Category Archives: War Commentary

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, War Commentary

A Declaration Of War

7 Comments

…by the Muslim Brotherhood:

…this is the group that many in the West, some in high positions, are urging to be engaged as a negotiating partner because it is supposedly moderate.

What does he say?

–Arab and Muslim regimes are betraying their people by failing to confront the Muslim’s real enemies, not only Israel but also the United States. Waging jihad against both of these infidels is a commandment of Allah that cannot be disregarded. Governments have no right to stop their people from fighting the United States. “They are disregarding Allah’s commandment to wage jihad for His sake with [their] money and [their] lives, so that Allah’s word will reign supreme” over all non-Muslims.

–All Muslims are required by their religion to fight: “They crucially need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life.” Notice that jihad here is not interpreted as so often happens by liars, apologists, and the merely ignorant in the West as spiritual striving. The clear meaning is one of armed struggle.

–The United States is immoral, doomed to collapse, and “experiencing the beginning of its end and is heading towards its demise.”

–Palestinians should back Hamas in overthrowing the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and unite in waging war on Israel.

To answer his question, no, few others will notice, including the media and the new national security advisor. Because (all together now) Islam is a religion of peace.

One of the stupider questions that the press often asks after a Jihadi attack is whether or not it was Al Qaeda, as though we’re supposed to be relieved to find out that it wasn’t.

[Via Michael Totten]

Education, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, War Commentary

Academics Seduced

2 Comments

..by radical Islam.

I’m not sure that “seduced” is quite the right word. I agree with Instapundit:

Bending over for tyrants is a major aspect of today’s academic culture, even as the benders-over proclaim their own courage and independence, and demonstrate those by attacking those whom they need not fear, while fearing those whom they do not criticize.

Islamaphobes.

Political Commentary, War Commentary

Imagine My Shock

9 Comments

The first administration attempt to try a Gitmo detainee in civilian court isn’t going well.

[Update a few minutes later]

More here:

Ghailani’s trial was supposed to start Monday. It has been postponed until today to allow the court to resolve the witness issue. If Abebe’s testimony is disallowed, the government will almost certainly appeal, potentially delaying the trial for weeks, if not longer.

Playing with fire like this is no way to prove a point. Maybe the Justice Department will convince the courts to permit the testimony of their crucial witness. Maybe the very talented prosecutors in Manhattan will even figure out a way to convict Ghailani without Abebe’s testimony. But we are intentionally tying our hands behind our backs and running an unnecessarily high risk of acquittal in a case involving a war criminal.

Is there room under the bus for Eric Holder? It’s long past time.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, War Commentary

European Terror Threats

1 Comment

And a warning in Berlin, that the Europeans have been ignoring for far too long. The biggest problem that liberal societies face in this war is how to properly confront a totalitarian political ideology masquerading as a religion.

[Update a few minutes later]

Geert Wilders on trial. This is a travesty, and a display of the true Islamaphobes are — those who betray western liberal values by shutting down any criticism of the most intolerant religion of all.

Political Commentary, War Commentary

Slamming Shut The Open Door

7 Comments

…of “diplomacy“:

Ahmadinejad understands perfectly well that confronting Iran is out of sync with the “new era of engagement” that is the trademark of Obama’s foreign policy. “Engagement” looks like this: The president of the United States keeps talking about “extended hands” and “open doors,” and the president of Iran keeps building nuclear weapons. As recently as September 19, even Secretary Hillary Clinton told Christiane Amanpour, “We’ve said to the Iranians all along…we still remain open to diplomacy. But it’s been very clear that the Iranians don’t want to engage with us.”

Ahmadinejad, therefore, took the opportunity provided by the U.N. to slam the door once more in President Obama’s face. While he lectured about the “lust for capital and domination” and “the egotist and the greedy,” the American U.N. delegation sat stoically in their seats. They had instructions to tough it out until Ahmadinejad really got offensive — though what would count as sufficiently offensive was never publicly announced.

The tripwire turned out to be Ahamdinejad’s suggestion that 9/11 was an inside job. “The U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grip on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime.” With that, the Obama representatives finally hauled themselves out of their seats and put engagement temporarily on hold.

Not for long, though. These fools will soon be knocking at the door again.

[Update a while later]

Is Israel already starting to attack Iran?

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Space, War Commentary

The Latest Lies

9 Comments

I rarely link to Mark Whittington any more, because I see no need to give him the traffic for which he seems to troll, but I’ll make an exception in this case, because it’s so blatant and stupid:

Rand Simberg, like many commercial space advocates, has attacked the Iran Nonproliferation Act (now including Syria and North Korea) as being ineffective and harming commercial space operations.

I have never “attacked,” or even criticized INKSNA, nor do I know anyone else in the commercial space community who has, so he is either making this up out of whole cloth, or he doesn’t understand the difference between INKSNA and ITAR. I guess the latter interpretation is more likely, and more charitable, since he understands little about space and technology policy in general.

[Afternoon update]

Mark has updated his post to continue his fantasies about me:

I suspect that he will play Clinton-like word games by saying not “attacked” but rather “expressed reservations” or “was dubious about” or even “mildly amused by.” Since it seems so important to him, I’ll give him that.

I have done none of the above. I have rarely, if ever, discussed INKSNA prior to that piece yesterday. He needs to adjust his meds, either up or down.