
Actually, now that I think about it, I do wish he'd shut up.

Why, then, should we be commanded to "respect" those who insist that they alone know something that is both unknowable and unfalsifiable? Something, furthermore, that can turn in an instant into a license for murder and rape? As one who has occasionally challenged Islamic propaganda in public and been told that I have thereby "insulted 1.5 billion Muslims," I can say what I suspect—which is that there is an unmistakable note of menace behind that claim. No, I do not think for a moment that Mohammed took a "night journey" to Jerusalem on a winged horse. And I do not care if 10 billion people intone the contrary. Nor should I have to. But the plain fact is that the believable threat of violence undergirds the Muslim demand for "respect."
Before me is a recent report that a student at Pace University in New York City has been arrested for a hate crime in consequence of an alleged dumping of the Quran. Nothing repels me more than the burning or desecration of books, and if, for example, this was a volume from a public or university library, I would hope that its mistreatment would constitute a misdemeanor at the very least. But if I choose to spit on a copy of the writings of Ayn Rand or Karl Marx or James Joyce, that is entirely my business. When I check into a hotel room and send my free and unsolicited copy of the Gideon Bible or the Book of Mormon spinning out of the window, I infringe no law, except perhaps the one concerning litter. Why do we not make this distinction in the case of the Quran? We do so simply out of fear, and because the fanatical believers in that particular holy book have proved time and again that they mean business when it comes to intimidation....
It is often said that resistance to jihadism only increases the recruitment to it. For all I know, this commonplace observation could be true. But, if so, it must cut both ways.
What is so disheartening is that here we have a university, with the help of law enforcement, turning an issue of free speech (and, to be fair, maybe vandalism or misdemeanor theft) into a double felony.
Which makes sense in a culture where butt-slapping thirteen-year olds are rapists and sexual predators, I suppose, or where “torture” and “racism” mean so much that they no longer mean anything at all.
Or where discoursing on the holy spunk and sheep-brained Catholics lands you a job with a presidential candidate…
Perhaps had Shmulevich issued his protest in a “free speech zone,” he’d have had better luck with the university. At any rate, a few years in the clink — and maybe some time in a re-education camp (the Pakistan mountain region has some fine facilities, I’m told) — will do this hater some good. Because as we know, there’s simply no excuse for tolerating intolerance.
SUDAN: JEWS BEHIND DARFUR CONFLICT
Sudanese defense minister says '24 Jewish organizations fueling conflict in Darfur'
Sudan's defense minister, Abdel Rahim Mohamed Hussein, has accused "24 Jewish organizations" of "fueling the conflict in Darfur" last week in an interview with a Saudi newspaper.
Hussein was interviewed during an official state-visit to the Saudi kingdom last week.
A journalist from Saudi Arabia's Okaz newspaper asked Hussein: "Some people are talking about the penetration of Jewish organizations in Darfur and that there is no conflict there?"
"The Darfur issue is being fuelled by 24 Jewish organizations, who are making the largest amount of noise over the issue, and using the Holocaust in their campaigning," the Sudanese defense minister replied.
Hussein added that the Darfur conflict was driven by "friction between farmers and herders and shepherds. Among the biggest problems is that of water, which is used to exploit the differences and fuel the conflict."
"Are these Jewish groups supporting (the rebels) financially?," the interviewer from Okaz asked Hussein.
"Yes, they provide political and material support through their control over the media and across American and British circles," Hussein said, adding that Jewish groups were using "all means to fuel these conflicts."
The real scandal isn’t that the US has locked up suspects at Guantanamo Bay, but that it’s let so many of them go free - free to resume their terrorism:AT LEAST 30 former Guantanamo Bay detainees have been killed or recaptured taking up arms against allied forces following their release.
They have been discovered mostly in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but not in Iraq, a US Defence Department spokesman told The Age yesterday…
His comments follow the death this week of Taliban commander and former detainee Abdullah Mehsud, who reportedly blew himself up rather than surrender to Pakistani forces. In December 2001, Mehsud was captured in Afghanistan and held at Guantanamo Bay until his release in March 2004. He later became the Taliban chief for South Waziristan.
How many people have now been murdered by fanatics set free from Guantanamo Bay, at the urging of so many civil libertarians and Leftist activists?
How many deaths do those civil libertarians now have on their conscience?
Savvy Democrats ought to be questioning the Bush administration’s mass release of Saudi detainees given such analysis. But they’re all too busy pressing for the immediate closure of Gitmo and the full liberation of every last detainee from the facility.
Democrats: For freeing jihadists faster.
Put that on a bumper sticker.
The brilliance of the new barbarism is that you cannot fight it without destroying your own value system into the bargain.
Traditionally the solution has been to consider wartime a discontinuity, when civilization's rules are suspended. It becomes possible, for example, to lay waste to the Monte Cassino Abbey. Berlin was bombed without regard for its buildings, churches or people.
The alternative is to create methods of fighting so discriminating that we can literally shoot between the raindrops. But that creates a different problem, for we will need an intelligence system so comprehensive that it will become intrusive.
Either way, the war cannot be won without cost. And the fundamental fraud foisted on the public is to claim we can have war without horror, conduct an intelligence war without dishonesty and cunning and obtain victory without sacrifice.
"...al-Qaida now views "all the world as a battlefield open in front of us."
The Egyptian-born physician said that the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah and Palestinian militants would not be ended with "cease-fires or agreements."
"It is a jihad (holy war) for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahri said. "We will attack everywhere."
You are not going to like this.
On the demonstrable virtues of not caring if children die, on hardening your mind for war, and other things we can no longer avoid discussing.
Beware that you are ready before you pass this seal.
Let us begin with a debate between a peaceful, gentle soul, and me. The topic could be Israel's war, or ours in Iraq, or -- if they have the heart for it -- the one to come.
"It cannot be," I must say. "Love should always rise, above war and fear and death. Love should always be first, and not last, in our hearts. It should never be that love brings wrong, and disdain brings right.
"And yet," I say, "It is. I have shown you that it is. That means we have moved into a time beyond human wisdom. We can no longer know the right. It is beyond us.
"We can only do," I must warn her, and you. "We can only do, and pray, that when we are done we may be forgiven."
The only issue here was, and remains, whether the stories Beauchamp told in his Diarist (and in the two that preceded it) were matters of fact, or embellishments of tales he had heard around the base, or were invented out of whole cloth.
Lincoln went through Gens. Burnside, Halleck, McClellan, McDowell, Pope, and Rosecrans before finding Grant, Sherman, Sheridan and Thomas. In World War II, we never did get Mark Clark out of Italy. No need to mention the train of generals in Vietnam before Creighton Abrams turned things around. Good generals study the errors of their predecessors as they wait for history’s call. In the case of Sherman and Grant, the key difference that marked them as great men, other than an instinctive genius for tactics and strategy, was insight into the mind of the enemy, especially his motivations and contradictions, and a complete calmness in the face of the battle hysteria around them and the backbiting at home.
I preface all that by saying I believe Gen. Petraeus is the right commander after Franks, Sanchez, and Casey, unflappable in the face of bad news at the front and politicking at the rear. If we can give him a year, he will stabilize the country—and the US will have pulled off the impossible of establishing some sort of consensual society, analogous to a Kurdistan or Turkey, in the heart of the ancient caliphate.
How will we sense any progress? Mostly to the degree which Democratic rhetoric insidiously lessens, as Sens. Like Biden, Clinton, Obama et al. begin to hedge their bets in fear that good news will embarrass them around midyear next.
Recently, the Syrian government press has been directing harsh criticism against some Arab countries, claiming that they are helping the U.S. implement its plans at the expense of the Arabs. The columnists have also condemned the Arabs for rejecting the policy of resistance - which they said had proven its effectiveness in Lebanon - and for normalizing relations with Israel. The writers used harsh terms to describe certain elements within the Arab countries, calling them "Judas Iscariot," Arab "neo-cons," "forces of evil,"and "Jews within [the Arab world]."
...the pan-Arabism that once made the Palestinian cause the region's cause is long dead, and the Arab countries have their own worries aplenty. In a decade of reporting in the region, I found it rarely took more than the arching of an eyebrow to get the most candid of Arab thinkers to acknowledge that the tears shed for the Palestinians today outside the West Bank and Gaza are of the crocodile variety. Palestinians know this best of all.
To promote the canard that the troubles of the Arab world are rooted in the Palestinians' misfortune does great harm. It encourages the Arabs to continue to avoid addressing their colossal societal and political ills by hiding behind their Great Excuse: it's all Israel's fault. Certainly, Israel has at times been an obnoxious neighbor, but God help the Arab leaders, propagandists and apologists if a day ever comes when the Arab-Israeli mess is unraveled. One wonders how they would then explain why in Egypt 4 of every 10 people are illiterate; Saudi Arabian Shi'ites (not to mention women) are second-class citizens; 11% of Syrians live below subsistence level; and Jordan's King can unilaterally dissolve Parliament, as he did in 2001. Or why no Middle Eastern government but Israel's and to some extent Lebanon's tolerates freedom of assembly or speech, or democratic institutions like a robust press or civic organizations with independence and clout--let alone unfettered competitive elections.
Might it not be closer to the truth to say that Arab radicalism is the cause of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute--not the result of it? There is no peace because Israel's neighbours--and too many of the world's Muslims--cannot accept the right of a non-Arab, non-Muslim minority to live unsubjugated in the Middle East. That is the true "core" of the dispute, and it cannot be fixed by negotiation.
Many in the Arab world defiantly declare their ‘Arab pride,’ but of course, that really isn’t true. That is a kind of projection. If there really was Arab pride, they would be digging holes for the foundation of schools and factories, and not digging holes to bury IED’s. If the Palestinians wanted to reflect Arab pride, they would build hospitals and not rockets and missiles.
The Arab world is not fighting for freedom and democracy. They are fighting to retain the values of oppression, tyranny and dysfunction. There is so much self hatred of what they have come to stand for, that they are willing to blow themselves up in the process. Subconsciously, they must know what they are fighting to preserve and how they are fighting, is repulsive to any decent, civilized and religious adherent of any faith.
In truth, the Arab world cannot be proud of itself. The Islamic and Arab cultures that contributed mightily to the progress of mankind, have willingly become the poster children for religious intolerance, hate, violence and even genocide. There is very little the Arab world has to be proud of- and pointing to past glory only serves to highlight how far they have fallen. All the phony ‘Arab pride’ in the world has not motivated them to build. All they have done is destroy- and that destruction is a symptom of self hatred. People who hate themselves, destroy everything around them. People that believe in their higher selves, build. The same is true for nations. Nations, societies and cultures are not remembered for what they destroy. They are remembered for what they have built.
Attack Beijing or Moscow? Any Chinese or Russian response to a Bin Laden attack would have gone as unreported as the Chinese reprisals of 1997 -- the year incidentally that Hongkong was returned to its motherland -- no need to raise any jitters about that. War by al-Qaeda against China or Russia would have been just kinetic war. One in which radical Islam would lose 100 men, women and children for every Chinese or Russian it killed. That was a losing proposition. What Osama needed was information war, one which would allow him to dish out propaganda instead of take losses, and that could only be started by attacking the United States of America. Western politics would do the rest....
There are times when I am tempted to think that the Western Left is radical Islam's Ring of Power. And the brilliance of al-Qaeda's reliance on it as a force-multiplier is that the defeat of radical Islam must consequently come at the price of altering the structure of post-war Western politics itself. In a sense the Western Left has become a hostage to the current world crisis, and perhaps the only part of the Left that understands this are the signatories of the Euston Manifesto, who realized that al-Qaeda had already claimed its political soul: that unconciously, almost imperceptibly, the Left in uncritical embrace of any foe of America had come to align itself with the most brutal, obscurantist, repressive theocrats on the planet. And would conceivably share its fate with them.
But al-Qaeda's allies can only control events up to a point. Elemental forces are ranged against it. Chief among which is the sheer, simple brutality of countries like Putin's Russia and China. If a snapping point is reached, even the Left may not forever restrain the West. The end point of debasing the coin of information is absolute bankruptcy.
The greatest most noble country in the history of the world? Yikes! You really believe that? What's so great about incarcerating more humans than any other nation on the planet? What's so noble about leaving a third of the nation without adequate health care? And what's so noble about leaving hundreds of thousands of veterans out on the street without a roof over their head? What's so great about a nation that has killed nearly a million people in an unprovoked and illegal war? A nation that justifies the same torture techniques used by the Nazis? A nation that has democratic institutions and forms but no democratic outcome? Yeah I would stop apologizing because it looks foolish to the rest of the world. Europeans look upon us as the biggest threat to world peace--not Iran. In the real world we are not the greatest nation; we are the greatest imperialist power and people resent that. As for defeating the Left, you've been trying to do that for years. You have us arrested, killed, beaten, spied on, and basically make our life a living hell, but you can't beat us. A people united will never be defeated. You can win battles, but you'll never defeat us because the ideas we represent speak to the human soul.
-dave
Let us stop apologizing for being the greatest, most noble country in the history of the world. Let us stop apologizing for being the most productive and free people in historical memory; a people who willingly, generously and honorably shoulder the burdens and problems of the world-- and get little or no thanks for doing so; on the contrary, they are heaped with scorn and are the objects of unceasing malevolence.It is time to go on the rhetorical and political offensive against the political left, before their strategies succeed in destroying the soul and will of our country, leaving us even more vulnerable to the Islamofascist enemy who--if they cannot possess or enslave our soul--intend to wipe us off the map.
When the grandiose self is out of control; the fragments self of the individual(s) will manipulate, control, subjugate, hurt and in extreme cases even kill others. This happens because without a cohesive self, other people are not seen as separate from the self, or even necessarily human. Those in the thrall of the grandiose self are not capable of real human empathy.
We see stories of this kind of thing happening all the time on the news, and frequently exclaim in astonishment, "How could someone do that?" Examples are the ex-boyfriend who cannot accept that the woman he loved has dared to withdraw her love from him and so must kill her (and often himself); the serial killer who does not experience others as really human; the pedophile who abuses then murders his child victim; and every petty criminal who believes implicitly that his feelings and desires are paramount and justify his behavior.
The second type problem for society at large is an evil that is far more subtle, but even more destructive; and it originates from the idealized object developmental line . Individuals with this particular narcissistic defect (as likewise described for the grandiose self) also do not see other people as separate individuals; and instead see them only as fodder for the expression of an IDEAL or as pawns for an Omnipotent Object (e.g., a dictator).
For all the lip service given to compassion and caring for others, the individual in the throes of narcissistic idealism also completely reject the needs of the individual and enslave him or her to their IDEAL. Eventually, the enslavement--whether religious or secular--snuffs out human ambition, confidence, energy and self-esteem. These "do-gooders" cause considerable human misery and their ideologies can lead to genocidal practices and unbelievable atrocities on a grand scale, all in the name of the IDEAL or GOD. Appropriate benevolence and compassion toward others can only occur when there is a cohesive self in residence; who accepts that other people are separate from him, with thoughts, desires, wishes and beliefs that may not coincide with his own--and that those others have a right to be so.
C.S. Lewis wrote:"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
Many people never completely resolve all the tension between the two poles of narcissistic development; thereby never reaching a fully integrated and cohesive self. While most would not meet specific criteria for a diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, such people have extremely dysfunctional narcissistic traits that continually interfere with their own and other's lives.
Great post, but can you be a little more specific about who can relieve these people of their denial and how to do it? Shouldn't President Bush be doing more, and more often?As I mentioned in the post, making people aware of what they are doing is actually the only way to deal with denial. By doing so, you make their denial a completely conscious action, instead of a partially conscious (or less) behavior. Then they face a clear-cut choice: either to continue to deny (but now it is conscious) or they can face reality and do what needs to be done.