fact that we keep spooning out the money of the U.S. taxpayer to appease states like Egypt can be rationalized in many ways, and Steven L. is logical, but it still does not make it the right thing to do.

Hugh writes: "What kind of "bribe" was necesary for Saddam Hussein and his Arab army to massacre 182,00 Kurds? What "bribe" was required to force the Arab League, and all the other supposedly indignant Arab rulers, to shut up entirely, to say not a word, in protest against those massacres?"

Are you serious??? At that time, all these Muslim nations were being played back and forth as chess pieces by the Great Powers: France, Russia, the U.S. and China. If you probe a little bit beneath the surface of any of the Middle Eastern wars, you will find one or more of the Great Powers egging them on.

The USSR was heavily involved in stirring up the Arab governments to wage war against Israel, because Israel was a U.S. ally. The Soviet KGB was involved in the 1979 Iranian revolution that brought Ayatollah Khomeini to power because they figured he had to be an improvement over the staunchly pro-U.S. Shah (they figured wrong).

Iraq and Iran went to war in 1980 at a time when the U.S. had tilted toward Iraq, supplying them with intelligence data and also with guarantees that we would back the territorial integrity of Iraq against growing Soviet influence in that region. It was common fear of the USSR and Iran that drew Saddam and the U.S. closer together.

Iraq was so good at playing the Great Powers off against each other that Iraq had actually received military aid from all four of them: the U.S., the USSR, France and even China.

After the Gulf War, the Kurds and Shi'a rose up against Saddam because they figured that was what the U.S. wanted, having clobbered Saddam's armies. They were wrong, the U.S. sold them out. And that's why Saddam knew he had a free hand to wipe them out. Saddam was massacring the Kurds and Shi'a from the air. The U.S. Air Force could have wiped out the remainder of Saddam's Air Force and saved the Kurds and Shi'a. We didn't. Saddam got the message: We kicked you out of Kuwait but you're still boss inside your own country.

The Arab League read the signal: If the U.S., which just clobbered Saddam in the Gulf War doesn't mind if Saddam massacres his own people, and the U.S. is heavily sending military aid to Saudi Arabia to just sit tight, then why should we care either?

Geopolitics is a practical business, not a moral one.

Foehammer writes: "We should not be giving money to any Islamic nations. This is hardly up for debate at this point."

Speak for yourself. I think it's very much up for debate.

During the Cold War, the fact that Red China had aided the Vietnamese Communists to kill thousands of American troops, threatened Taiwan, inspired Communist revolutionaries throughout the Third World, and continued to espouse a totalitarian communist ideology that got hundreds of thousands killed in Mao's so-called Cultural Revolution, did not prevent us from holding our noses and sucking up to China as a counterweight to the USSR. And we benefited in many ways from the get-go, including China's allowing our CIA to actually set up monitoring stations inside China to gather intelligence and telemetry on Soviet missile tests. And while China has made all kinds of ideological noises about Taiwan over the years, Taiwan is still there and China is profiting tremendously from Wal-Mart and wouldn't dream of jeopardizing their profitable dealings with America. As the Chinese Prime Minister told "60 Minutes" some years ago: "Business is business" (his words, not mine).

In Economics 101, they teach you that if an investment starts out with a negative initial Return on Investment (ROI), then it's likely to be a bad investment. An example is a piece of rental property that for whatever reason you can't find tenants to rent. With no tenants to generate rental income to you, you're forced to "feed" the property, paying mortgage and upkeep, year after year, while receiving no income. It's an open question if you'll ever profit from that dog at all.

The Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty of 1979, which included promises of massive U.S. aid to both sides as part of the package, had a positive initial ROI. From the day it was signed, there has been peace between the Egyptian and Israeli governments and the Egyptian army has sat tight and done nothing, whereas Iraq and Iran continued to stir up trouble year after year. In contrast to Iran and Saudi Arabia, the Egyptian government is not waging jihad against the West. At least not now. Nor is it encouraging terrorist suicide-bombers against Israel by rewarding the terrorists' families, something Saddam liked to do. In contrast to the fundamentalist regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia, that are allergic to infidels, Egypt grew so alarmed at Soviet demarches in the Middle East that by 1981, they actually asked the new Reagan Administration to preposition U.S. armaments in Egypt as a staging area against Soviet aggression. We didn't have to ask them for basing rights, they invited us in.

All this makes it a much better investment than Bush's Iraq War, into which we have poured our blood and treasure for over 3 years and we are still waiting for any tangible benefits to accrue to us--just like that aforementioned example of rental property that we can't get tenants for. A massive negative ROI for the first three years of our investment in Iraq there.

It's just like the Chinese Prime Minister said. Business is business.

Steven L.,

"Geopolitics is a practical business, not a moral one."

Its practicality will be hampered if the facts about Islam are not known or consistently suppressed and/or misinterpreted.

There might be a middle ground between your point and Hugh's insofar as Hugh might agree that such Geo-realpolitik can be useful, but only insofar as those playing it know lucidly the full paradigm of Islamic Jihad. Since it seems that Western geopoliticians are absymally ignorant of Islam, it would stand to reason that most of their geopolitical tactics will prove practical only through sheer dumb luck.

Good points are being made above. Though I'm no fan of GWB, and consider his understanding of Islam to be dangerously rudimentary -- there have been things done which are interesting, some of which might appear, upon analysis, to be the exact opposite of what they seem.

Here's a great example:

I was among those who nearly flipped out seeing this President holding hands in Crawford with that scrofulous scumbag from Saudi Arabia. I'd love to see that pile of soft "royal' flesh be used to feed millions of needy blowfly larvae -- or, better yet -- botfly larvae. (Those are the ones that leave the host alive, and simply feast under the flesh.) But still I didn't allow my dislike of Mr. Bush to cloud my ability to read the circumstance: Seen from the seething Arab perspective of hatred for all things non-Arab and non-Muslim, what better way to undermine the new 'king' of Arabia, (a perfumed nomad) and to provide a fabulously damning photo for his Frankensteins to lick their fangs over? That hand holding incident was odious in the West -- it may have sealed that pigs fate forever in the ME.

The war on Iraq, despite all the bad mouthing at this site, also serves to disrupt the horrid status quo I describe above. I agree with Steven L. that the staggering expenditure may not be best, but I can also make a very good argument for the priceless on-the-job training our new Military establishment is gaining from the experience -- their exposure to the heinousness of Arab culture and Islam is something no textbook or ivory tower theories could possibly capture. And if a less extreme government than Saddam's is installed successfully, our position in the world will be enhanced incrementally -- that may or may not be sufficient to justify the huge cost -- but the jury is out, and will be for some time, despite all the bellyaching going on. At the very least, a shiny new playground for Islam's internal strife to play out. One which will be seen as tainted from the Muslim perspective with the constant stench of Zionist maneuverings -- one which will permanently place the target on their head, and in so doing lessen the likelihood that the distant enemy is as appealing as the near one. The possibility of such a real estate was something Saddam mercilessly and effectively kicked to the curb during his regime.

If the "intelligence community" is doing their job (big if) the treasure trove of intelligence materials being collected daily, and the possibility of penetrating deeply into Sunni and Shiite domains will prove priceless for us, and create pockets of uncertainty among our various other global rivals. While we're collecting the nasty dirt on every player in the region, we're also learning volumes about our rivals and so-called 'allies'.

We also sent a formidable emphatic message to any tinpot Muslim regime: We are able and willing crush you if we suspect you might actually harm us with WMD. If Iraq devolves, they know next time we probably won't be so dainty about rebuilding in the aftermath. If Iraq succeeds, then what better testament to the effectiveness of the operation. Either way we win. France could only say "We'll drop nukes on you if you drop nukes on us". The Mullah's laughed at the new French joke, knowing it was uttered by a frightened maid. It was the equivalent of saying "We will sue you!" We have barely begun to deploy the spectrum of our weapons, and tyrants fell, myths exploded, and Muslims are now the greater target of Muslim hatred than "infidels". It may or may not last. It may prove disastrous. But as I said above -- the status quo had to change, and so we changed it.

Now there's great impatience to see the Iranian crisis resolved -- But this won't be so simple. This is the way such these things go -- it's complicated, slow, sometimes dreary, and sometimes there are setbacks.

I wonder how productive the constant drum beat against our involvement in the ME is. The sad but genuine reality is that our global economy is based on petroleum and will remain so for an indeterminate period. It's a cold hard fact that cannot be denied. Sure -- we should be agitating for grand schemes and futuristic projects to change the dynamics of our oil economy. But simultaneously those who recognize most deeply the peril of the Muslim menace should be working for real approaches and workable solutions. It would be nice and convenient to see Muslims marginalized right out of our domain, and yesterday. How do we get there? It sure would be nice to see a major slap-down of Iran and Syria and Egypt and the "Palestinians" and especially nasty bitch-slaps for Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. How do we get there?

Until recently it's clear that global powers refused to recognize the unusual manner in which the poisonous balloon of Islam inflates itself, or the fact that Islam could actually threaten us existentially. The tectonics of Muslim terrorism still haven't convinced enough of the danger from this foe -- the potential victims are still mezmerized by old-think. Urgent progress is needed to roll back Islam's barbaric onslaught against us, but such a thing will not be easy. Providing a description of the endgame does little to help it arrive. We're learning it's unwise to squeeze too hard or too quickly on the poison filled membrane of Islam. Every time we do -- we're learning how its poison is deliberately splashed on us -- We are starting to appreciate how Islam's puddle spreads beneath our feet while we're not looking.

Islam Rampant is the most unusual and implacable foe the world has ever faced. In the end, I am convinced that it must be destroyed or we will be destroyed. But getting there won't be simple, and the route just won't be straight. Most ominously, our succes is far from guaranteed. We need razor sharp analysis -- brilliant ideas -- and simple, perhaps primitive seeming ones too. We will need to rely on nationalism, exploit intolerance, cultivate targeted xenophobia too in order to beat the beast back and subdue it. More ideas. More analysis. More work. We've barely begun, despite the heroics of the early alarm ringers.