Ground State

Well, here's a day I thought would never come. Can I get this on my iPod? (HT: The Islamic Threat).

I belong to the Dennis Prager school of comparative religions. Dennis is an expert on any number of the world's religions, but he does not judge their scriptures, he reserves judgement for the behavior of the followers.

I've reached the same level of enlightenment without all that hard work. I don't care about your holy scroll, script, scrawl, shawl, whatever - it's your problem. I can see. When I see snuff-flicks with animals screaming Allah Akbar while they saw off a man's head - I know them. When not one of their followers takes to the streets to protest - I know them. When not one of their Imams says a word about it other than to warn me against Islamophobia - I know them. They're sick. It's a diseased faith. By their works I know them.

So - onto Muslim Congressman-elect Keith Ellison's speech on the 24'th, which included this passage:

Muslims, you're up to bat right now..." he said. "How do you know that you were not brought right here to this place to learn how to make this world better? How do you know that Allah, sallalahu aleyhi wasallam,” (meaning peace be upon him) "did not bring you here so that you could understand how to teach people what tolerance was, what justice was?… How do you know that you're not here to teach this country?

With all due respect, Keith, I think you lost your audience at the "up to bat" part. We all know what Muslims want to do with bats. As far as teaching me about tolerance and justice, I can only say - stuff it. I won't even study the religions I have respect for - I'm sure as hell not going to study your twisted death-cult faith. You're the one who needs the schooling.

Prince Harry's Nazi uniform stunt was an ugly disgrace. I recalled doing some ugly things myself at that age - fortunately no paparazzi followed me around then (this was before my fame as a blogger). Still, I had him written him off. Another piece of flotsam in the wastepool of British culture.

But I was wrong. Demanding to go to Iraq (HT Drudge Report). No doubt the MOD is begging him not to go, with some reason. Going to Iraq while his pop runs around talking about the threat of global warming. That takes some juevos. No kidding. Good luck Prince Harry.

There are two main varieties of the peace aficionados. The first - pure bred - rejects the use of force in all affairs. The second rejects the use of force here and now because it has costs.

The first is a utopian crowd. Many respect their idealism, but I do not. The practical effect of their ideology is that others must fight for their survival. The logical endpoint in any contest with their kind alone is that they must surrender or die. Their true numbers are few. I suspect most would fight when the choice of fighting or dieing is at their doorstep. They parade weakness as moral superiority.

The second group is larger, and in the proximate case of Iraq and more importantly Iran, becoming the determinant of the outcome of the national debate. Their motivations must be understood and addressed if the outcome of that debate is to be affected.

Emotional intelligence is sometimes defined as the ability to delay gratification for the sake of longer-term well-being. Fighting a war is an act of delayed gratification, for some the penultimate act of delayed-gratification.

The common thread to those who preach peace in the face of aggression is they are focused on the very near-term, their needs are now. They do not talk about surrendering, but that the war need not be fought today. A longer view forces consideration of the consequences of waiting - and there the peaceniks will not go. Their language reflects their focus. Peace Now. Chamberlain's formulation is the canonical form. Peace in our time. Yes, perhaps so, if your time is the next 3 months. Peace is always achievable unilaterally. Stop fighting, you're at peace, but the future may be pretty bleak.

So I want to change their views. I ask if they could have assassinated Hitler in 1939, would they pull the trigger? It's surprising how many would not. Would they agree to having someone else pull the trigger? There are many more positive responses. Then, if they haven't gotten away from me yet, I ask if they believe AhWantMyJihad is engaged in a program to develop nuclear weapons to be used in Israel (yes), United States (maybe), Great Britain (maybe). So I ask - if we can take him out now - should we? Usually - I get no. We should wait for the UN. We should negotiate.

It is these minds which must be changed if America is to engage the nuclear Imams before they go nuclear. But I don't know how to do it. They seem determined to wait for the blast.

This is a good blog about the war for civilization - this entry about Congressman Goode's letter is a flashing sign on the highway. The Islamification program is on-track here - in America. Hat tip to another great blog, Western Resistance.

I usually don't bother to post on anything I see on Little Green Footballs, because I assume anyone who reads my blog has already been reading there. But perhaps that is unwarranted - in any event - another must-see video with a hat-tip to LGF.

Make him President! First - the man is trying to eat his lunch, and he has to put up with this (HT LGF).




Then - the follow-up interview with Fox, archived on Hot Air, may even be better.

The December issue of Imprimis from Hillsdale College presents an article adapted from a speech made at Hillsdale by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard. The article is titled "Saddam's Iraq and Islamic Terrorism: What We Know". It is fascinating, depressing, and worth reading. Stephen Hayes discloses some of the concrete evidence that Saddam and Al-Qaeda were working together, so much so that Abdul Rahman Yasin, a veteran of the first WTC bombing, lived in Iraq at government expense throughout the 1990s. Of equal interest is the evidence that the insurgency which we're now fighting was planned, in detail, before we arrived.

Lastly, and depressingly, he spells out some of the effort by US intelligence to repress any exploitation of the documents found in Iraq, noting that as of March less than 5% of the material had been translated and that no serious effort is being made to increase the take - that in fact such efforts are being obstructed. Hayes suspects the primary reason for this is protecting the intelligence community from embarassment over what they were missing in Iraq. I find that hard to believe - the entire world thinks pre-war US intelligence was completely inadequate - there's no reputation to protect.

I try to imagine what would encourage those in the Administration to try to bury the data when it offers the potential to a) exonerate most if not all of the decisions made prior to the decision to invade Iraq, and b) help us connect the dots of Al-Qaeda, at least those who passed through Iraq. Who were they? How were they trained? Where did they go? That is information we should be pursuing with top-priority. Why wouldn't we do that?

I have a hunch that the hands of Saudi Arabia are dirtier than we know now (and that's pretty dirty). The Administration does not want that book opened, they have shied-away from every allegation of the involvement of elements of the Saudi government. If that's the case, then we really are getting troops killed for oil. Not to drill it out of Iraq, but to protect the despots sitting on the wells in Saudi Arabia.

CENTCOM News Release 12/12/06

Private First Class Ross A. McGinnis packed only 136 pounds into his 6-foot frame, but few have ever matched his inner strength.

McGinnis sacrificed himself in an act of supreme bravery on Dec. 4, belying his status as the youngest Soldier in Company C, 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment, attached to the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division.

The 19-year-old amateur mechanic from Knox, Pa., who enjoyed poker and loud music, likely saved the lives of four Soldiers riding with him on a mission in Baghdad.

McGinnis was manning the gunner’s hatch when an insurgent tossed a grenade from above. It flew past McGinnis and down through the hatch before lodging near the radio.

His platoon sergeant, Sgt. 1st Class Cedric Thomas of Longview, Texas, recalled what happened next.

“Pfc. McGinnis yelled ‘Grenade…It’s in the truck,’” Thomas said. “I looked out of the corner of my eye as I was crouching down and I saw him pin it down.”

McGinnis did so even though he could have escaped.

“He had time to jump out of the truck,” Thomas said. “He chose not to.”

Many short-sighted bloggers (LGF, Jawa, Gateway Pundit) have noted with some disgust David Duke's trip to Iran to support the Iranian colloquium on the fantastic holocaust fraud. I can now reveal that exclusive Ground State sources report that David Duke is actually there on a secret mission from James Baker to open negotiations with Iran on implementing the ISG recommendations. He's the realist ambassador.

As you can see in the accompanying photo - from one of David's many "sewer main" speeches - he's often accompanied by a visible aura around his head - just like AhWantMyJihad. They should get along famously - and America's surrender should go virtually unnoticed!

Update from the conference:

Reliable GS sources tell us that in the bag - David Duke has:

1) A map of the Golan Heights - to be renamed Hezbollah Heights

2) A map of the West Bank - to be renamed Rocket Bank

3) A copy of the recently published "Nuclear Warheads for Dummies"

4) A signed copy of the ISG Report - with the inscription from Jim expressing his sorrow that he could not attend the holocaust conference personally, but assuring AhWantMyJihad that David Duke represents the ISG's views in these matters.

5) A personal note from Alan Simpson - assuring AhWantMyJihad that this "Jewish problem" can be worked out satisfactorily if America is not bloodied too badly on the way out of Iraq - that he and Leon Panetta are used to working out deals like this.

6) A congratulatory note from Ed Meese on AhWantMyJihad's campaign to stifle pornography by stamping out radio, television, the internet, music, and women in public without a head-to-toe hijab.

7) A little reminder card from Justice O'Connor that public execution of minors for being homosexual only makes it harder to work a deal like this - if the executions were done inside the prison immediately after the torture - matters will progress more smoothly.

8) A letter from ex-Secretary of State Eagleberger reassurring AhWantMyJihad that no one in the State Department remembers that nasty hostage business in the American embassy, and that his nickname inside the State Department these days is "the Statesman from the Middle Eastern Hyper-Power".

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

This quote has circulated in e-mails, generally attributed to TR in 1907. In fact, the quote comes from a letter to the president of the American Defense Society dated January 3, 1919, a few days before his death. A copy of the original letter from the Library of Congress is posted by Snopes.com here.

The quote is suggested in this Townhall blog in a proposal for a first plank in a conservative Republican platform for 2008. A fine suggestion for the conservative Republicans - but is it not also a fine suggestion for liberal Democrats? Is this not a basis for American immigration that all Americans could agree to?

Teddy Roosevelt was the most popular Republican politician in 1912, but he was denied the nomination in the Republican primary, whereupon his supporters walked out and formed the Bull Moose party. His third-party candidacy was the most successful in American history measuring by percentage of the popular vote:

Woodrow Wilson (D)	6,301,254
Theodore Roosevelt	4,127,788
William H. Taft (R)	3,485,831

Had the Republicans nominated Roosevelt, they assuredly would have won. No League of Nations. Would WWII need even have been fought? It boggles the mind, the consequences of that primary.

The Republican party today seems on a similar track. There is no Republican candidate of Rudy Giuliani's stature and oratory capability. He's reminiscent of Roosevelt, pugnacious and independent. He may be denied the Republican party nomination for "ideological impurity" on gay marriage. What a shame that would be. The Republicans could produce a repeat of the 1912 result.

Still - if there's any issue which could ignite a third-party in America in 2008, it is the failure of both major parties to listen to what Teddy was telling us. The country is indeed built on immigrants - immigrants who want to be 100% Americans.

Mark Steyn is blowing the bugle, calling reveille to America. Somehow, some way - we must get more people to listen. In the Chicago Sun-Times:

It has been strange to see my pals on the right approach Iraq as a matter of inventory and personnel. Many call for more troops to be sent to Baghdad, others say the U.S. armed forces overall are too small and overstretched. Look, America is responsible for 40 percent of the planet's military spending: It spends more money on its armed forces than the next 43 biggest militaries combined, from China, Britain and France all the way down the military-spending hit parade to Montenegro and Angola. Yet it's not big enough to see off an insurgency confined to a 30-mile radius of a desert capital?

It's not the planes, the tanks, the men, the body armor. It's the political will. You can have the best car in town, but it won't go anywhere if you don't put your foot on the pedal. Three years ago, when it was obvious Syria and Iran were violating Iraq's borders with impunity, we should have done what the British did in the so-called ''Confrontation'' with Indonesia 40 years ago when they were faced with Jakarta doing to the newly independent state of Malaysia exactly what Damascus and Tehran are doing to Iraq. British, Aussie and Malaysian forces sent troops on low-key, lethally effective raids into Indonesia, keeping the enemy on the defensive and winning the war with barely a word making the papers. If the strategic purpose in invading Iraq was to create a regional domino effect, then playing defense in the Sunni Triangle for three years makes no sense. We should never have wound up hunkered down in the Green Zone. If there has to be a Green Zone, it should be on the Syrian side of the border.

Yeah - I think that's a pretty productive line of questioning. How come the 'hyperpower' is submitting to an insurgency from Iran and Syria - and they don't have one of their own to worry about? Where is the IED factory and why is anyone who works there still alive? How are the Iranians who train Shia warriors for Iraq and Palestine able to go about their daily lives with peace and quiet? Why aren't they spending sleepless nights wondering when their camp comes up on the radar? Seems like we ought to be doing something about that.

I think the perception we had is that getting Al-Zarqawi would break the will of the insurgency in Iraq. The problem is that the will for the insurgency in Iraq is not in Iraq - it's in Iran. The money, the ammo, the freshly manufactured "improvised" explosive devices - these come from somewhere. We should be making somewhere a pretty tough place to live.

Why aren't we? Fear of an oil crisis? Get real. If Iran gets nuclear weapons, an oil crisis will look like a Sunday picnic compared to what we'll have to deal with.

Victor Davis Hanson gave the remarks at an annual Claremont Institute dinner in honor of Winston Churchill. He discusses the completely craven submission of Europe to Islamic facism, and goes on to address post 9/11 America:

We on this side of Atlantic also are showing different symptoms of this same Western malaise, but more likely through heated rhetoric than complacent indifference—given the events of September 11 that galvanized many, while disappointing liberals that past appeasement had created monsters rather than mere confused, if not dangerous rivals. The war on terror has turned out to be the torn scab that has exposed a deep wound beneath, of an endemic Western self-loathing—and near mania that our own superior education and material wealth have not eliminated altogether the need for force and coercion.

I would recommend the whole speech to you.

The Laconic Blog, a kindred spirit - writes:

What has happened to the George Bush of 2001-2003? Granted, the politization of the war by the Left has made him a bit gun-shy but he previously understood that in a supposed world of gray, there was still plenty of black and white. He seemed to know evil when he saw it.

Now he seems simply content to damn something as "unacceptable" while doing nothing to prevent or reverse it.

I want the old George Bush back. He may not have been perfect, but he inspired confindence in the growing darkeness.

Yeah. Me too.

This map was downloaded from a government run web-site in France. The region bordered in red is a sensitive zone. By "sensitive", they mean "infidels get beaten and stabbed here". There are over 750 such zones. These are the regions in France where French people should not go - because they aren't really part of France anymore.

After the Iraq Study Group straigtens out how Islam can support the growth of peace and democracy in Iraq, perhaps Baker & Co. can form up the FSG and help out the frogs.

I honestly don't spend a lot of time listening to country music - it's OK, but sooner or later, I'd like them to get another song. Charlie Daniels, however, has found a home on my iPod. In Simple Man, he suggests we "take them rascals out to the swamp" and "let the ... alligators do the rest".

And from the truth is stranger than country music department - CBS News reports that Adrian J. Apgar - a simple crack-head - is in critical condition following a mauling by an alligator. The alligator, apparently, does not like crack-head rascals swimming naked in his swamp at night.

I think we have to ask if this is being handled fairly by the alligators. Would they mete out the same damage to a cocaine-addict swimming naked in their swamp at midnight? Or do they reserve their full wrath for the crack-heads? More of the same implicit racism we see in prison sentencing in America I suspect.