CAIR is at it again…..calling Israel "terrorists":
(WASHINGTON, DC, 7/30/06) – A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group today said the Bush administration and the international community must act to stop Israel’s campaign of "terror" in Southern Lebanon.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued that call after an Israeli air strike killed at least 57 civilians in the town of Qana, the site of a similar massacre of civilians by Israel a decade ago. (In 1996, an Israeli air strike on a United Nations compound in Qana killed more than 100 civilians who had sought shelter there.) Lebanese officials said the majority of the dead in today’s attack were children. Hundreds of Lebanese civilians have been killed in previous Israeli attacks.
Only one little itty-bitty tiny small problem….CAIR makes no mention of Hezbullah. Hey, CAIR, shall we talk about the root cause, that Hezbullah causes those civilian casualties by hiding and fighting among them. Gee, for an "honor" society, they show a lot of cowardice….(H/T: CNSNews)
*****
From Blackfive:
I asked a few of the soldiers how they felt about this war, a war that had begun with an attack on American soil. How did it feel being Canadian leading the fight? The answers were nearly all the same, "It’s time that someone else steps up. The United States shouldn’t have to carry the fight alone. We may be Canadians, but the attack was an attack on our common values and beliefs. The attack of 9-11 was an attack on all of us."
Thank you. It is much appreciated
Usually, when a program fails, the private sector pulls the plug. In the public sector, generally not. At the UN – Hah! (H/T: LGF)
UNIFIL Sitting Ducks Not Evacuated
UN observers in Lebanon, who have no authority to actually do anything about the Hizballah terrorists using their positions as shields (even if they wanted to), will be sitting ducks for another month. (Hat tip: Newsbeat1.)
Having examined the Secretary-General’s report on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), including its observations that the Force had been impeded from effectively carrying out its activities, as a result of the continuing hostilities along the Blue Line, the Security Council today decided to extend its mandate until 31 August 2006.
It’s a win-win for Hizballah! They can:
1) continue using UN posts as cover, and
2) score a big propaganda bonus if Israel happens to hit one.
There is a controversy here in my town of Gilford that may be brewing. While the idea of a War Memorial is passing muster at the School Board level, the Chairmam seems to be upset that it would contain "a military" weapon – part of the symbol US troops use to honor one of their fallen (a pair of empty boots, an upside rifle with its bayonet stuck into the ground, helmet on the stock). When my son (just discharged from the Marines) heard this, he remarked "What does he expect we are supposed to do – fight with a pencil?".
My reaction to the above UNIFIL story is the same. For 28 years, they’ve done nothing but take up space. They allowed Hezbullah to set up positions right around their positions, and they aren’t allowed to fight. What the heck good are these PEACEkeepers, if they can’t stop the violence leading to WAR?
*****
From the Belmont Club:
That Hezbollah’s attack has finally destroyed the land-for-peace formula, upon which all past Roadmaps were founded. "Israel has no concession that it can make to Hezbollah to end the fighting, and Hezbollah cannot give Israel what it must ultimately have — acceptance of its existence and the recognition of specific borders — without destroying its own legitimacy."
Already noted here….and frankly, it was always a smokescreen to kick the can down the road. It is, nor has it been, about small strips of land…it is about ALL of the land. And if they get Israel, where do you think they are going next. Given that the Islamofacists have a beef about losing Andalusa, watch out Spain…
*****
From our friends at Weekend Pundit – for a chuckle, read the bit about the Grocery Service Desk.
*****
I don’t know if Spock (or his writers) is the original author of that observation, but it’s so painfully true that it should give pause to those who advocate diplomacy over action — which is just about every world "leader."
A case can be made that military solutions are more likely to be lasting than negotiated settlements, especially when dealing with those who have no code or constitution that they honour
*****
Peter Worthington at the Toronto Sun seems to agree with me:
I don’t know if Spock (or his writers) is the original author of that observation, but it’s so painfully true that it should give pause to those who advocate diplomacy over action — which is just about every world "leader."
A case can be made that military solutions are more likely to be lasting than negotiated settlements, especially when dealing with those who have no code or constitution that they honour
Again, there is a place for diplomacy….but it is not the end all be all to every type of conflict. Lately, it seems to be the only hammer in the elite toolbelt…and everything is NOT a nail.
*****
Especially when you read this, as reported by Yahoo News:
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – Iranian U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif rejected as without legal basis on Monday a Security Council demand that it suspend its nuclear activities by the end of the month or face the threat of sanctions
Hey, UN – All talk and no action gets sand kicked in your face! And WHY should Iran start worrying? No credible action has been taken against them for over three years, why should they expect any to happen any time soon? The leaders of the West are getting stared down, and they are too spineless to even admit that. What a lesson – act like a petulant (although VERY dangerous) child, and when reprimanded, declare that more reprimands will result in more bad behaviour….and have it work.
Sheesh….
