Sep 27 2008

The threats our new President will face for us

Thnk the ability to debate is seriously important?  Think it matters more than good judgment, clear understanding of the world, and commitment to the welfare of America above party?

The threats, and some unfortunate connections, are made clear here.  These are serious people, with seriously bad intentions, who aren’t impressed by debate tactics, smooth talk or stage presence.  They will not be “negotiated with” in the normal sense of the term, because we have nothing they want that they aren’t going to get from us anyway.  We cannot give them enough to remove their bad intentions, and they have the capabilities, by and large, to act on those intentions, if we give them time and opportunity.  All of them have proved that.

Who is the very serious person you want as President of the USA to deal with these people?  Who, among the candidates we have, has sufficient wisdom, experience, clarity and toughness to represent us, and make decisions critical to our security?  Who has proved that he will put us first, regardless of his own self-interest, regardless of political fallout?   Who, among the candidates we have, will these people take seriously?   I think you know.

The old standbys, also hip deep in bad plans for the USA, and freedom around the world.

And then, there are our “friends”.

Whose vested interest is keeping us waiting in line for their largess.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,


Jul 31 2008

Challenge lies, or ignore them?

Category: Hamas,Hizbullah,Israel,media,middle east,terrorismharmonicminer @ 9:00 am

A writer in the Jerusalem Post observes that US newspapers constantly attack Israel in editorial pages and with slanted, distorted coverage and wonders what the appropriate response is. To defend, or to ignore? It’s hard to know what will be most effective:

Verbal attacks on Israel in US papers and other media outlets are ceaseless, and can be demoralizing. But how do we measure their impact on the average American? Should we simply assume that a pro-Hamas op-ed in The New York Times is far more damaging to Israel’s cause than a local activist’s letter in a minor paper? Perhaps we should assume that Times’ readers are less likely to fall for obvious spin because they are more sophisticated than local media consumers? It’s impossible to be sure.

My inclination, which the writer eventually seems to share, is that if you want to affect public opinion, you have to fight unfair assertions, every single time.

The Bush administration learned, too late, that when you don’t answer outrageous assertions, and those assertions are constantly repeated, they have a way of becoming received wisdom in the relatively uncritical public mind. By the time the Bush administration wised up a bit and began to try to counter the main stream media’s narrative that Bush had lied about weapons of mass destruction, and that the presence of those weapons was the only reason for going into Iraq, it was just too late to affect the public understanding with facts.

People in sympathy with Israel, and Israel itself, need to learn this lesson: absolutely no good comes from “taking the high road” and not responding to outrageous claims. Lies need to be countered, period.

Tags: , , , , ,


Jul 17 2008

Trading the living for the dead: How many will die at the hands of released terrorists?

Category: Hamas,Hizbullah,Islam,Israel,middle east,terrorismharmonicminer @ 2:09 pm

Power Line asks some obvious questions about Israel’s trade of live terrorists for dead bodies: Why did Israel do it?

Why did the government of Israel turn over four terrorists and a mass murderer for the bodies of two dead soldiers? Herb Keinon purports to explain the deal via an exploration of the Israeli national psyche. Keinon does not address the question whether Ehud Olmert and his cabinet in fact fairly represent the desires of the people of Israel in agreeing to the exchange. Do they?

It is naturally demoralizing for those with a healthy psyche to watch evil rewarded and celebrated. Are the Israelis somehow different in this respect? I doubt it. Watching the Lebanese celebrate the return of Samir Kuntar and the Hezbollah terrorists (as in the video above) is profoundly demoralizing. Ynet News editor Sharon Gilad, for example, describes her blood running cold as she watched the exchange take place. In this video former Israel Defense Minister Moshe Arens frankly condemns the exchange. Who speaks for Israel?

UPDATE: Carl in Jerusalem adds: Hezbollah mutilated the bodies of Goldwasser and Regev.

Tags: , , , ,