The Origins of the Great War of 2007

From Niall Ferguson, the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University, comes this very believable retrospective on the great war that might yet come to pass. In today's Telegraph with a generous hat tip to Protein Wisdom.

Prior to 2007, the Islamists had seen no alternative but to wage war against their enemies by means of terrorism. From the Gaza to Manhattan, the hero of 2001 was the suicide bomber. Yet Ahmadinejad, a veteran of the Iran-Iraq War, craved a more serious weapon than strapped-on explosives. His decision to accelerate Iran's nuclear weapons programme was intended to give Iran the kind of power North Korea already wielded in East Asia: the power to defy the United States; the power to obliterate America's closest regional ally.

Under different circumstances, it would not have been difficult to thwart Ahmadinejad's ambitions. The Israelis had shown themselves capable of pre-emptive air strikes against Iraq's nuclear facilities in 1981. Similar strikes against Iran's were urged on President Bush by neo-conservative commentators throughout 2006. The United States, they argued, was perfectly placed to carry out such strikes. It had the bases in neighbouring Iraq and Afghanistan. It had the intelligence proving Iran's contravention of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

But the President was advised by his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, to opt instead for diplomacy. Not just European opinion but American opinion was strongly opposed to an attack on Iran. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 had been discredited by the failure to find the weapons of mass destruction Saddam Hussein had supposedly possessed and by the failure of the US-led coalition to quell a bloody insurgency.

Evil is at march in Iran, and while some people are noticing the developments, most parties are too busy engaged in the camps of either "let someone else do something," or "let diplomacy run it's course."

I do hope that President Bush is engaged in diplomatic activities (and other activities that would drive the NY Times and Democrats crazy,) to get this crises solved before the great war of 2007 or 2008 ever occurs.

Just because Iran is not an imminent threat now, does that mean we must wait until it is before we do something? I suppose the answer to that question is best answered by the likes of John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean and the irrepressible Al Gore.

Maryland Attacks Wal-Mart

The socialists in Maryland have struck a blow against Wal-Mart by passing a law that would require any company with more than 10,000 employees to spend at least 8% of their payroll on health care.

"The vote expands health care for workers, stops large, profitable companies from shifting their health care costs onto taxpayers, and makes sure all large, profitable employers pay their fair share for health care," said Paul Blank of WakeUpWalMart.com, a union-affiliated group that says it wants to change the way Wal-Mart does business.

Blank said Maryland lawmakers have "set a trailblazing example that other states will follow." WakeUpWalMart.com said it plans to introduce Fair Share Health Care legislation in at least 30 states this year.

I'd like to know when it became the job of state or federal governments to dictate this sort of blatant overreach into private enterprise. The goal of these people is a state like France or Germany, where 10% unemployment is a good number and personal wealth is almost zip. This is a step in that direction.

Blank, its more than a name, it is a mental state too!

John Shadegg For House Majority Leader

John Shadegg is the new conservative hope for House Majority Leader. Until Shadegg entered himself in the race, the contest was between Missouri's Roy Blunt and Ohio's John Boehner. Blunt has been sullied by the Abramoff scandal, and Boehner has the black eye of having passed out tobacco settlement checks on the house floor. (Not the image of cost-controls and fiscal conservatism I'm looking for.)

Larry Kudlow, writing in RealClearPolitics, says that

(h)opefully, Shadegg, who is not part of the Abramoff lobbying culture, will run on the budget-cutting proposals of the Republican Study Committee, in particular the RSC plan to end midnight "earmarks," which stealthily insert pork into bills without debate.

These earmarks are not only budget-busters, they open the door to rogue lobbying, where legislative favors are traded for cash. If the 100-member RSC gets behind Shadegg, it could win in come-from-behind fashion. This rebel group is full of change agents, people like Mike Pence, Jeff Flake, Paul Ryan, Marsha Blackburn and Jeb Hensarling -- rising young stars in the GOP firmament. This crowd, of which Shadegg is a longtime member, stands on bedrock conservative principles. They all deserve seats at the leadership table of high Republican policymaking.

A Who's Who of right leaning bloggers are endorsing the candidacy of John Shadegg for House majority leader. This letter, crafted by N.Z. Bear and circulating around the the hot right blogs, welcomes Shadegg into the race.

An Appeal from Center-Right Bloggers

We are bloggers with boatloads of opinions, and none of us come close to agreeing with any other one of us all of the time. But we do agree on this: The new leadership in the House of Representatives needs to be thoroughly and transparently free of the taint of the Jack Abramoff scandals, and beyond that, of undue influence of K Street.

We are not naive about lobbying, and we know it can and has in fact advanced crucial issues and has often served to inform rather than simply influence Members.

But we are certain that the public is disgusted with excess and with privilege. We hope the Hastert-Dreier effort leads to sweeping reforms including the end of subsidized travel and other obvious influence operations. Just as importantly, we call for major changes to increase openness, transparency and accountability in Congressional operations and in the appropriations process.

As for the Republican leadership elections, we hope to see more candidates who will support these goals, and we therefore welcome the entry of Congressman John Shadegg to the race for Majority Leader. We hope every Congressman who is committed to ethical and transparent conduct supports a reform agenda and a reform candidate. And we hope all would-be members of the leadership make themselves available to new media to answer questions now and on a regular basis in the future.


Signed,

N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear
Hugh Hewitt, HughHewitt.com
Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit.com
Kevin Aylward, Wizbang!
La Shawn Barber, La Shawn Barber's Corner
Lorie Byrd / DJ Drummond , Polipundit
Beth Cleaver, MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Jeff Goldstein, Protein Wisdom
Stephen Green, Vodkapundit
John Hawkins, Right Wing News
John Hinderaker, Power Line
Jon Henke / McQ / Dale Franks, QandO
James Joyner, Outside The Beltway
Mike Krempasky, Redstate.org
Michelle Malkin, MichelleMalkin.com
Ed Morrissey, Captain's Quarters
Scott Ott, Scrappleface
The Anchoress, The Anchoress
John Donovan / Bill Tuttle, Castle Argghhh!!!

The conservatives in the Republican Party have placed emphasis on three outcomes--national security, judicial restraint, and fiscal conservatism. We are working on one, we are succeeding on the second, but the third has been an incredible disappointment, particularly as we have had the numbers in the House and Senate, as well as the Presidency.

This can only mean that many of those that were elected to fight on these principles have either forgotten their way or were never on the same path with those that elected them. Of the three candidates running for the post of House Majority Leader, only John Shadegg seems to be of good memory and direction.

Conceding Defeat The Old Fashioned Way -- Blaming Someone Else

An in depth article in the New York Times today discusses the prevailing attitudes of Democratic Senators and strategists as they contemplate the successful performance of Samuel Alito before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week.

Disheartened by the administration's success with the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., Democratic leaders say that President Bush is putting an enduring conservative ideological imprint on the nation's judiciary, and that they see little hope of holding off the tide without winning back control of the Senate or the White House.

In interviews, Democrats said that the lesson of the Alito hearings was that this White House could put on the bench almost any qualified candidate, even one whom Democrats consider to be ideologically out of step with the country.

These are both epiphanistic realizations akin to a second grader figuring out how a math table works. This is what national elections are all about, and befuddled democrats are finally putting two and two together--almost.

Even though Democrats thought from the beginning that they had little hope of defeating the nomination, they were dismayed that a nominee with such clear conservative views - in particular a written record of opposition to abortion rights - appeared to be stirring little opposition.

Most people I talk with are already tired of left leaning jurists issuing "out of the mainstream" opinions--and they see Alito as antithesis to these opinions. What is out of the mainstream to most of the people I talk to is the idea of the Pledge being declared unconstitutional, that the constitution contains an explicit right for gay marriage, that a public display of the Ten Commandments represents the establishment of a national religion, and that the government has the right to seize personal property to grant that property to another private entity. Sure, abortion is also a push-button issue, but it really doesn't help democrats that their most visible party members are adamant about protecting the free enterprise of abortionists to suck the brains out of viable babies after their feet are already out of the womb.

But daftness, it seems, is hard to understand for the daft.

Several Democrats expressed frustration over what they saw as the Republicans outmaneuvering them by drawing attention to an episode Wednesday when Judge Alito's wife, Martha-Ann, began crying as her husband was being questioned. That evening, senior Democratic senate aides convened in a basement room of the Dirksen Senate Office Building stunned at the realization that the pictures of a weeping Mrs. Alito were being broadcast across the nation - as opposed to, for example, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, pressing Judge Alito about his membership in an alumni club that resisted affirmative action efforts.

"Had she not cried, we would have won that day," said one Senate strategist involved in the hearings, who did not want to be quoted by name discussing the Democrats' problems at the hearing. "It got front-page attention. It was on every local news show."

No, you still don't quite get it, and you weren't "winning the day," what you were doing was exposing yourself publicly for the mean and manipulative bastards that you are. No one gives a rat's ass about an inactive membership Alito had in his life 20 years ago, when they know that all the attention paid to it was pointless grandstanding.

Truly, if democrats want to become more relevant in deciding the slant of the judiciary in the future they are going to have to relate more favorably to values and ideals that most Americans hold dear. Not by attaching themselves to the hip of serving judges that outrage Americans, in other words, modify your stance to one more centrist in nature and build some voting momentum.

Indeed, many Democrats said that what took place with both the Roberts and Alito nominations simply underlined what Senator John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democratic who ran for president in 2004, said would happen to the court if Mr. Bush was returned to the White House.

"George Bush won the election," said Representative Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat. "If you don't like it, you better win elections."

Indeed Mr. Emanuel. Now go tell that to the rest of your party.

All emphasis mine.

A Fiery John Bolton Blasts Kofi Annan over Palestine Map Without Israel

US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton sent a letter to Sec.-Gen. Kofi Annan complaining that a map that omitted Israel was hung at an annual UN meeting.

In the letter, written on January 3, and revealed on The New York Sun on Friday, Bolton wrote: "It was entirely inappropriate for this map to be used. It can be misconstrued to suggest that the United Nations tacitly supports the abolition of the state of Israel."

"Given that we now have a world leader pursuing nuclear weapons who is calling for the state of Israel to be 'wiped off the map,' the issue has even greater salience," he stressed.

With his confirmation hearings stalled, John Bolton was an absentee appointment by President Bush.

The weeping and blustering of Senators, afraid to redirect the ineffective meanderings of the world body, could be heard loudly in Washington and around the world, apparently fearful that the UN would be seen in a negative light by other countries in the world.

Now, as it is being reported in the Jerusalem Post, it appears that John Bolton is at least applying the sort of policy pressures that need to be applied if the UN is ever going to be able to fulfill the purposes of its charter.

This is probably breaking little George Voinovich's heart.

Tanning the Buns of Bums

Why should I get my panties in a wad over such a small contingent of congressional dupes and their "wink, wink" trip to Jamaica to discuss trade and security issues?

Of course, this isn't the problem, it is the symptom of a problem. Government is too big. Government has its manipulative tendrils in all aspects of our lives, and this sort of junket (regardless of who paid) does not help any American anywhere (unless you consider tanning the backsides of a handfull of aging caucasians beneficial to greater American society.)

Can this trip be more thinly veiled?

Rep. A: Bob, we need to make certain that luggage is tied down. You know, completely secure.

Rep. B: Yes, Frank, I will make certain the load is secure. By the way, do you have a beach towel?

Rep. A: Sure. You got any suntan lotion?

Rep. B: Yep, Coppertone, with sun-block. Wanna trade?

Unison: Cha-ching!

(h/t to Right Nation.)

Confirmation Hearing Hypocrisy

While Ted Kennedy (D-Delusion) was accusing Samuel Alito of insensitivity to women and minorities for a decades old inactive membership in the group, Concerned Alumni of Princeton, Ted was an active member in the Owl Club, a group thrown off Harvard's campus for being discriminatory. Kennedy updated his membership as recently as September 7.

Newsmax with hat/tip to Drudge.

Ayman al-Zawahiri Possibly Killed

Until they prance out a body or complete DNA testing, it is too soon to start jumping for joy. However, ABC News tonight is reporting the possible killing of al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant.

Al-Zawahiri is the top operational planner of al-Qaida. His death would be a huge blow to the operations of the terrorist group.

Finger-crossedly awaiting updates.

(h/t Right Nation.)

Norah Jones

Just this past week (because of a late Christmas celebration,) I received a CD by Norah Jones. I was vaguely familiar with some of her earlier work, but had never taken the time to concentrate on the true earthiness of her voice.

After listening to her beautiful bluesy voice and studying the both the cover of her CD and her website, I've determined that she has a huge crush on me.

A Woman The Dems Don't Want To Hear

Would it be too much to ask for democratic Senators on the Judiciary Committee to actually attend the whole Senate Confirmation Hearing for Samuel Alito?

From Michelle Malkin comes this article on who did and didn't bother to stick around to listen to witnesses speaking on behalf of Samuel Alito.

This is U.S. Appeals Court Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, a Clinton appointee who gave a glowing endorsement of her colleague, Sam Alito, earlier today, along with six other judges from the appeals court who appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to support Alito. Chuck Schumer walked out before the judges started to speak. Teddy Kennedy showed up late, stayed for 10 minutes, then left. Pat Leahy put on a dour face for a short time, and also bailed. Dianne Feinstein, to her credit, remained for the duration and asked respectful questions.

Apparently Chuck Schumer feels that a decades old inactive membership in a campus organization is more pertinent than the testimony of current jurists who are intimately familiar with Samuel Alito's demeanor and judicial process.
In much the same way that Schumer's glasses bring into focus only the bottom half of his vision, his pro-active ignorance concentrates his political focus on only the left half of what remains.

An Alito Hatefest

I mentioned the incident the other day at the Alito Confirmation Blathering that Judge Alito's wife left the proceeding momentarily in tears after a too-little, too-late apology to Alito and his family for the ugliness of the spectacle.

Not so those on the left. This from Ankle Biting Pundits, who have been monitoring the left's hatefest for both Alitos.

Examples you ask?

-She has to be someone else when she's spanking alito to complete the whore/ madonna complex he so desperately feels he needs to feed

- Sounds like Mrs. "Ah-lie-too" needs a hysterectomy

-Martha Ann Bomgardner sounds like the moniker a sixteen year old who is experimenting with her identity would give herself, not the dignified name of even an average middle aged wife and mother

- If the woman had any ovaries at all, she'd speak up herself and say, "Don't mind me, just a bit stressed out, doncha know. My husband is up for one of the most important gigs in the land, and it's important that these hearings vet him thoroughly." But noooooo! She's gotta play the petite flower and let these men defend her womanly honor! Sheesh, what a wimp!

I've been accused of being too vitriolic. At least the targets I pick on put themselves in the crosshairs. This is drive-by shooting off.

(h/t Right Wing News.)

Human/Rabbit Hybrids Proposed in Stem-Cell Research

Perhaps it is simply because I watched The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe a couple of weeks ago where the imagery of half-man/half-(insert animal here)s were very vivid and believable, that I am disturbed by news out of Britain today.

From the Guardian with a hat tip to Drudge.

British scientists are seeking permission to create hybrid embryos in the lab by fusing human cells with rabbit eggs. If granted consent, the team will use the embryos to produce stem cells that carry genetic defects, in the hope that studying them will help understand the complex mechanisms behind incurable human diseases.

The proposal drew strong criticism from opponents to embryo research who yesterday challenged the ethics of the research and branded the work repugnant.

Do I have to define why I believe this sort of thing is wrong, or can I simply say and believe it without having to get a degree in human bio-ethics before anyone would listen?

Why I'm Skipping The Oscar's This Year

Writing in Townhall today, Ben Shapiro complains about the poor movie fare of today and how undisguised activist films have become Oscar's annual darlings.

Every year since I was old enough to stay up late, I've watched the Academy Awards. This year, however, I have absolutely zero desire to watch the Oscars. In recent years, lack of quality from Hollywood has turned the Academy Awards into a special-interest-group get-together.

Ok, ok, I know that Ben Shapiro looks like he is still only 13, and probably has only been able to stay up late for about two years now.

Still an interesting read.

Ted Koppel to ABC

From CNN with an assist from Right Nation.

"Ted and NPR are a natural fit, with curiosity about the world and commitment to getting to the heart of the story," said Jay Kernis, NPR senior vice president for programming. "The role of news analyst has been a tradition on NPR newsmagazines and there is no one better qualified to uphold and grow that tradition than Ted."

Yes, I'll say Ted is a good fit. He will fit in quite nicely among the cast of other left wing propagandists at NPR that already includes Scott Simon, Nina Totenburg, Anne Garrels, Daniel Schorr, Cokie Roberts, Terry Gross, etc. (Hey, that's just off the top of my head!)

Iranian Teenage Rape Victim To Be Hanged For Stabbing Assailant

The justice of Islam.

Iran Focus

Tehran, Iran, Jan. 07 – An Iranian court has sentenced a teenage rape victim to death by hanging after she weepingly confessed that she had unintentionally killed a man who had tried to rape both her and her niece.

The state-run daily Etemaad reported on Saturday that 18-year-old Nazanin confessed to stabbing one of three men who had attacked the pair along with their boyfriends while they were spending some time in a park west of the Iranian capital in March 2005.

Nazanin, who was 17 years old at the time of the incident, said that after the three men started to throw stones at them, the two girls’ boyfriends quickly escaped on their motorbikes leaving the pair helpless.

She described how the three men pushed her and her 16-year-old niece Somayeh onto the ground and tried to rape them, and said that she took out a knife from her pocket and stabbed one of the men in the hand.

As the girls tried to escape, the men once again attacked them, and at this point, Nazanin said, she stabbed one of the men in the chest. The teenage girl, however, broke down in tears in court as she explained that she had no intention of killing the man but was merely defending herself and her younger niece from rape, the report said.

The court, however, issued on Tuesday a sentence for Nazanin to be hanged to death.

Last week, a court in the city of Rasht, northern Iran, sentenced Delara Darabi to death by hanging charged with murder when she was 17 years old. Darabi has denied the charges.

In August 2004, Iran’s Islamic penal system sentenced a 16-year-old girl, Atefeh Rajabi, to death after a sham trial, in which she was accused of committing “acts incompatible with chastity”.

The teenage victim had no access to a lawyer at any stage and efforts by her family to retain one were to no avail. Atefeh personally defended herself and told the religious judge that he should punish those who force women into adultery, not the victims. She was eventually hanged in public in the northern town of Neka.

(h/t to FrontPageMag.)

Mrs. Alito Leaves Hearing In Tears

From the Drudge Report, Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's wife left today's Senate confirmation hearing in tears .

One senior Republican in the hearing room said of the situation: "After three full days of attacks against her husband's character, Mrs. Alito had enough. Democrat behavior during this hearing has not only been wrong, it's been embarrassing. Ted Kennedy is nothing but a bully."

A conservative nominee to this country's highest court must accept a huge burden, not only what he hoists on his own shoulders, but also must accept the burden of pain heaped upon his family and friends. Most persons will willingly accept the first, but the second is a burden none should have to bear.

Justice Samuel Alito is recognized as being well qualified by the ABA, but the wheels of an unrelenting Democrat political machine continue to produce the chaff of character assassination regardless.

It is time to engage the "constitutional option" now. Dispense with all of this crap. Conservatives hold the constitution foremost and, as evidenced by the confirmation of ACLU sympathist Ruth Bader Ginsburg, will confirm a reasonable nominee if they prove qualified. Conservatives will not enlist the filibuster as a means to defeat a nominee as Ginsbprovedoved. It is time to remove the Democrat's leverage of a filibuster. In fact, it is past that time. It is now time to allow a qualified nominee of unquestioned character, to serve his country without having to subject himself and family to ridicule for the sake of political scorecards. Will we be happy when every qualified candidate passes on the honor and duty of serving on the Supreme Court because they do not want to be subjected to this bastardized process?

I hope that every Democrat on the Judiciary Committee recognizes that what they have engaged in is beneath the minimum level of standards that should be expected from a human, even a politician.

Shame on them.

Condoleezza Rice: One Russian's Perspective

Traveling to Pravda to get another perspective can be pretty interesting. It can also be chillingly scary. Many Russians are not happy with their country's descent from super-power status, and it is making them irritable.

Condoleezza Rice has made some statements critical of Russia in regards to their handling of the Ukrainian natural gas crisis. It isn't sitting well with Yaroslava Krestovskaya who, writing in Pravda, says

(a)ccording to Condoleezza Rice, Russia's actions towards Ukraine did not characterize it as a respectable member of the Group of Eight. The statement from the high-ranking US official sounded like a reprimand from a strict babysitter that was teaching its baby to behave.

It goes without saying that the largest Eurasian power is not a baby. In addition, the geopolitical system in the world has undergone dramatic changes since the 1990s. The US Secretary of State, however, has seemingly lost the sense of time and reality.

But, Yaroslava is mild in her characterizations of Rice's statements when compared Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the leader of the Liberal and Democratic Party of Russia.

Mr. Zhirinovsky described Rice and her statements thusly:

"Condoleezza Rice released a coarse anti-Russian statement. This is because she is a single woman who has no children. She loses her reason because of her late single status. Nature takes it all.

"Such women are very rough. They are all workaholics, public workaholics. They can be happy only when they are talked and written about everywhere: "Oh, Condoleezza, what a remarkable woman, what a charming Afro-American lady! How well she can play the piano and speak Russian! What a courageous, tough and strong female she is!

"This is the only way to satisfy her needs of a female. She derives pleasure from it. If she has no man by her side at her age, he will never appear. Even if she had a whole selection of men to choose from she would stay single because her soul and heart have hardened. Like Napoleon, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, or Alexander the Great of Macedon Ms. Rice needs to fight and release tough public statements in global scale. She needs to be on top of the world.

But, if you think that is bad, it gets worse. Much worse.

"The civilized world needs to think about a decision when single politicians are not allowed to stay in power. This was a common practice in the Soviet political system. The matter of international relations is very subtle and exquisite. One single word or phrase may play an extremely important role in politics. This is not the place, where one can sublimate their personal sexual problems.

"Complex-prone women are especially dangerous. They are like malicious mothers-in-law, women that evoke hatred and irritation with everyone. Everybody tries to part with such women as soon as possible. A mother-in-law is better than a single and childless political persona, though.

"This is really scary. Ms. Rice's personal complexes affect the entire field of international politics. This is an irritating factor for everyone, especially for the East and the Islamic world. When they look at her, they go mad.

"Condoleezza Rice needs a company of soldiers. She needs to be taken to barracks where she would be satisfied. On the other hand, she can hardly be satisfied because of her age. This is a complex. She needs to return to her university and teach students there. She could also deal with psychological analysis.

"The true reason of Ms. Rice's attack against Russia is very simple. Condoleezza Rice is a very cruel, offended woman who lacks men's attention. Releasing such stupid remarks gives her the feeling of being fulfilled. This is the only way for her to attract men's attention," Vladimir Zhirinovsky said.

This is not parody. This is sincere lunacy, Russian Nazi style.

Report: Israel Hastening Plans to Strike Iran

From Newsmax with a hat tip to Right Wing News.

A preemptive airstrike by Israel against suspected nuclear weapons facilities in Iran could come as early as March, a report in the Glasgow Herald claimed Tuesday.

"The Israeli raids would be carried out by long-range F-15E bombers and cruise missiles against a dozen key sites and are designed to set Tehran's weapons program back by up to two years," the paper said.

"Pilots at the Israeli air force's elite 69 squadron have been briefed on the plan and have conducted rehearsals for their missions."

One of the primary targets would be the enrichment plant at Natanz - where Iranian scientists removed seals on Tuesday that had kept one of the country's largest uranium stockpiles under wraps since 2004.

Someone soon is going to have to take down Iran's nuclear program unless there is a remarkable diplomatic breakthrough--which seems more and more unlikely as time goes on.

Israel has the most to lose, and unlike democrats, they have no desire to wait until a threat is imminent before they will take action. If Ahmadinejad and the mullahs believes that the state of Israel will waste away what little time it has left with pointless negotiations, they are naive.

Israel says what it means and means what it says. Unlike the UN and the EU.

Some Comments Are Too Good Not To Be Repeated

"It's very hard to fight a terrorist war without intelligence. By
definition, you can only win battles against terrorists
preemptively---that's to say, you find out what they're planning
to do next Thursday and you stop it cold on Wednesday. Capturing
them on Friday while you're still pulling your dead from the
rubble is poor consolation." ---Mark Steyn

Thanks to the Federalist Patriot.

Egypt Threatens Abbas With Non-Support

How bad does it have to get before someone besides the Israelis condemn the chaos in Palestinian controlled areas? Apparently, only this bad.

From the Jerusalem Post,

Egypt threatened to withdraw its support for the Palestinian Authority if the PA did not act to control the rampant anarchy in the Gaza Strip, according to a report in the London Arab newspaper Al Quds.

The report claimed that following the incident at the Rafah border crossing in which two Egyptian soldiers were killed, Egyptian authorities delivered the threat to PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas as part of a specially delivered message.

Of course, we have all seen the absolutely deplorable activities of the Palestinians in Palestinian controlled areas for years. But, this was not a big problem for Egypt as long as Israel kept a lid on the terrorist problem. With the buffer gone this is no longer the case.

In the incident at the border crossing last Wednesday, two Egyptian border guards were killed and at least 30 were wounded when scores of Fatah gunmen opened fire at Egyptian army posts. They first demolished parts of the concrete slabs along the border between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, enabling many Palestinians to cross into Egypt.

Eyewitnesses said the gunmen used a bulldozer and explosives to create a hole in the wall. Egyptian border guards and Palestinian Authority policemen fired into the air in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent Palestinians from infiltrating into Egypt, they added.

I have a suggestion as to how to handle this type of situation if it ever happens again. The next time Palestinians try and invade your territory, don't shoot your guns in the air, shoot at the terrorists!