Islamic Dummies

[FC]

Let's see- they shoot rockets into Israel, abduct their soldiers, then whine because they get paybacks that make their lives difficult.

I sure get tired of them teaching kids the supposed story that Mohammed was offered poisoned food by a Jewish woman to determine if he really was a prophet. Because of that Jews are considered pigs and apes, in need of extermination.

Well, the Jews are going after Allah's own in Lebanon now, and guess who is told to exercise restraint? Nope, not Hezbollah or Hamas!

 

"And, of course, al-Qa'ida never need to sign the Conventions now, do they? As the ultimate beneficiaries of the progressive mindset, they get all the benefits with none of the obligations. We're bound, they're not. If you're captured with the severed head of a U.S. soldier in your knapsack, you're covered by Geneva..." —Mark Steyn

 

[FC]

Investor's Bus. Daily

 

The Usual Suspect

 

 

 

Middle East: Israel crosses into Lebanon to defend itself from Hezbollah terror attacks, and what leadership does the world get from the United Nations? The secretary-general implies that Israel is a terrorist state.

 

 

 

 

Israel, a punching bag — but no sucker — for Arab nations since it was declared a state in 1948, justifiably responded to the incursion onto its sovereign soil by Hezbollah terrorists who captured two Israeli soldiers Wednesday.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert correctly called the Hezbollah raid “an act of war,” and Israeli forces quickly went to work, striking Hezbollah positions inside Lebanon, some just outside Beirut.

The force is justified because there’s good reason to think that more Hezbollah terror attacks will come. Two weeks ago, the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas snatched Cpl. Gilad Shalit from inside Israel’s borders. Hezbollah and Hamas plan to use Israeli soldiers to swap for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.

Most Palestinians seem to agree with the strategy: A Jerusalem Media and Communication Center poll shows 77% favor the kidnapping of Shalit and 67% support further abductions. That level of enthusiasm only emboldens the terrorists.

While Israeli soldiers consider their new roles as human prey, world leaders rush to cameras and microphones to blame Israel. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, on a junket to Rome, scolded Israel for crossing into southern Lebanon, where Hezbollah guerillas, not Lebanon’s military, control the border.

Yes, Annan called for the immediate release of the captured Israeli soldiers. But of what effect is that when he plays the moral equivalence game?

“Whatever happens,” he said in reference to Israel’s response, “every effort must be made to protect civilians. The deliberate attack and maiming of unarmed civilians is terrorism pure and simple, whatever the cause.”

So, according to the head of the institution that purports to be the hope of a world sorely afflicted by poverty and violence, responding to an act of war is terrorism.

We don’t suppose that Israel has deliberately attacked unarmed civilians. Yet Annan seems to think that without the U.N.’s gentle hand on its shoulder, Israel is a rogue state that will do just that.

Where, we wonder, are the secretary-general’s words about terrorism when jihadist groups fire rockets into Israel? Where is his insistence that Hezbollah safely return the Israeli soldiers? And why won’t his U.N. enforce its own Resolution 1559, which was intended to disarm both Lebanese and non-Lebanese “militias” — terrorists — such as Hezbollah?

Meanwhile, the U.S. is blaming, as it should, Iran and Syria because of those countries’ support for Hezbollah. Lebanon also must get rid of all terrorists operating within its borders. That includes Hezbollah. With 14 representatives in Lebanon’s 128-seat parliament, two in the 26-member Cabinet, and 13,000 rockets, Hezbollah won’t go quietly.

But go it must, even if it’s a long-term project. If not, Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution will be endangered. And the United Nations will have yet another bleeding and chaotic hot spot on its hands, one that it was instrumental in creating.

[fritz]

Ahhh, the old UN. Supposed to stand for United Nations. But is it, really?

 

About halfway between my town and Cuero on US 183 is a Burma Shave type of sign display. It is in the pasture of an old farmer (a sheep farmer). It reads, in 3 parts---

 

"If in the UN we stay,

American soverignity will be taken away"

Then there is a www. addy to a site (can't make it out at 70 mph) but it has been there for several years now.

 

So, the UN crap is nothing new. His signs are right. And they are a sign of the times.

 

fritz