Helter Skelter: Lebanon as a Shield for “The Party of God”

Jul 21, 2006 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2

From Cox and Forum:

From After the Cedar Revolution, the Lebanese managed to eject Syria from their nest, but Hezbollah was allowed to stay, whether out of fear or sympathy or some combination of both. The Lebanese were supposed to disarm Hezbollah, but the “Party of God,” supported by Iran’s Islamic theocracy and Syria’s regime, has become a lethally armed “state within a state.” Hezbollah is not only responsible for terrorist attacks against Israelis; Americans have died at theirs hands too, most notably the 1983 Beirut attack in which 241 U.S. Marines were killed. There should be no doubt who is the enemy here.

As Lebanon is being used as a shield for Hezbollah, both politically and literally, some Lebanese have cried for help in the fight against Hezbollah’s presence in their country.

But some Lebanese officials have been more conciliatory toward Hezbollah. Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora has expressed sympathy with Hezbollah claims against Israel. Lebanese President Emile Lahoud formally thanked Iran for its support during the Israeli attacks, knowing that Hezbollah is using missiles made in Iran. And though its been reported that the Lebanese army is too weak to take on Hezbollah, this report says the Lebanese army may join forces with the “Party of God” to take on Israel.

As criticism of Israel rises with the Lebanese deathtoll, it is paramount to remember: Hezbollah initiated this war by crossing Israel’s border from Lebanon to kill eight Israeli soldiers and kidnap two. Hezbollah then returned to take refuge in Lebanon where the terrorist group enjoys a safe haven behind Lebanese human shields. The civilian casualties in Lebanon will continue to rise so long as Lebanon continues to harbor Hezbollah. Every single Lebanese victim should be laid at the feet of Hezbollah and any Lebanese who have supported Hezbollah’s home in Lebanon.

Disproportionate Response

Jul 16, 2006 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2

From Cox and Forum:

The criticism that Israel is using a “disproportionate response” to the kidnappings of its soldiers is an attempt to morally disarm Israel and make Israel out to be a bully. This notion is ludicrous when considered in the full context: Hezbollah and Hamas initiated the current crisis in an ongoing war against Israel’s right to exist. Notice that no one cried “disproportionate response” when Hamas demanded 1,200 prisoners in exchange for one Israeli hostage. Hamas and Hezbollah aren’t playing a game of proportions, why should Israel?

Israel, an outpost of freedom in the Middle East, has every right to use whatever means necessary for her long-term interests to defeat those who are warring against her. All the “disproportionate response” critics are accomplishing is to empower Israel’s enemies to wage more war, harm more Israeli citizens and escalate the violence. They are kicking Israel when she is down, when she needs our support the most.

From The Jerusalem Post: Chirac: Israel has gone too far.

French President Jacques Chirac castigated Israel for its military offensive in Lebanon on Friday, calling it “totally disproportionate,” while he and other European leaders expressed fears of a widening Middle East conflict that could spiral out of control.

Referring to Israel’s attacks Friday on Lebanon’s international airport and other transport links, the latest in a three-day offensive, Chirac asked aloud whether Lebanon’s destruction was not the ultimate goal.

“One could ask if today there is not a sort of will to destroy Lebanon, its equipment, its roads, its communication,” Chirac said during an interview in the garden of the presidential Elysee Palace to mark Bastille Day, the French national holiday.

From Russia to Spain, leaders voiced concern at the escalation of the conflict, with Lebanon now drawn into the spiral of violence that has long been the mark of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.

In Russia, President Vladimir Putin called on all sides to stand down.

“All the sides that are involved in the conflict must immediately cease military action,” he said before a G-8 summit this weekend in St. Peterburg. …

In Spain, Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero warned Israel that it was “making a mistake” to attack Lebanon and said that both the EU and the United Nations must secure “an immediate cessation of the hostilities.”

“One thing is defense, which is legitimate, and another is a counteroffensive of widespread attack,” Zapatero told Punto Radio. “It won’t bring anything other than an escalation of violence.”

The Vatican, the seat of the Roman Catholic church, echoed that remark – and the fear of a widening conflict.

“In fact, the right to defense on the part of a country does not exempt it from respecting norms of international law above all for that which concerns the safety of the civilian population,” said a statement by Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Vatican’s No. 2 official.

Pope Benedict XVI was following the situation, the statement said, warning that it risks “degenerating into a conflict with international repercussions.”

From FoxNews: G8 Leaders Agree on Statement About Mideast Fighting.

Leaders of the world’s wealthiest nations agreed Sunday that three Israeli soldiers kidnapped by terror groups must be returned as a first order of business, and that all sides must put down their arms to resolve a conflict that is tearing up both Lebanon and Israel’s northern region.

Members of the Group of Eight, the world’s industrialized nations and Russia, issued a consensus statement that they say sends a “strong message” on the Mideast crisis.

Bush is still ridiculously urging “restraint” from Israel, but at least we’re sending them jet fuel for their warplanes.

Some critics of our inclusion of the Pope in this cartoon are trying to distance the Pope from the comments of Cardinal Sodano. But this news report quotes the Pope as follows:

“In recent days the news from the Holy Land is a reason for new and grave concern for all, in particular because of the spread of warlike actions also in Lebanon, and because of the numerous victims among the civilian population.”

A very relevant observation at Tigerhawk that I think also applies Israeli strikes in Lebanon. (via Alan Fang)

There has been some complaint about Israel’s reactions in Gaza as “asymmetrical.” Those complaints are, frankly, silly. Military actions in war are meant to be asymmetrical and lead to victory. They are not meant to be measured to achieve a stalemate.

More from Pope Benedict XVI: Pope makes new appeal for peace in Middle East.

“In reality, the Lebanese have the right to see the integrity and sovereignty of their country respected, the Israelis the right to live in peace in their State, and the Palestinians have the right to have their own free and sovereign homeland,” a message from Pope Benedict read, as released by the Vatican Information Services on Thursday.

The Lebanese surrendered their sovereignty when they continued allowing a terrorist state to exist within their borders. Palestinians leadership has never demonstrated that they would create anything but a terrorist state, and they have no right to that.

Hezbollah Hostage Exchange

Jul 13, 2006 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2

From Cox and Forum:

We’re hoping that Israel continues to vigorously defend herself and refuse negotiations with Hezbollah and Hamas for the kidnapped Israeli soldiers. In our cartoon “Non-negotiable” we celebrated such an aggressive response. But it should be remembered that the terrorists’ tactics have worked for them in the past. A FoxNews article yesterday noted this fact in passing:

Israel has carried out several prisoner swaps with Hezbollah in the past to obtain freedom for captures Israelis. These include a January 2004 swap in which an Israeli civilian and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers were exchanged for 436 Arab prisoners and the bodies of 59 Lebanese fighters. In 1985, three Israeli soldiers captured in Lebanon in 1982 were traded for 1,150 Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners.

The Jewish Virtual Library has more on the issue: Israel-Hizbollah Prisoner Exchange (2004):

In exchange for the bodies of three Israeli soldiers, missing since October 2000, and one Israeli businessman, abducted in October 2000 under questionable circumstances, Israel released more than 430 Arab prisoners on January 29, 2004. Those released by Israel included 400 Palestinian prisoners who were released to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Another 29 prisoners from Arab nations, and a German-citizen who worked with Hizbollah, were flown to Germany and then most went to Lebanon. In addition, the bodies of approximately 60 Lebanese terrorists were handed over to the International Committee of the Red Cross at the Israel-Lebanon border near Rosh Hanikra.

The prisoner exchange was the latest example of Israel’s determination to bring its soldiers home, dead or alive. In 1985, Israel freed 1,150 prisoners in exchange for three Israeli soldiers kidnapped in Lebanon by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)-General Command. Many of the Arabs who were freed became leaders in the first Palestinian intifada. …

In the wake of the morning rush hour bus bombing in Jerusalem’s upscale Rehavia neighborhood, some last minute voices were heard urging the government to stop the prisoner swap. MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union) told Maariv, “Yesterday this murderous organization promised us a ‘surprise,’ so we must stop the release of 400 terrorists before we discover that they’ve put us in a death trap.” According to Dr. Shmuel Bar, a senior research fellow at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, the message this swap sends to the Palestinians is that “the only way in which anyone can succeed in freeing prisoners is Hezbollah’s way of abducting Israeli soldiers and citizens … We’re going to be sorry for this.”

The Intelligence & Terrorism Information Center has more information on Hezbollah’s ongoing war against Israel.

The Multiculturalist Ghetto vs. The American Melting Pot

Jun 6, 2006 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2

Writes Jeff Jacoby in the Boston Globe:

…the burning immigration problem of our time isn’t that too many people are breaking the rules to get in. It is what they are finding when they get here.

Instead of a national commitment to assimilation, a cynical multiculturalism sends the message that our culture is no better than any other, so there is no particular reason to embrace the American experience. ”Bilingual” education and foreign-language ballots accelerate the loss of a common English tongue, making it easier than ever for newcomers to cluster in linguistic ghettoes. Identity politics erodes the national identity, encouraging immigrants to see themselves first and foremost as members of racial or ethnic groups, and only secondarily as individuals and Americans.

From the day he got off the boat from Europe, my father lived up to the code that expected immigrants to go to work, learn the language, obey the laws, and become an American. My immigrant son, I hope, will live up to it too. The melting pot, it used to be called, before political correctness intervened. That political correctness is what has caused the present crisis. The crisis won’t be solved by blaming the immigrants.

For more on multiculturalism, read Diversity and Multiculturalism: The New Racism and Multiculturalism’s War on Education. For more on immigration read The Moral and Practical Case for Open Immigration.

Politics and the SUN Operating System

Aug 1, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2

I found the following in release notes for a recent Sun Solaris 8 security patch:

ROC timezone should be avoided for political reasons

The “Inner Jihad” and Islamic Totalitarianism

Aug 1, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2

This talk confronts claims that the real meaning of jihad is a benign “inner struggle,” and not war for the expansion of Islamic rule. Such claims are contrary to history; even mystical orthodox philosophers such as Al-Ghazali confirmed the meaning of jihad as war. Claims that jihad is an “inner struggle” are best seen either as the apologetics of those who do not want to face the fact that jihad means war, or who wish to cover up this fact in order to achieve the ends of Islamic rule. What the claimants call an “inner jihad” is a process of internal intellectual evasion, in which facts and conclusions contrary to support for Islam are suppressed. The outward political manifestations of such deception are censorship and propaganda, which are used to further Islamic rule. Islamic totalitarianism remains an active, and dangerous, force in the world, which must be confronted intellectually and defeated militarily.

Who: Dr. John Lewis, Senior Research Scholar in History and Classics, Social Philosophy and Policy Center