UNforgivable

Hattip: The Redhunter

While Kofi Anan feigns outrage over the Israeli bombing of a UN position, the news is coming out (but not from much of MSM) that Hezbollah has been using the UN as cover. A Canadian killed in the air strike had only days earlier emailed a retired Canadian General indicating the position was being targeted out of "tactical necessity." Hinting that Hezbollah terrorists were using the position as cover.

The full story can be found here.

Michelle Malkin has more on this story. The story includes this image:



That would be a UN flag flying next to a Hezbollah flag!

The photo is of a UN outpost on the border between Lebanon and Israel. It can be found in a book written by Jed Babbin (Undersecretary of Defense in the Bush I administration, who mentions the image in this Opinion Journal article. According to Babbin: "Observers told me the U.N. and Hezbollah personnel share water and telephones, and that the U.N. presence serves as a shield against Israeli strikes against the terrorists."

The UN was supposed to serve as peacekeepers on this border. Instead, they watched as Hezbollah moved thousands of missiles and other armaments in, and even shared their facilities and communications network with them all the while. One has to wonder if the missles weren't shipped in on UN trucks!

If the enemy of my enemy is my friend then it is also true that the friend of my enemy is my enemy. The UN has proved (once again) which side they are on. They have aided and abetted the terrorists and even sacrificed the lives of UN peacekeepers in the process. The UN should be allowed no role in Mideast peacekeeping after Israel cleans Hezbollah out of Southern Lebanon. In fact, the UN should be allowed no role anywhere in the world. The UN has proved itself, time and again, to be the friend of dicatators and the enemy of free people everywhere.

Peace Now! Or We'll Kill You!

The Peacniks and the devotees of the Religion of Peace held a little rally in Boston recently. They carried signs calling for Hezbollah's victory over Israel and they threatened a Jewish photographer (Seva Brodsky) who they didn't want in their presence. So tolerant. Go check it out at Solomonia.

Watch the video clips. My personal favorite is the young idiotarian in the last sequence when filming is taking place across the street. He declares "We hate you" then talks to a trio of muslim girls about the photographer. Is it just me, or do you think that this punk would be among the first to have his empty head lopped off if the Hezbollah types he supports actually acheived their aim of a caliphate?

The Liberal, Tax and Spend, Big Government, Income Redistributing, Nanny State Dream Initiative

Call me cynical, but when the Democrats trot out an "initiative" touted as an "opportunity agenda" I assume they mean an opportunity for them to take my money and an opportunity for me to become dependent on the government. That was my reaction when I heard about the announcement of the Democratic Leadership Council's American Dream Initiative, which was announced by Sen. Hillary Clinton yesterday.

The description of this thinly disguised big government program shows that the Dems are obviously hoping to get America's votes the old fashioned way: buying them with offers of money for nothing.

The sad fact is, they picked a bad time for this message. While the DLC bemoans the fading away of the American Dream, more Americans are living that dream than ever before.

Much of the Liberal's Dream Intitiative is simply unneccessary, and the DLC's own numbers prove it. Let's take a look at the "pillars" of their agenda.

1. Every American should have the opportunity and responsibility to go to college and earn a degree, or to get the lifelong training they need.

Sidebar: I love the way they use the word "responsibility" throughout this document, it almost makes them sound like rugged individualists.

Okay, according to the DLC's narrative of this plan:

Over the past 20 years, the United States has made some progress in the percentage of young people who go to college: 63 percent of high school graduates go to college right away; 80 percent go on to some form of college within eight years.

Eighty percent of high school graduates attend some college within eight years of graduation! I think that's awesome! Under the original GI Bill 7.8 million WWII veterans attended college by the time the program ended in 1956 (source). That is less than half of the total number of veterans who returned from the war. It was a great program, but the high school seniors of today are managing to make it to college at a much, much higher rate.

Of course to the Democrats the success of American's acheiving higher education on their own must be made to look like a failure. So the DLC tells us that the real problem is that too many drop out before earning their degree. The reason, presumably, is that they could no longer afford to attend, but no proof of the reasons these students pursue other options is offered. Perhaps they drop out to hop aboard the roaring steam engine known as the US economy, or they decide to marry and raise a family (known to liberals as domestic slavery and legalized rape).

So, the DLC wants to implement a plan to ensure that more students graduate with a degree.

We offer a plan to produce 1 million more college and community college graduates a year by 2015 -- so that within a decade, America will be a nation in which more than half the young people finish college with a degree, and any student willing to work part-time or perform community service can go to four years of college tuition-free.

How generous of them. No doubt they plan on encouraging private investment in scholarship programs to fund this. Why do I get the feeling that I will be unable to save for my own children's educations because the Dems will be taking more of my paycheck to pay for someone else's kid to go?

2. Every worker should have the opportunity and responsibility to save for a secure retirement.

I was hoping (but not expecting) to see here a proposal for fixing Social Security as I know that was such a priority for the Congressional Democrats in the past, as evidenced by their coming together to kill any reform of a hopelessly broken system.

Instead, the Dems are calling for regulations to force employers of even very small companies to pay into retirement plans out of their own and their employees pockets. Is it just me, or do we have that already? I think we call it Social Security. The DLC calling for a secure retirement for all is like CBS calling for honesty in news reporting!

3. Every business should have the opportunity to grow and prosper in the strongest private economy on earth, and the responsibility to equip workers with the same tools of success as management.

This one is fun! The narrative slams the tax cuts for shifting the burden from the wealthy to the middle class and claims that the average American is much worse off than he was in the 90's (read: Under Clinton).

When Bush took office, the economy was in a downturn. Added to this was the impact of corporate scandals and then the 9/11 attacks. But, according to Irwin Stelzer at the Weekly Standard:

In the years before the [Bush]tax cuts made themselves fully felt, the economy grew at the puny rates of 0.8 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively. Then, things picked up--to 2.7 percent in 2003, 4.2 percent in 2004, 3.5 percent in 2005, and a torrid 5.6 percent in the first quarter of this year, before cooling to an estimated 3 percent in the second quarter.

As for jobs, Stelzer points out that since August of 2003 "5.4 million new jobs have been created." All done without the DLC's agenda for more regulation of businesses, the real engines of the economy. Currently we are at a level economists consider "full employment."

Meanwhile, today brought more bad economic news for the DLC as consumer confidence rose.

Pete Du Pont at Opinion Journal has more economic stats including:

Mr. Bush signed the most recent tax cuts into law in the spring of 2003. In the past 33 months the size of America's entire economy has increased by 20%--or, as National Review Online's Larry Kudlow put it, "In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy."

You read correctly, our economy has grown by a factor equal to the entire economy of China! Du Pont also had this to say:

The unemployment rate dropped from 6.1% when the bills were signed to 5.4% at the end of 2004 and 4.6% today, and the rate has gone down for men, women, blacks and Hispanics. Hourly wage rates for workers are up 3.9% in the past year, and they increased at an annualized rate of 4.6% in the second quarter of this year, the highest quarterly rate in nearly 10 years.

And this:

As Stephen Moore noted in The Wall Street Journal, "the percentage of Americans earning more than $50,000 a year rose from 40.8% to 44.2%" between 2002 and 2004. As for very wealthy families, the portion of total income "captured by the richest 1%, 5% and 10% of Americans is lower today than in the last year of the Clinton administration."

So much for the liberal lie that only the rich have benefited!

And all of this growth has meant record revenues for government. Tax rates went down but revenues are climbing. Except in places like here in Illinois where our Governor and Democrat controlled legislature have been unable to catch the wave that virtually every other state has. In fact, we have the largest deficit of any state! Nice to be first in something!

Do you really want the DLC tinkering with something that is moving in the right direction faster than it ever did when they held office?

4. Every individual should have the opportunity and responsibility to start building wealth from day one, and the security and community that come from owning a home.

Okay, I won't even link to a story on this one, because we all know that home ownership is at the highest rate ever! Somehow, all those suffering folks who aren't making a decent living have been able to buy houses. In fact, since Bush took office, my wife and I have been among those buying a home for the first time in our lives. I guess that makes me a wealthy oppressor!

But, get this:

Baby Bonds...The United States should follow Tony Blair's lead in Britain by providing a Baby Bond to each of the 4 million children born in America each year. A $500 savings bond at birth and again 10 years later would give young people from low- and middle-income families a stake in upward mobility.

Baby Bonds!? A $500 bond costs $250 at purchase date. Now, assume a constant birtrate of 4 million a year. Assume also that these 4 million survive each year until age 10. Every year we shell out for 8 million bonds at $250 each (half for the newbies and half for the 10 year olds). I'm no math wizard, but that amounts to something like $2,000,000,000 per year!

I've got a better idea, make the tax cuts permanent, then I can earn more, save more and the government will receive increased revenues instead of wasting billions on idiotic spending programs like Baby Bonds!

5. Every family should have the opportunity to afford health insurance for their children, and the responsibility to obtain it.

Here the DLC makes references to the need to kill unborn babies to explore new cures and never mentions tort reform as a possible way to stem rising health costs. They promote universal child health care as well. What they don't mention in this section is what they do mention under the college education plank, that 85% of all Americans have health coverage. I have news for them, most of us with health care want them to keep their hands off of it!

6. In order to expand opportunity for all Americans, we must demand a new ethic of responsibility from Washington: to put government's priorities back in line with our values -- and its books back in balance -- by getting rid of wasteful corporate subsidies, unchecked bureaucracy, and narrow-interest loopholes; collecting taxes that are owed; clamping down on tens of billions of dollars in improper payments and no bid-contracts; and restoring commonsense budgeting principles like pay-as-you-go.

Sidebar: Under this plank the DLC uses the word God for the second time (in both cases referring to "God-given" in the sense of God-given potential and talent). The first draft no doubt includes vomit stains, because I can't imagine dems mentioning God without getting violently ill. In any case, they clearly are still trying to reach those "morality voters" by sprinkling a little religion in their document.

I agree that we need to balance the books. Given the affect of tax cuts on revenue, I assume the dems would be in favor of more cuts to ensure continued growth. I also think the Congressional Republicans should get serious about acting like fiscal conservatives, and Bush needs to pull out his veto pen.

But after hearing about Baby Bonds, I just can't believe the DLC is seriously hoping to convince us that they would control spending any better.

Israel's New War

Israel, simply put, must prevail in this current war against the terrorist enemies which have assaulted her this month. To punish and push back should not be their objective. Rather, they need to utterly demolish both Hamas and Hezbollah.

It would have been inconceivable for the Allies during World War II to liberate North Africa as punitive retribution for the German and Italian aggressions. Certainly, the Allies would have ignored any calls by any government or world body for "restraint." Or, having driven the enemy from Africa and turning to the Sicily campaign, who would have been justified in calling that invasion "disproportionate." The leadership of European nations should recall that their freedom was bought by other nations who showed anything but restraint in the face of ruthless aggression.

Israel is now at war on two fronts with powers that seek her destruction. Hezbollah leader, Hasan Nasrallah (now in hiding after the destruction of his home and headquarters) has vowed "open war" as a result of the Israeli response. His exact quote was "You wanted an open war. We are heading towards an open war, and we are ready for it." Excuse me, I would think the open war started when Hezbollah terrorists, acting without provocation, crossed the border of a sovereign nation to raid and capture Israeli soldiers. This is like Hirohito pledging total war with the United States after the Doolittle raid 4 months after the Japs started the war by bombing Pearl Harbor.

It seems to me that this escalation by Hezbollah has at least two purposes: to reassert Syrian hegemony (via that nation's client terrorist group) in Lebanon, and to destroy Israel.

Both purposes are implied in this quote from the same Washington Post article linked above:

With dramatic phrasing, he said Friday that Lebanese now had two choices: either surrender to Israel's demands or fight with Hezbollah. He renewed a threat to carry the fight deep into Israel, which has so far suffered four dead from the scores of rockets Hezbollah has fired over three days.

So Lebanon has an ultimatum from Hezbollah, join the terrorists or be occupied by Israel. Lebanon would be wise to choose Israel. Israel has been there before and withdrawn, restoring Lebanon's borders. Syria, via Hezbollah, has occupied, murdered and assassinated the Lebanese people for decades.

Israel must not merely fight until its captured soldiers are returned. The goal must be the elimination of the terrorist entities who perpetrated these acts. Peace comes with victory not a restoration of the pre-war status quo. Following such victory, peaceful regimes can be established in the conquered territories and sovereignty restored. That task will be daunting given the decades of virulent anti-Jewish hatred upon which the populations of the Arab nations have been raised by their fanatical leaders.

As for those calling for restraint, Israel must do what is right even if the entire world opposes them. The UN, predictably, has become the defacto benefactor of the terrorists by condemning Israel. In the Post article linked above, it is mentioned that "The United Nations' top humanitarian official, Jan Egeland, said Israel's attacks against transportation infrastructure violated international law."

Apparently launching rockets at civilian areas and crossing national boundaries to kidnap soldiers without a formal declaration of war are perfectly acceptable. As a side note, it is always my position that in any reference to the UN, the letters representing that agency should be read phonetically. Thus Egeland would not be a UN humanitarian official but an unhumanitarian official. It just makes more sense that way (i.e. unhuman rights commission, unpeacekeeper, etc.).

With or without help, Israel has no choice but to press on to rout Hezbollah and Hamas, otherwise it has no hope of a secure future from these threats. The fact is, even if victorious, other treats will rise in the future, but they will need to be dealt with in turn. For the present, Hamas and Hezbollah must be destroyed.

Clifford D. May provides excellent analysis at National Review. Bringing great clarity to the issue, May writes:

Its [Hamas'] leaders have stated their goal candidly and repeatedly: They mean to wipe Israel off the map. Living peacefully next door to a Jewish neighbor is not on their agenda.

For some reason, however, many Europeans and Americans can't bring themselves to accept that Hamas is articulating not a negotiating posture but a religious conviction. By now, most people understand that Islamists consider it impermissible for a Muslim ever to convert to another religion -- conversion brings a death sentence in Saudi Arabia and other countries where extreme variants of Islam hold sway. What most people may not realize is that Islamists also believe it is impermissible for land to convert: Territory once conquered by Muslims, they insist, must never revert to the rule of infidels. That includes not just Israel but large parts of Europe. Also Kashmir, they demand, must be Muslim-ruled; that almost certainly was the motive behind this week's railway bombings in India.

There is the crux of the issue, this is part of the Islamist dogma. I think that within Hezbollah and Hamas and the populations they represent, there are vast legions of true believers in this dogma. They do not want peace with Israel. They will not be persuaded by any effort at diplomacy to lay down arms and live in peace on a permanent basis. Israel, in their view, must be restored to Islamic rule. For that matter, so must Spaireferredred to by Islamists as al-Andalus), which was ruled by Muslims prior to the 1500's. Such idealogues can only be pacified through utter defeat.

I also believe there are those political leaders who capitalize on the trbelieversers of the Islamist movement, using them to advance their own aims. They will be somewhat easier to defeat, but defeated they must be. They must be convinced that Islamism is a dead end and their only hope for survival is to come to terms with Israel and the West.

Could Israel lose in this current struggle? Possibly, but as I said, she has no choice. Already Israel faces an enemy in Iran that very soon may be able to equip its terrorist puppets with nuclear weapons. It would behoove them to eliminate that puppet before that day comes. The fight cannot be postponed for as Churchill wrote:

...if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves.

Sadly, Israel does not have even the option to live as slaves. A victory for the Islamists means extinction for Israelis. Israel has no choice but to win, and we must support her every step of the way.

The Battle of Britain

Little Green Footballs has this post about an article in the Asharq Alawsat, an Arabic daily. The article LGF links to is no longer available but MEMRI has excerpts as well. The article consist of an interview with Omar Bakri, a radical Muslim who left England and now lives in Lebanon.

Here are a couple of quotes by Bakri from LGF and MEMRI:

I advise the British Muslim youth in general and my dear students in particular not to mix with the ignorant British society and not to isolate themselves from people. They must actively preach the word of God; promote virtue and prevent vice; publicly reveal God's orders; stay away fromnon-believerss and their customs, practices, and laws; and adhere to the teachings of the Quran and of Prophet Mohammed by understanding the goodness of our ancestors.

Gotta respect the value he places on tolerance! To the liberals of this world who continue to claim that jihadists hate us because of our policies, the history of Western colonialism, our support of Israel etc. etc. It seems pretty clear from these words from one of their own that they are xenophobic fanatics who hate anyone who does not ascribe to their view of a worldwide caliphate.

Doubt my assertion that they want worldwide dominance, then parse this quote:

I believe that one day honest Muslims in the United Kingdom will, God willing, turn it into "Islamistan," like what the first Muslims did in Eritrea and Indonesia. The great dream of Islam will come true. Muslims dream to see flags that read: "There is no god but Allah" fluttering in the wind on top of Big Ben and the House of Commons, God willing.

In the world of Islam there are two parts of the globe dar al-Islam (The house of submission) and dar al-Harb (the house of war). Their plan is to fight until the dar al-Harb submits and becomes part of dar al-Islam. Clearly these fanatics see Western nations as places that need to be brought into submission. Bakri and his ilk will not be pacified by changes in our policies, by withdrawing our troops from the Middle East, nor even if we joined them in pushing Israel into the sea. Indeed, we from theomthe past that when we have cut and run, they have only been encouraged to continue their attacks (i.e.Beirutiruit barracks bombing and Mogadishu). Nope, this is one of those cases in the world when one side or the other must emerge victorious, there can be no detente.

The handing over of information concerning Muslims - whether they are those who fight jihad for the sake of Allah or just plain Muslims - to the British or American police or to any other infidel or apostate security force [i.e. those of Arab or Muslim states], is a forbidden act according to the shari'a. This is one of the severe forms of heresy that removes one from the [fold of the] religion [of Islam]. This is because this is a kind of aid to the infidels against the Muslims, and Allah said: 'Whosoever among you befriends them, he is [like] one of them [Koran 5:51].'

In other wordswords, any Muslim who aides law enforcement in fighting terrorists becomes a heretic. In the theology of the jihadists, these people are no longer true Muslims but legitimate targets in the Jihad. Note his reference to the security forces of Muslim states as "apostate." Still think its all about Iraq and Israel? What will it take for people in the West to just believe what these people say is their goal?

And what about those former students of Bakri's who remain devoted to their Imam's teachings? Well, The Jawa Report has an article about a video mocking the victims of terror attacks (beheadings, 9/11 and 7/7) that originally posted on website of Bakri's Britain-based supporters.

The West better get real serious, real soon about dealing with these types. God willing, America and the West will remain forever a part of dar al-Harb!

Go Read It Now!

It's a couple days old, but worth a glance. The Redhunter has a great article on Code Pink's rallies at Walter Reed Hospital, and efforts by some great patriots to oppose their hatred for our warriors. The article includes some great insight into the true motives behind these and many in the "peace" movement, including evidence that they have materially supported those who kill and maim our soldiers.

Dick Goes to Gitmo

Illinois' senior Senator, Dick Durbin has finally traveled to Gitmo. You will no doubt remember that last year the distinguished Senator (member of the most deliberative legislative body in the world) compared US soldiers to Nazis, communists and the Khmer Rouge in referring to the facility at Guantanamo Bay where the US holds non-uniformed, non-state prisoners captured in the midst of terrorist acts. Later he shed crocodile tears and issued an apology claiming he never meant to disrespect our brave men and women by likening them to the most brutal mass murderers in living memory.

After touring the facility Dick came home to declare that Gitmo should be closed. I had hoped that the military would keep him in Cuba, as I feel he could be held as an enemy combatant for giving aid and comfort to the enemy during a time of war.

I have often wondered if the irony has struck him that if the Bush Administration was truly comparable to the regimes he cited, he would have long ago died for his comments against that administration. But in our free society he can be as ridiculous as he wants and still remain a sitting US Senator (at least until the voters of my state get the good sense to turn him out).

You can read more about Dick's visit in this Belleville News Democrat article. Here are just a few thoughts I had while reading it:

"Congress must ask, have we given our troops an impossible task?" Durbin said in a Senate speech that emphasized U.S. soldiers and sailors were doing their best at Guantanamo, but were burdened with rehabilitating its image as a place where there have been abuses of detainees from the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan.

An impossible task? Well, considering Dick and his buddies in Congress and on the left have accused our soldiers of conduct comparable to Nazis, communists, Saddam Hussein's torturers, and the terrorists themselves, I think maybe their task is a little more difficult. This is the perfect example of a self-fulfilling prophecy, first you tarnish the image of our soldiers and of our detention facilities then you demand that the facility be closed because it has a tarnished image. Gitmo would not need to rehabilitate its image were it not for fifth columnists like Dick who have created a false image with lies and exaggerations and comparisons of American actions to the genocidal crimes of the last century.

A year ago, Durbin became a national figure virtually overnight after a Senate floor speech widely interpreted, even by some of his political allies, as an unfavorable comparison of U.S. treatment of prisoners with that of Nazis. Durbin later apologized, teary-eyed, and said he meant no disrespect for U.S. soldiers and simply was interpreting FBI-prepared memos on the treatment.

"You're like a Nazi...but I mean that in a good way!?" Meant no disrespect? Come on! And what about that FBI memo, unless I've missed it, I don't think the good Senator ever released his sources.

Even President Bush has acknowledged that Guantanamo should be closed," Durbin said of the facilities on the U.S.-controlled portion of Cuba, less than 24 hours after returning from a six-hour visit. "Despite the valiant efforts of our troops, Guantanamo has become a powerful, negative symbol around the world for the failures of this administration."

Again, Gitmo has become that symbol because Dick and those like him have made it so.

"I do not believe that we should release anyone who is a danger to our country or to our troops," Durbin added. "It is right that we hold them, if they are such a danger, in the appropriate legal fashion."

We've released quite a few number of the detainees at Gitmo, there must be room for others who are as Dick says "a danger to our country or to our troops." Again I say, they should have kept Dick there.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Durbin further explained that dangerous detainees would be brought to the United States, probably to federal correctional centers or possibly other facilities the government would contract with.

Great idea Dick! Let's put hardcore Islamofascists in our prisons system with the general prison population. In fact we can see what a great idea this is here, here, and here.

Dick, you have done everything you could think of to damage the image of our troops and portray as victims the Islamofascist swine who blow up innocents and cut the heads off of their prisoners. You have provided propaganda to the enemy, making it easier for them to lie about America's actions and gain support for their cause. You have proved yourself contemptuous of the American war effort and you are unworthy of the office you hold in a government protected and maintained by men and women who are infinitely better than you.

Dick alluded to the recent Supreme Court decision to support his opposition to the camps at Gitmo. Let's see if he gets on board to rectify the situation by supporting legislation to permit military tribunals, my bet is that he will not.

Incidentally, Dick was accompanied to Gitmo by Sen. George Allen of VA. Allen said after the visit that he did not see any need to close the facilities and said through a spokesperson that conditions "really exceeded international standards, including the Geneva Convention."

Must Reads!

Not much time for blogging over the past couple of weeks, but got a good deal of reading in. The following books are must read if you really want to understand what we are up against in the War On Terror:

1. Knowing the Enemy by Mary Habeck was a great read. I remember hearing historians say that if the world had read Mein Kampf they would have known the threat Hitler posed well before he started World War II. Habeck's premise is that the jihadists have left us their own version of Mein Kampf in their writings and statements over centuries of history. Habeck thoroughly examines the theology that drives the Islamofascists, answering the question asked by so many hand-wringing liberals: "Why do they hate us." The answer is not American support for Israel, it is not the result of decades of oppression under western colonialism. The fact is that they hate us because theirs is a faith of hate and intolerance. You simply must read this book for some facts that will simply shut down any moonbats you come into contact with who want to blame American policies and specifically the WOT for creating more terrorism. Arguments that lay the blame for terrorism on the West simply cannot stand up in the face of the long history of the fanatical theology which drives modern jihadists.

2. Islamic Imperialism by Efraim Karsh is a great little synopsis at the long history of Imperialism practiced by Islamic states. In the words of Muhammad himself: "I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah.'" As with Habeck's book, we see that the problems with jihad are not so easily blamed on the west as leftists would have us believe. Islam has a long history of violent expansion and conquest. Indeed, Jews and Christians felt the sting of Mohammedan blades long before any Muslim lands were conquered by European or American "colonialists." Those idiotarians who insist terrorism is a reaction to Western policies are spewing nothing more than Marxist tripe that this book thoroughly refutes.

3. Why We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism by Bill Bennett was another good read. Okay, I know its not exactly a new title, but hey, I just got around to it. A solid defense of the moral ground that America stands on in this struggle to protect ourselves and civilization against a truly evil threat to humanity. Bennett demolishes the leftists' arguments that equate our actions with those of the terrorists themselves. A reasoned and thoughtful reply to all the moral relativists in the blame America first crowd who accuse America of all manner of evil while excusing the terrorists as victims of American policies. This book will prove to you that you are justified in feeling proud of our culture, our troops and our policy of fighting terrorism.