THE WAR WITH ISLAM

Leftists as battered wives: "The aftermath of the London terrorist bombings has demonstrated that the antiwar Left is severely afflicted by the political equivalent of battered-wife syndrome. With each new beating, the scarred and bruised victims of spousal abuse tend to excuse and rationalize the actions of their tormentors. A stubborn unwillingness to accept the proposition that their partners are violent louts plunges these woeful women into a morass of self-deception that spawns only further violence. The far Left has similarly proved unable to liberate itself from the web of rose-tinted delusions that it has spun about the nature of Islamic extremism. After each al Qaeda outrage, leftist ideologues are quick to castigate their own countrymen for a catalogue of sins, both real and imagined.. The streets of Britain's capital city were still damp with innocent blood when the same obscene dance of political self-flagellation began... In the world according to radical Islam it's the jihadist way or the highway, and these 7th-century dogmas represent the only acceptable outcome to al Qaeda... Fixated by a knee-jerk hostility towards all things American, the likes of Ali, Fisk, and Galloway refuse to recognize the existence of this conflict, much less the stakes that are involved. Their primal instinct is to appease bin Laden and his cohorts rather than oppose them. But Winston Churchill defined an appeaser as "someone who feeds the crocodile in the hopes of being eaten last." The sooner we accept the fact that this is a war; then the sooner we can get about the task of winning it".

The Marx-Muslim pact: "In 1939, the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact cleared the way for Hitler to start World War II. The Pact caught the world by surprise, because it was an alliance between two bitter enemies, Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. Similarly, what made possible the recent bombings in London, and the many more that will follow in Europe and the U.S., is the Marx-Mohammed Pact. Once again, two sworn enemies, Marxism -- specifically the cultural Marxism commonly known as Political Correctness -- and Islam, have made a Devil's bargain whereby each assists the other against a common enemy, the remnants of the Christian West. From a Fourth Generation war perspective, the most important fact about the London bombings is that they were carried out by legal residents of the British Isles.... This fact in turn points to what may be the West's biggest strategic blunder, namely its immigration policies. European and American immigration policies have imported, and continue to import, millions of immigrants who are deeply hostile to the traditional cultures of their new homelands... Obviously, these immigrant Moslem communities pose a clear and present danger to the Western countries they now inhabit. Equally obviously, given its history and what its adherents are doing around the world, Islam itself is a threat. Europe, and the United States, need to stop more Islamics (and, in the U.S., Hispanics) from coming, and at least some of the Islamics now in residence must go".

Seems reasonable: "The home secretary, Charles Clarke, yesterday widened the worldwide net that will allow him to exclude or deport from Britain Islamist militants whose inflammatory language or behaviour is judged to foment or provoke terrorism. He told MPs that intelligence, foreign and home office staff would compile a database of individuals which may lead to them being refused entry to the UK, or even being removed. Civil liberties groups last night said that they were alarmed by the list's catch-all nature. Under the plan, a systematic index will be drawn up of what the home secretary called 'unacceptable behaviours.' Included on it will be anyone preaching, running a website or writing articles which are 'intended to foment or provoke terrorism.'"

There is a rather idiotic article here (PDF) by some State Department hack, arguing that peace in Europe depends on Europe making (unspecified) accomodations to its Muslim population. Since Europe has already bent over backwards to accomodate the Muslims and got only aggression in response, I cannot even imagine what more the dolt thinks Europe could and should do. I think it is time for the Muslims to be making some changes, not the other way around. If they don't like European ways, they should be given a one-way ticket back to their ancestral homelands.

*******************************

ELSEWHERE

I normally read Brian Leiter only for laughs but I found this post oddly reassuring. There have been quite a few doubts expressed about whether John Roberts really will be conservative if he is elevated to SCOTUS. His whole career could be interpreted as aimed at sliding himself into a seat on SCOTUS by not revealing anything much about what he really thinks. But Leiter actually mounts some reasonable arguments for believing that Roberts IS conservative -- though almost anybody would be to the Right of Leiter, of course. I also liked this flash of honesty from Leiter: "on a range of issues the U.S. Supreme Court is unavoidably a super-legislature". I have a feeling that I will be quoting that again sometime. Kudlow and Manuel Miranda of the WSJ are also reassuring about Roberts.

A disturbing record: "Seven of the nine current Justices were appointed by Republican Presidents. ... Earl Warren, the father of modern judicial activism, was an Eisenhower appointee. So was William Brennan, who inherited Warren's mantle as the Court's liberal giant. Harry Blackmun, the author of Roe v. Wade, was a Nixon appointee. The most liberal member of the current court, John Paul Stevens, was a Gerald Ford selection. David Souter, a George H. W. Bush and Warren Rudman choice, told the Senate he saw himself in the tradition of the great Justice John Harlan, who revered precedent. But on the court he's arguably been more of a liberal activist than either of Bill Clinton's two justices (Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer). Anthony Kennedy, selected by Reagan after Robert Bork was defeated, was said at the time to share 80% of Mr. Bork's philosophy. But Mr. Kennedy's jurisprudence has proven to be nearly as malleable as Justice Souter's, especially on the cultural and church-state issues where the Court has become the de facto national legislature. ... Our objection to Roe and to Lawrence, the Texas sodomy case, isn't on the underlying policy. It is that the Court has hijacked those social disputes from democratic debate, preventing the kind of legislative compromises that would allow a social and political consensus to form. ... But there are many other issues on which the post-Warren justices have arrogated to themselves an almost legislative authority: overturning voter-passed Congressional term limits by 5-4, dictating racial and gender preferences in law, extending the Commerce Clause to encompass virtually any federal authority as in last term's Raich medical-marijuana decision, or expanding eminent domain in Kelo. ... But the larger goal should be to...restore the High Court to its more restrained historical role. In a phrase, this means putting an end at last to the judicial legislating that was unleashed in the Warren era and that has slowed only on occasion ever since."

GIs criticize Dems: "Soldiers from Massachusetts and Hawaii who work at the U.S. military detention facility at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, gave visiting home-state senators a piece of their mind last week. Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and Daniel K. Akaka, Hawaii Democrat, met with several soldiers during a visit led by Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. John W. Warner, Virginia Republican. Pentagon officials said soldiers criticized the harsh comments made recently by Senate Democrats... "They got stiff reactions from those home-state soldiers," one official told us. "The troops down there expressed their disdain for that kind of commentary, especially comparisons to the gulag".

Logical Meme has a horror-story about an out-of-control welfare system in Hartford, Ct.

For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald

**************************

That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.

Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist"

Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.

********************************