Bits: Around the World in 80 Days

If Mexico started shelling us from across the border, how long would we do nothing more than to hide in our cellars? This is the reality Israel has been facing for some time now. It knows that the shelling is designed to provoke a greater war in the region – a war (barring a Biblical miracle) she would lose.

Israel has essentially zero friends. Even if she were to defend herself successfully, she would be condemned by virtually all nations. Should she lay herself down in front of the lions and beg for mercy, there might be a chance – but you know how lions are.

At the moment – even with Obama’s empty rhetoric – Kaddafi has more street creds than Israel could ever hope to have. Kaddafi’s crime was to stand up against AQ and the Iranian axis. We jumped on the scaffold too soon. The axe hadn’t been sharpened yet and we looked foolish just holding sticks in our hands.

Kaddafi will fall – they all do – but it will be on his terms. In 50 years, all the kids will be wearing t-shirts with Kaddafi’s picture on it.

Kaddafi had long ago agreed to support and be a key member of Soros’ Open Society. In that he was one up on us. (We joined up much later.) He knew how to work it. He knows where the bones are buried, even if he never intended to swallow all of it.
-------------------------------------------------

Thaddeus gets it – up to a point. The reason it no longer matters if the president shows up for work or not; the reason it no longer matters if the parties tie themselves in knots over what essentially amount to non-issues; the reason our government has ceased to function in its service for the people of the United States is because our government is now elsewhere. It is elsewhere that the real decisions are now being made –while Washington remains a convenient diversion, a pointless, but seductive charade.

Look at the flourishes of the right hand and miss what the left hand is doing. If you really want to know what’s going on, look to Soros' Open Society, look to the UN, look to The Hague, look to NATO. Washington has long since surrendered its sword.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Guest Contributer: Tom From NJ

Tom replies to my post entitled: "Massacre At Mazari-i-Sharif: It's A U.S. Pastor's Fault."

"We even tolerate the intolerant."

All too true, Peter; at least if the tolerated intolerant hail from one of PC's Most Favored Victim groups. That this is largely PC-driven is proven beyond doubt by the grotesque fact that Muslims as a group -- including the most radical, violent and, yes, intolerant among them -- have achieved full-fledged MFV status among the Liberal Establishment of both parties and the MSM. The latest stomach-turning development here is General Petraeus' mealy-mouthed apology for the Koran burning staged by self-proclaimed Christian minister Terry Jones and his huge throng of tens of like-minded haters.

The good General is no doubt a fine and dedicated officer but he has apparently fallen victim to the military professional's most prevalent occupational malady -- fighting the last war. Petraeus has been trying to adapt the deference to Islamic mores and traditional tribal structures that powered the successful surge in Iraq to a very different situation in Afghantistan, where the shorthand for Islamic mores and traditional tribal structures is most often spelt T-A-L-I-B-A-N. In Iraq, the Sunni elders had their own excellent reasons to morph into active foes of al-Quaeda; in Afghanistan, the incentives for tribal leaders vis-a-vis the Taliban seem almost 180 degrees opposite.

Unfortunately, the response of the General, and the Obama Administration, has been to double-down on an increasingly expensive and ineffective strategy, with his public reaction to the Florida Koran burning being the latest example. Petraeus rightly condemns the Koran burning as an offensive and intolerant act, but he never even mentions, must less denounces, the murderous temper-tantrums of Afghan Muslims that resulted in the deaths of innocent people, even the beheadings of a pair of UN mission officials, nor does he call any attention to the fact that the worst of these tantrums have been whipped up by lying imams who claim repeatedly that burning Korans by the dozen is virtually routine in Great-Satan America.

Now Senator Lindsey Graham, John McCain's poodle, is joining in with a strange and dangerous doctrine that the "loose lips sink ships" ethos of World War II be applied to the "war" that the USA is currently engaged in. Senator Graham, may we dare ask -- what war are we now engaged in, exactly? None has been declared, certainly not in the same way as WW II, and wouldn't we want such a clear legal basis before we limit our traditional American free speech, which in your statement you damn with faint praise as "a good idea, but . . .?"

Never one to miss an opportunity for working a scam, Hamid Karzai is also jumping in on this Koran-burning issue. Admittedly Karzai -- unlike General Petraeus -- condemns the murders as well as the book-burning, but how he and his well-respected, wildly popular regime is going to investigate to describe and explain what really happened. Can anyone doubt, based on the slippery Karzai track record, that the results of this "investigation" will be heavily couched in terms of "blame America first?" Followed by an even larger bill presented to Wash-DC by Karzai for his invaluable and selfless services in "opposing" -- ha, ha! -- the Taliban?

In any case, Petraeus, Karzai, Obama, Graham, the MSM, and all the rest of our dhimmis-in-training will sooner or later blame alleged American "intolerance" as the root cause of murderous anti-Western protests in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Ummah. None will question why, after all the sacrifices in blood and treasure Americans and their Western allies have made to benefit or "protect" -- today's buzz-word -- various Muslim populations, significant percentages of those same populations seem fully prepared to believe any outrageous charge that those same Westerners are nothing more than tools of the Jews and/or Crusaders in sheep's clothing waging war on Islam. Which is to say, could these murderous tantrums actually be the result of MUSLIM intolerance? But to say so is not PC and is, therefore, taboo, unlike willingly undermining our Constitutional protection of free speech, the better to tolerate the intolerant. God save America!
--------------------------------------------
My comment: They engage in 'murderous tantrums' because it works for them. Can you blame them? Like children, the more they act out, the more we allow. Tolerance only works up to a point.

Doorstop

There’s a door in our hallway that naturally closes. It has to be kept open with a doorstop - in our case, an antique Chinese casting of small dog.

I remember back around the time when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated, Pakistan was regarded as ours, to do with as we wished. We had been conducting drone strikes (inside Pakistan) as a part of our effort in Afghanistan. Pakistan had been voicing its objections, but our foreign policy experts chose to continue with the strikes anyway because, they reasoned, Pakistan couldn’t do much about it. We essentially viewed it as a failed and deeply divided state - the lesser half, heavily dependent on U.S. foreign aid. Since then, Pakistan has made strides in coming together - and not necessarily in our favor.

The Ray Davis affair shows that things have changed significantly; that Pakistan is now asserting itself in a way it has never done before. It doesn’t do to declare any nation a failed state simply because we happen not to like it. And , yes, we do not like the Taliban; and, yes, we do not like AQ; and, yes, we do not like Islamic extremism; shariah; and, yes, we do not like people who do not like us and pray daily for their god to hasten our demise.

At some point, Pakistan had to chose between itself and us. It has chosen itself. The Ray Davis affair has brought the rift between us into sharp focus. Surely, we have offered untold sums to settle the matter quietly. And, while this might have worked in the past, it’s not working now. The people of Pakistan see America as a hated intruder; as interloper; as propping up illegitimate and corrupt governments that only serve to oppress to undermine their true desires.

The rulers of Pakistan have had to go along with the people’s wishes in order to remain in power. Another factor is the money we’ve been doling out. It doesn’t buy as much as it used to. Even the lowliest Pakistani citizen senses that America’s power is waning; that it will no longer do to try to keep themselves warm in the fading glow of dying embers.

On the other hand, Islam is on the rise. In order to survive, it has become necessary to throw in with Islam which appears to have even the once great America shaking in it’s boots.

Hanging the bastard publicly will serve as yet another signal that America’s days in the region are essentially over.

Things have indeed changed since Obama took power in America. Some would argue it was inevitable; that the door had been torn from its hinges long ago (translation: Bush). And now the doorstop has been discarded as well.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Street Fighting Man

I too marched on Washington in my day, ostensibly to protest against the Vietnam war. We fell into one of three groups: professional agitators, self-righteous moralists, and those who just came out to raise a little hell. Though I would never have admitted it at the time, I was part of the latter, the biggest, group. Despite the civic display of tightly choreographed, helmeted phalanx; water cannon and tear gas, I felt perfectly safe for I knew that the government - unlike those of then communist nations - would take utmost care to see to it that nothing would happen to us. If we really had been asked to risk life and limb, I’m sure that 99% of us would have stayed away.

As it was, for most of us, it amounted to no more than a day trip - an afternoon of staged, pot-enhanced high drama - participatory theater under bright skies.

In Britain, the operative word is 'hooliganism'. Behavior after sports events had become so bad, young Britains have been barred from attending similar events in other countries. In Europe, we’ve seen self-respect eroding for a long time. This is fertile soil for agitprop. It is to demonstrate that the government is essentially powerless. The issue of university fees is just pretext. In France, the raising of the retirement age from 60 to 62 is just pretext - a reason to come out into the streets in feigned (Street Fighting Man) anger and protest and smash things and poke a stick in the eye of authority for the sake of ritual rebellion alone - to vent, to explode into violence primarily because of some sense of individual dislocation or inadequacy that often accompanies the transition from infantilism.

Don’t tell me these people have any higher purpose in mind; don’t tell me they have any profound agenda - most of them - in their frenzied, out of control, pointless, pathetic pantomime. People with legitimate grievances do not behave like that.

…and it’s coming to America. It’s orchestrated by the Left. It is to undermine the nation, to overwhelm it, score propaganda points and render it utterly impotent. It’s revolution for revolution’s sake; to topple the elite; erase standards; nullify morality - to be replaced by the finality of tyranny. It’s AQ; it’s Al Sharpton; it’s community organizing; it’s the UN; unions; Bill Ayers; Rev. Wright. It’s George Soros. It’s Barack Hussein Obama.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Bashing the Tea Parties

Another day, another swipe at the Tea Parties to build up your lib creds - just in case the power of legitimized corruption wins this round. It’s easy to swipe at Tea Parties - just like it was easy to swipe at Bush. There is literally no down-side. You’re practically guaranteed a ring-side seat while Mom & Pop America are being drawn-and-quartered publicly.

I didn’t even want to reply to this one. I don’t think it deserves a reply. Like I said, it’s too easy and not worthy of your talents - which may well be considerable. Besides, it’s not true. And, oh yeah, you’ll get your 30-40 comments. Whoopee! Much more of this and the JBS website will begin to approximate tumbleweeds; crickets and The New York Times.

You’re right, of course: I had a tough time explaining Tea Parties to Raman over coffee last week. I’m not sure I was able to convince him. He didn’t believe me about POTUS either. Why should he? All the Americans over here are big time libs; the papers are communist; the mayor’s name is Stalin. The principal meeting place is the Russian Cultural Center. The American Consulate is a fortress. I’m lucky Ram didn’t strike me from the mailing list.

No downside should the Tea Parties win out either. You know very well they’re not about reparations or revenge. And that, admittedly, may be a failing. A little fright night thrown into the mix wouldn’t hurt at this point.

Nothing like if the ACORN types should win out in the end. Or Erdogan. Or that little Hitler in your ancestral place. They’d surely see to it that you and me, along with everybody else, 'd have our asses in a sling. Like if the Palestinians should prevail over Israel; or AQ over everybody too fat to wear a belt.

What’s got you so upset at the Tea Parties anyway? Is it because you think that because of their civilized ways they can’t win? This could be true - but still, siding with the likely winners of this contest is not a principled stand. Remind that principle is all that some of us got left in this country.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Why Anwar al-Awlaki Is Laughing

The clip above demonstrates why we are losing; why Anwar al-Awlaki looks so much like the cat that's just polished off the cream. The difference in mindset is as obvious as it is annoying. One side is unsure, scattered, careful, unfocused; the other is determined, unified and having fun. Note they've identified us. That's where it starts.

We still refuse to identify them. Instead, we turn on ourselves. To most of us - or, at least, at the time we elected Barack Hussein Obama - George, Rush and Palin were considered more of a threat to us than AQ. (Freud would be perplexed by our inclination to regard non-threatening things and situations as dangerous, while we blissfully ignore the real thing.)

I truly believe that our gambit was and remains the following: assuage evil, and evil will not hurt us. Of course, nobody would be so bold as to identify evil. In fact, the strategy itself precludes identifying evil. Taken to its logical conclusion, the concept either (A) does not exist - like God - or (B) could only be used to apply to ourselves. The immediate consequence of the latter was to produce traitors in our midst, while the former produced ostrich eggs. Interesting too is that we have yet to formulate a Plan B.

That's why Anwar al-Awlaki is laughing. Even AQ's failures produce tangible results. The 24-hour news channels prove it. In failing to identify the enemy, we're once again at each other's throats. How’s that ‘hope and change’ working out for you? Happy New Year, everyone! May we all be so fortunate as to survive it.