Ohhh please let Israel be the one to get him.
I can hear the uproar from the Islamic world already.....

Posted by: kc England at May 13, 2005 8:03 AM

kc, that would be a Major coup.

Today’s Extras on Jihad’s 5th Column:

http://techcentralstation.com/051305B.html

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/cliffordmay/cm20050512.shtml

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/jg20050513.shtml

Posted by: Gary at May 13, 2005 8:07 AM

Ya'alon, a former head of IDF Intelligence, said, "Ultimately, in order to get your hands on him you will need what we perfected and that is what we call 'targeted assassination.'"

Unfortunately the Jews of Israel had to become somewhat like their enemies. They had to take a leaf out of Mein Koran and engage in assassinations same as Muhammad did. Same as his adherents have done though the centuries. Assassination and cowardly murder (car bombs etc.) are favored by Jihadists.

Posted by: dennisw at May 13, 2005 8:08 AM

I'm sure he flew the coop by now!

Posted by: Jakester at May 13, 2005 8:23 AM

BIn Laden is already a hero throughout the Muslim world and the darling of europe's lefties.
It would be best if he was "taken out" by his own.
When Israel destroyed the Iraqi osiris nuclear plant , they did the world a HUGE favour.
But they were condemned for it by the UN and most of the world. Why should thay now repeat the favor?

Posted by: chevalier de st george at May 13, 2005 8:36 AM

Killing BL would be counterproductive. He needs to be captured and tried for his crimes. Killing him just regulates him to legend and helps his cause.

f.g.

Posted by: f.g. at May 13, 2005 8:43 AM

dennisw

That's a bunch of crap you wrote. You evidently believe that killing someone such as Yassin who ordered the death of hundreds of civilians is the same as a human bomb walking into an ice cream parlor in order to kill a 2 year old. Man, your' moral compass is grossly out of whack. Do you also believe that when the State executed John Wayne Gacy that the act was morally the same as Gacy's crimes? Did the Nuremberg Trials which resulted in the hanging of Nazi war criminals say to you that the Allies were no better than the Axis powers? Are you saying that when Count von Stauffenberg planted the bomb designed to kill Hitler that he was engaging in an attempt at
"cowardly murder"?

By the way, does your moral superiority in condemning Israeli action apply to the entire world or just to Jews? In other words, will your moral superiority allow Jews the right of self-defense?

Posted by: MJ at May 13, 2005 9:02 AM

MJ:
I am 100% proud Jewish, same as my father's fathers. I know what Jihad is all about and how Israel has to defend against these monsters. You have misread my post. I say this with all due respect.

This is Friday, the day for Muslim riots after incendiary preachers appeal to their base emotions. Not a day for Jews and philo-Semites to go wild :)

Posted by: dennisw at May 13, 2005 9:18 AM

Dennisw~ I've always found it interesting to see how people interpret just who is posting here. MJ, no offense to you, I am coming to a Different point than the one this would suggest.

Seems a great many people assume that most if not all the posters here are white Christians, and bigoted / racist / unconscious-supporters-of-dominionist ones, to boot. (Those who actively make that claim are projecting their own prejudices). Of course they are wrong. If one pays attention, they at least know that:

Posters here are from just about Every continent.
Posters here cover just about the entire range of major faiths (or lack thereof).
Posters here all have the same thing in common- they are being targeted by the Jihadists, either long-range (as for example, thru the leftist Academia) or right up front (such as Robert or Ali Sina).

Naturally, mobots and a few others get this entirely wrong (that's the projection I was speaking of).

Waaay back when, I used to read about the events in Israel, and I thought what they were doing was too much like what had been done to them in Nazi Germany.

But then I started to study history and politics, and now have 20 years of it under my belt. Unlike some would have you believe, I became more conservative, rather than turning my mind off to reality. I will Always advocate that people learn for themselves. Don't listen to the politicians, or the MSM. Most of them are for turning off the mind.

Posted by: Gary at May 13, 2005 9:36 AM

Dennisw~ I've always found it interesting to see how people interpret just who is posting here. MJ, no offense to you, I am coming to a Different point than the one this would suggest.

Seems a great many people assume that most if not all the posters here are white Christians, and bigoted / racist / unconscious-supporters-of-dominionist ones, to boot. (Those who actively make that claim are projecting their own prejudices). Of course they are wrong. If one pays attention, they at least know that:

Posters here are from just about Every continent.
Posters here cover just about the entire range of major faiths (or lack thereof).
Posters here all have the same thing in common- they are being targeted by the Jihadists, either long-range (as for example, thru the leftist Academia) or right up front (such as Robert or Ali Sina).

Naturally, mobots and a few others get this entirely wrong (that's the projection I was speaking of).

Waaay back when, I used to read about the events in Israel, and I thought what they were doing was too much like what had been done to them in Nazi Germany.

But then I started to study history and politics, and now have 20 years of it under my belt. Unlike some would have you believe, I became more conservative, rather than turning my mind off to reality. I will Always advocate that people learn for themselves. Don't listen to the politicians, or the MSM. Most of them are for turning off the mind.

Posted by: Gary at May 13, 2005 9:37 AM

dennisw

I'm sorry if I mis-read your post but you wrote of a moral equivalency which I just do not buy.
You wrote, "Unfortunately the Jews of Israel had to become somewhat like their enemies". In what sense are they like their enemies? Do they go around targeting civilians? Do they plant bombs in pizza parlors in order to kill teenagers? Do Israelis shoot at automobiles carrying a mother and her children then kill the mother in front of the children and then murder the children? Do Israelis rip out the guts and heart of the "soldiers" it captures and then drop their bodies from two story buildings to a wild and cheering crowd below? Do Israelis play soccer with the severed head of soldiers killed by a land mine? Do Israeli females lure young teenage boys to a cave with the promise of friendship in order that they may be beaten to death?
All these things the Palestinians did.
There is nothing "cowardly" if in preventing these gross violations of human conduct Israelis target for death those who order such human depravity.

Posted by: MJ at May 13, 2005 9:38 AM

'There is nothing "cowardly" if in preventing these gross violations of human conduct Israelis target for death those who order such human depravity.' ~ MJ

And MJ, there is where I definitely agree with you.

And I had better get back to work!

Posted by: Gary at May 13, 2005 9:40 AM

'There is nothing "cowardly" if in preventing these gross violations of human conduct Israelis target for death those who order such human depravity.' ~ MJ

And MJ, there is where I definitely agree with you.

And I had better get back to work!

Posted by: Gary at May 13, 2005 9:41 AM

MJ and Gary, many thanks.

To clarify. When your enemy is brutal assassins and gunners of children in settlements behind the green line you have to become somewhat like him. You have to waste him with extreme prejudice. All I'm saying is the Jews of Israel had to become a bit like the Muslims. They have to engage in assassinations which is advocated in Koran but not in Tanach.

I have been to Kotel four times and inserted (into those big blocks) my prayers written on paper. So.....please spare me MJ.

Posted by: dennisw at May 13, 2005 9:58 AM

MJ
Gacy had a trial, as well as the defendents at Nuremberg and had appeals after the verdict. Yassin was assassinated with no due process, that's a big difference!

Posted by: Jakester at May 13, 2005 10:21 AM

Jakester-

RE Yassin:
As you sow, so shall you reap.

Posted by: treehugger at May 13, 2005 10:28 AM

WELL WELL WELL!!!

Is the 50mil still on the Table wanted dead or alive!!!

If the IDF gets the islamic monster!!
Do they get the money??

Or just the Gratuide of the USA??

ubl[YELLOW COWARD WHO RUNS AWAY] has been convicted!! By his own words we have it on tape no need to spend money and keep him in jail!

Maybe we can work a deal where he gets killed and it stays behind closed doors?

Better to keep the honey pot working!!

and Gary
Gold Star for you today!!

After seeing the 8000 grave stones of Crosses and Stars of David in Norway of Americans who died to Free them in WW2 And knowing the loses of today so should they be Honered in this Fight against EVIL for this Fight is no less then our Grandparents Fought and the Stakes are the Same!!!

http://www.beecy.net/frank/

Fighting Among yourselves just gives our enemy joy!!

http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/mainreason.html
The Main Reason for the Present Middle East Conflict: ISLAM and not "The Territories"
by Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director
International Christian Zionist Center
In The Dhimmi Bat Ye’or writes (page 45):
The jihad is a global conception that divides the peoples of the world into two irreconcilable camps: that of the dar al-Harb, the “Territory of War,” which covers those regions controlled by the infidels; and the dar al-Islam, “the Territory of Islam,” the Muslim homeland where Islamic law reigns. The jihad is the normal and permanent state of war between the Muslims and the dar al-Harb, a war that can only end with the final domination over unbelievers and the absolute supremacy of Islam throughout the world.
Once the forces of Islam conquer a land or territory, it is to remain under Islamic dominion forever (‘for generations’), and it is a mortal affront to the supremacy of Islam when such territories would ever be lost to the dominion of Islam and revert to previous - infidel - ownership as was the case in Palestine. It was a Muslim controlled territory (under the Muslim Turks and later the Muslim Arabs) and reverted by the decree of the U.N. resolution back to its previous owners: the Jews.

This is why the Muslim children chant, especially during the Middle East Wars: “We shall fight on Saturday and then on Sunday” In other words, first the Jews and then the Christians. Make no mistake about this. When Israel will be swallowed up by the sea of Jihad, soon to be armed by weapons of mass destruction acquired by Muslim Iran and Muslim Iraq and others, the Muslims will believe that Allah has brought them to this point that they can finally reoccupy their Muslim Palestine and drive the Jews, the infidels as they would call them - into the sea as they have said and screamed many times in the name of their Allah.
We only need to look at the genocide by Muslims of over a million Christians in Southern Sudan, the massacres of Christians in Indonesia by Muslims and elsewhere not to mention the genocide of Armenian Christians in the past by Muslim Turks - to know that this chant is no empty threat.
VERY GOOD READ! THE WHOLE THING!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight, and Courage to stay the course to Destroy ALL islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them let not the World be deceived by them give the World Courage to Stand Up and Fight them Amen

Posted by: Catherine at May 13, 2005 11:36 AM

Gary, you might find it strange, but I agree in principle with your comments, I do take exception to your tendency for broad generalizations and accusations.

For instance that swipe at, what is apparently me, who takes STRONG exception to and am concerned with the increasing power of the Dominionists whom I fear and consider to be the Christian equivalent of the Mullahcracy of Iran (as do better lights than me, including Christian pastors).

As Robert reminded me this is not a Dominionist watch forum, so I remind you it is not a Dominionist apologia forum, or a forae for apologia by those on the so called right who advance Dominionist ideology by obfuscation (taqiyya, comes to mind Kurtz and National Review and other articles you posted from Front Page, who otherwise if they stayed to Islam would be readable).

As regards your visceral hatred of the so called "left"" it is counterproductive, not all left is Left, just as not all right is Right, their are no oaths of unfettered allegiance in ideologies, and those who blindly embrace, without reservation the entire agenda of an ideological slant are idiots.

Ideology is for idiots.

I consider myself quite conservative in many regards and quite liberal in others. And if the world can't deal with that, that is their problem, because no one has the right or ability to define me.

Press on Dude.

Posted by: Giaour at May 13, 2005 1:11 PM

O.K. Guys,

I'm sorry this is OT but I have to ask this question.
As you are probably by now aware, I am a committed Christian although I guess you couldn't 'pigeon hole' me as to which 'camp' I belong to.
(If I was pressed, I guess the movement I would agree with almost 100% is http://www.desiringgod.org/">John Piper.)
Anyway my question is "What the hecks a 'dominionist'?"

Regards,
Kc

Posted by: kc England at May 13, 2005 2:05 PM

Ok, I'll try that link again!
John Piper.

Posted by: kc England at May 13, 2005 2:08 PM

KC~ with apologies to Robert (and perhaps giaour?), dominionists are a tiny, minority cult within Christianity, dedicated to making the US a Theocracy, at the expense of virtually everyone (and I DO believe that would include most Real Christians)

*chuckles* and I don't do apologetics for a group I don't have any faith in (sorry for the pun), never heard of prior to a few months ago- and see No chance of success for, g. Nor I have yet found a single article about a conservative teacher indoctrinating the upcoming generations so that they can put such in place- but there are plenty of teachers out there supporting the 'RoP' with their anti-Western, Anti-US teachings.
If bringing them to the publics attention (as Robert himself does on occasion) is hatred of liberals...

In any case, I'm gone for the weekend, and may you all have a good one. Or a couple of good ones, depending on what you drink :)

Posted by: Gary at May 13, 2005 2:35 PM

Thanks for clarifying that Gary.

Gees. It would sure be useful if Christians actually read their Bible and got their 'world view' from that, rather than 'fad teachings'.

Ho hum.

Posted by: kc England at May 13, 2005 3:02 PM

Gees. It would sure be useful if Christians actually read their Bible and got their 'world view' from that, rather than 'fad teachings'.

Well, there are about as many "Biblical World Views" as there as flavors of ice cream my friend. Don't eat 'em too fast you'll get a Brain Freeze headache. A more appropriate use of the term "Brain Freeze" you won't come across.

f.g.

Posted by: f.g. at May 13, 2005 3:35 PM

Kc in case you come back to this page.

Gary, the domionists are not a "tiny" minority cult within the US, they have more power than you realize, at the last link below, there latest conference reached 61 million Christian homes, via telecast. And they hold great sway with The RNC and and Karl Rove listens carefully to them, and uses them in return.

Please Gary take the time to become informed yourself.

Dominion Theology

Dominion theology

This site by a Deist (pro Israel, anti Atheist, anti Islamist)

Royal Race of the Redeemed

Here is a Google Search resultes

Invest a few bucks read the May issue of Harper's, three articles The Christian Rights War on America
, especially the article by Chris Hedges

See also this interview with Chris Hedges The Christian Right and the Rising Power of the Evangelical Movement

From a secularists, and moderate Christians Point of view, there isn''t much difference in agenda between these folk and the Mullahs of Iran.

Posted by: Giaour at May 13, 2005 4:27 PM

We mostly scoff at "arm-chair warriors," sloughing them off as day-dreamers and fools. We read of the brave exploits they would perform if only they could. I'd like to look briefly at those who are out of the arm-chair and in the position to act, who are required to act.

Knowing where bin Laden is will not do us any good at all unless we have men and women who will take it upon themselves to rid us of that beast. And who will those men and women be? Not you or I, I'm sorry to say. Those who will act will be the few of the few. Aside from my anecdotal experiences which back up the following, I'll rely here on the published work of Joanna Bourke, An Intimate History of Killing. London: Granta, 1999. For further information on this topic one may go to google for "Killology."

Most soldiers do not kill their enemies. They don't generally even fire their weapons.

"...no matter how thourough the training, it still failed to enable most combatants to fight. During the First World War, it was commonly believed that only 10 per cent of soldiers could be called brave and many military commentators deplored the 'live and let live' principle. [p.73.]

During the Second World War,... no more than 15 per cent of men had actually fired at enemy positions or personnel...it would have been possible for 80 per cent of the men to have fired and nearly all men were (at some stage) within firing distance of the enemy. To be counted as a 'firer,' a man would only have had to fire his weapon or lob a grenade 'roughly in the direction of the enemy' once or twice." [p.75.]

For all the writing back and forth here about how we are or are not violent and fascistic and hatefilled, when the crunch comes, few if any of us would act any differently in the face of our enemies than did soldiers in WWL, WW2, and the war in Viet Nam, as covered in the book above.

What does this say about us as anti-jihadists? I'll venture that of the 15 per cent of us who think of ourselves as badass guys only 15 per cent of those would ever pull the trigger on bin Laden. and ask yourselves just how many rounds would actually hit the man? We leave these things to professionals for good reason: most of us couldn't shoot a man face-to-face if he were shooting at us.

"Marshall found that there were some men who identified targets yet did not shoot, and there were other men who were under attack yet did not attempt to use the weapons to retaliate or in self protection. Furthermore, passive troops were not 'green' troops." [p. 76.]

The most remarkable thing about the IDF wasn't their professionalism, which most Western soldiers possess to the nth degree, it was their ability to remain Human in the midst of war, to kill the enemy without devolving into animal hatred even in the smoke and shock of battle. The enemy, on the other hand, were indistinguishable for maniacs crazzed and screaming, one going so far as to rush head-long into a burning building in search of a phantom. I'm sorry to admit that I'm the only one who laughed.

All the violent words that splash down these columns are so much nothing. There might be a will to triumph over our enemies but it's passive. That's not a condemnation of our readers. We do not want to be soldiers in the field. If we were, chances are we would not fire our weapons at men who are much like us. That's nothing to be ashamed of.

"The passive 75 per cent of men would generally remain passive. But...even those soldiers who did not fire were crucial to the battle: their presence was essential for morale. Active combatants were too busy fighting to notice what their comrades were (or were not) doing. In fact, it was the presence of passive soldiers which enabled active soldiers to continue fighting. They contributed thier weight to the mass of the attack, even if they contributed little to its velocity." [p.87.]

What is the serious objection to killing an individual in a crowd, Yassin, for example? The message is clear and precise. One man is responsible fror his actions, and that man is dead. Our opponents would set off a car bomb, killing at random, and call it good. Allah is responsible for that action, and the group understands the irrationality of it in its own terms. Our experience in Jugoslavia is contrary: we fired laser-guided missles from the ether. The average Serb has to this day no idea why that happened. Jets were long past the target before they were seen, and then the fires were raging long since. That speck brought death! There was no sense of who did that or why, because one cannot hate a speck, only an idea one might associate with that speck. And since there is no way to fight a speck it isn't a defeat no matter how badly one is beaten, for no speck is viable as an enemy. It has no meaning whatsoever. The science of war loses wars because there is no art to war by machines, and there is therefore no enemy to lose to.

If we are to win any war against any enemy, we must have men on the ground, face to face with our enemies so they can see us and fight us man to man till one man is still standing. We will not win any war until the enemy is in the dust begging not for mercy but crying out "I am you!" When that defeated man sees my face and knows I'm the better man, then he will not be defeated but he will be my ally. When I beat a man who beats a woman I must beat him till he beats men who beat women. He will do that when he is me and mine. I cannot make him one of mine from inside a tank. I can do that by beating him man to man so he knows who I am and what I do. Killing a murderer doesn't make me a murderer, it makes his survivors moral.

Who among us will take up arms and fight man to man against bin Laden? Who will run the man down and kill him face to face? Who will stand with bin Laden's head in hand and say: "Now you work for me!"

I'll retire to my armchair to wheeze and read of imaginable glories, to dream of William Walker and his Immortal Filibusters who could have made the world America.

Posted by: sonofwalker at May 13, 2005 5:28 PM

I reject utterly the existence of "Dominionism", this is the invention of the same people who have re-written our history to exclude the Christian beginnings of our nation. The only dominionism I know of, and I am a Christian, is the rule and reign of Jesus Christ when He returns to earth.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at May 13, 2005 5:39 PM

Thanks Giaour;

After reading your links, I decided to see if John Piper had said anything on the issue.
He did and, needless to say, doesn't hold to that 'doctrine'.

Heres what he had to say.

I guess summing up, like he points out, Jesus said;
"My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."
John 18:36

Oh well, apologies to everyone else, this is so OT.
I'll finish here.

Regards everyone,
Kc

Posted by: kc England at May 13, 2005 5:49 PM

Christian's are at the gate... and they are not coming for you!

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/jg20050513.shtml

Posted by: Carolyn2 at May 13, 2005 6:08 PM

I can understand where it could be more advantageous to contain OBL and his disciples. Hopefully ample intelligence is being gathered on the infrastructure of his and other terrorist networks. Intelligence that will be used to disrupt future terrorist activities.

On the O.T Dominionism stuff

Their eventual goal is to achieve the "Kingdom of God" in which much of the world is converted to Christianity. They feel that the power of God's word will bring about this conversion. No armed force or insurrection will be needed;

There is a huge difference between a Dominionist and a jihadist!

Posted by: Bar at May 13, 2005 6:27 PM

Who among us will take up arms and fight man to man against bin Laden? Who will run the man down and kill him face to face? Who will stand with bin Laden's head in hand and say: "Now you work for me!"

I'll retire to my armchair to wheeze and read of imaginable glories, to dream of William Walker and his Immortal Filibusters who could have made the world America.

Posted by: sonofwalker at May 13, 2005 05:28 PM

I say we get him any way we can!!

Wally Farrais had a good point on the qu-ran thing?
Why didn't the islamist who are now in the streets protesting NOT in the streets when the islamic etrrorist blew up the mosques in Pakistan surely there were many holy qu-rans destroyed?? Or why were they not in the Streets when the islamic terrorist blew up the mosques in Iraq again many qurans were destroyed yet on a roumor by who?? in an American magazine by Isicoff they are in the streets killing burning NO this is just a way to rally the people against America!!!

Sonofwalker I did like your post!!
Not all people can be hunters?? But it helps to have others in the brush to push the prey!!

One of the things I pray for is to ease the hearts of our Fighting Forces for the Evil they see that they may come home Whole!!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight, and Courage to stay the course to Destroy ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Amen

PS
Sonofwalker
More Islamic Terrorist Dead today by MEN on the ground with a little help from the Air!! safe house gone!! must have been those guys who said they were going to fight the USA and Arabs well the USA and the New Iraqis army are the ones left standing because the Monsters will not be killing any more people because they are DEAD!!

Posted by: Catherine at May 13, 2005 6:49 PM

It would be great if the Israelis arrested/killed Bin Laden and it was broadcast on Al-Jazeera.

Posted by: Freedom1 at May 13, 2005 8:03 PM

Look at the Moslem world: bin Laden hides in a rock pile and we read of Epaminondes.They fetishize Mohammed while we rejoice in the wisdom of Solon. Taliban and Caliban. Aisha and Catherine. Zarqawi and Jabotinski. Hamas and Zahal. Kaba and Kotel.

Yes, the Moslems love their own filth as much as we admire our heroes and our great symbols and centers of Good. Islam is not a religion of peace, nor are we going to live in peace with its adherents. We choose our side, or by not choosing we decide anyway. Regardless, the sides are divided, and it's up to us to make our moves. And not a one of us in a million has chosen a side based on inductive reasoning and rational discourse.

Let us, with Georges Sorel, reflect on violence: We move according to "myth." If my myth is greater in violence than is the force of the myth of Islam, then I will succeed. Our vision of triumph is our myth. The Myth of American Triumphalism.

We need, writes Sorel, a "...body of images which, by intuition alone, and before any considered analyses are made, is capable of evoking as an undivided whole the mass of sentiments which corresponds to the different manifestations of the war undertaken by progressive Humanity against Islam and dhimmitude. By concentrating [o]n the drama there is no longer any place for the reconcilliation of equivocations; everything is clearly mapped out, only one interpretation is possible [with] all the advantages which 'integral' knowledge has over analysis....

The Myth must be judged as a means of acting on the present....It is the Myth in its entirity which is alone important..... The question whether the Myth is a partial reality, or only a product of popular imagination, is of little importance. All that is necessary to know is whether the Myth contains everything our Myth expects of us. To solve this question we are no longer compelled to argue learnedly about the future; we are not obliged to indulge in lofty reflections about philosophy, history, or economics; we are not on the plane of theories, and we can remain on the level of observable facts.

[Our Myth is] a body of images capable of evoking instinctively all the sentiments which correspond to the different manifestations of the war we've undertaken against Islam and dhimmitude."

KJ, Kemaste, Kepha: We are our Myth. Our mythlogos does not include Islam or dhimmitude. We are as irrationally Baconian as we are irrationally Christian or Jewish or Hindu. Our Socratic Myth is irrational. Only the Violence of our Myth needs to be rational. When we celebrate the irrationality of our Myth our Violence will prevail over the Force of Islam and dhimmitude. Ours is the Will, the Myth, and the Violence.

Again and again I have urged the adoption of the 'phaze-shift" symbol and the reification of our party. Today I urge the adoption of the Myth of our Triumphalism. Embrace foundationalism-- elenchus and aporia-- and abandon the relativism of the dhimmis and the Left defeatists. Organize around the Myth as the vanguard of the party to come.

What Myth? Our Myth. Socrates and William Walker. The sword and the hammer, the gun and the pen.

Every man on every block is a seed of the Myth. Every block has a woman who bears the fruit of the Myth in our midst. We know what we know, and we need know little more. We have only to embrace the Violence against the Force to ensure that the Will of the Myth is triumphant.

9/11. Beslan. We know Islam. We know our Myth. We know our destiny. We begin to know our Path.

Posted by: sonofwalker at May 13, 2005 11:39 PM

Ya'alon...said, "Ultimately, in order to get your hands on him you will need...'targeted assassination.'"

Unfortunately the Jews of Israel had to become somewhat like their enemies. They had to take a leaf out of Mein Koran and engage in assassinations same as Muhammad did. Same as his adherents have done though the centuries. Assassination and cowardly murder (car bombs etc.) are favored by Jihadists.

Posted by: dennisw at May 13, 2005 08:08 AM

Dennisw,

Not to worry that a "targeted assassination" in instances like this makes us "somewhat like their enemies."

The fundamental principle is that we are born with "unalianable rights"--that means, they are ours by nature. They cannot be granted or taken away, they can only be respected or violated.

There is an expression that says, "Your rights stop at my skin." A slightly more detailed description is, "Rights are violated by two means: The INITIATION of the use of physical force, and the intellectual equivalent of physical force, which is fraud or deceit." Inasmuch as there is not the time or space here fully to derive what our rights are, this short expression will have to do.

When someone--say, bin Laden--initiates the use of force or fraud, you have the right to defend yourself. The violator, on the other hand, WAIVES his rights.

Thus it is, when the Twin Towers went down, the violators waived all their rights, and it was morally correct for us to retaliate.

We did not initiate the use of force or fraud against bin Laden and Associates--it was he who initiated force against us.

If we are able to kill him, by whatever means possible, there will be no "moral equivalence."

Nor has there been an issue of "moral equivalence" when the Israelis kill those who have initiated the use of force against them.

Apples and oranges.

Posted by: cubed at May 14, 2005 3:32 PM

Speaking of Bin Lousy...I am listening to a radio talk show from KGO radio S.F. A gay liberal, bombastic, shrill host, he has just made the point that our gov is phony on the war on terror and just said that Bin Laden had only done "one", thing to the US. Meaning 911...thats all the Japanese did to us also..."one thing" called Pearl Harbor. If I remember right, about 2500 servicemen died in P.H. 3000 innocents died on 911... What an idiot...I just listen to him for laughs...but I thought I would pass his thoughts about Binny to you...

Posted by: duh_swami at May 14, 2005 10:41 PM

There's more to war than killing the enemy. It comes down to what kind of man you are. Look at mine:

http://www.clan-cameron.org/battles/1544.html

and compare the beauty of them to the beauty of another kind of man involved in war:

http://nobelprize.org/peace/laureates/1901/dunant-bio.html

I don't know if those links turned out right, so I'll summarize a bit.

Mine fought the Battle of the Shirts. They met in the morning, swung their claymores till the heat was too much, and then they took off their kilts and fought in their shirts till there were a few exhausted men left alive on either side, men too tired to finish killing each other.

There's a difference between a soldier and a warrior. The latter is out to kill and die, not for "a" cause but "be"cause. Mine were heroes. They were thieves and drunkards and bullies and cringeing cowards in the face of the clan chief; but in the fields and the glens and in the tors they were men who fought and killed and screamed and bled and died. They were mad-men who fought.

When the English slaughtered mine at Culloden and cleared the Highlands to graze sheep and destroy the land, well, I could scream and bellow and want to wreak havok on the English for it; but I look at the damage done, and I thank God for it: I was fortunate enough because of that to live my life, not on a barren wasteland scrambling from groats and haggis, but as an American.

Mine were fighting men, and they died like men, beautiful and fantastic and brave. The children, some of them, the fortunate, who survived went on to America and became Americans. Thank God for it.

As good as mine are they didn't raise up among them Henry Dunant, and they didn't live his hard life. That man was a hero, too, a man deeply involved in war. His war won't ever end, and the suffering will never cease.

And what about us? We have the best of both in us,
the maniac killers who fight for the blood of man and a place at the hand of God; and we are those who will tend our fellows in spite of the grief and the pain we suffer for it. We are, as I've written here many times before, blessed by living in this time when we can take the fight to the world of evil and conquer it for the Good. Crazed and savage though we might be in battle we have also in us the Humanity lacking in the majority of the world's population. We are able to crush our enemies totally, and we have the duty to do so to bring to them the hope of Humaness they now lack. what could be better in life?

Ha Zahal, the IDF, they fight for Israel, and rightly so. But we can fight for the whole world. It really doesn't get much better. And if at the end of the day there are few of us left standing, then maybe some beggar will come to tend us and take us back to our wives and babies so we can all be Americans in peace till the next time.

Posted by: sonofwalker at May 15, 2005 12:45 AM