America, Israel, Britain. The enemy within and without.

We have Americans, in America, marching in support of Hezbollah. They can do that, that's their right in a free country like America. But they are supporting terrorists. How far does their support go? Do they just march, carry signs, chant, or do they raise funds for Hezbollah? Do they go further than financial support? Are some of them actually Hezbollah in the US?

The Islamic Center in Dearborn is the largest Shiite mosque in the country. Most Arab-Americans in Dearborn are Shiite Muslims. Signs in the community are in English AND Arabic.

Daily protests occur in Dearborn. At one recent demonstration, organized by the Congress of Arab-Americans, about 1,000 people attended. College-age men asked, in call and response fashion, "Who is your army?" Protestors responded: "Hezbollah." "Who is your leader?" they were asked. "Nasrallah," the chanters responded. Many carried placards of the Hezbollah leader. A few days earlier at an even larger demonstration, more than 15,000 turned out ... source

Dearborn is just one example, one city in the U.S, one example of America's attack from within. What to do about it?

What Security Measures vis-à-vis American Muslims?, asks Daniel Pipes. He begins:

I have repeatedly argued that, however distasteful, there must be special scrutiny of Muslims in the West for security purposes. Here's how I put it two days ago: "Because the identity of the next homicidal jihadi cannot be anticipated, Muslims generally need to come under heightened observation. I regret writing this as much as you dislike reading it, but it needs to be said and operated upon."

The world is experiencing conflict, battles, war. The USA needs to decide if we are going to be pro-active or re-active. Are we going to continue to act only 'defensively' or is it time to get on the 'offense'? I'm not asking this question, free people of the world are asking this question.

World War III, either here or on the way depending on who you talk to, is discussed by Robert Tracinski of The Independent Advocate (TIADaily), in his article, "Five Minutes to Midnight", posted in full at Atlas Shrugs. You can go read it all, but here are the final paragraphs of the long article:

And it takes no great feat of imagination to project how much more horrible the coming conflict will be if we wait on events long enough for Iran to arm itself with nuclear technology. Among the horrific consequences is the specter of a new Holocaust, courtesy of an Iranian nuclear bomb.

The good news, such as it is, is that the air of foreboding about this new war is somewhat exaggerated. Yes, the conflict will become larger and bloodier-far bloodier than it would have been had we acted earlier. But Iran is not Nazi Germany-a large, united, economically and technologically advanced nation that could nearly equal our military capability. Iran is a poor, backward nation with a large, restive dissident movement. Its military bluster is a hollow shell hiding its underlying weakness. It's time to break that shell and kill the monster inside-before it grows any bigger and more powerful.

We can all sense that the war is coming. It is vital for America to seize the initiative and fight it on our terms, when we have the maximum advantage.

It's five minutes to midnight. The time to strike Iran is now.

War Horse, Pale Horse says of Tracinski's article:

I believe the world may have decided its willing to trade the destruction of Tel Aviv rather than allow the limited engagement to the Litani to continue. I don't understand this willingness to sacrifice millions of people. What will the structures of the West look like should a nuclear event occur in the Levant? Will the UN still collect dues? Who will claim moral authority that does not not have blood on their hands? We should not find ourselves so weary this early in the fight.

We have to deal with the 'left', who are just having hissy fits. Take, "Daily KOS - the idiot's guide to Terrorism" from Plancks Constant (who has tons of pictures) via Blue Star Chronicles:

... explaining why the CONSTANT comparison of Bush to Hitler is not only not funny, it’s inaccurate and insulting to and trivalizes the memory of the millions who died and suffered under the tyrany of one of the world’s most evil creatures. Then they go ballistic over Bush using the term ‘Islamic Fascism’ and Lieberman declaring that islamic fascism is a greater threat than Nazism.

He explains why Islamic fascism is INDEED a greater threat and why we MUST fight this war.

In a WALL STREET JOURNAL op-ed Tuesday, Princeton’s Bernard Lewis writes: “There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran’s present rulers.”

'Quit Being So Neurotic and Self-Hating, Israel' -- is good advice from the Anti-Idotarian Rottweiler

(Via the Imperial Linkmaster General). Trying to please a serial abuser will only bring more abuse. Just ask any battered wife.

Gates of Vienna states the obvious (maybe), "We Need Slogans", by Baron Bodissey

Yesterday’s post in response to TigerHawk discussed what would be necessary to militarize the West. In the comments section, ScottSA asserted that Western conservatives need slogans, some brief and pithy catch-phrases which express our cause succinctly. World War Two had its slogans. Our enemies in Islam have their slogans. The appeasers and fellow-travelers on the Left have their neo-Marxist slogans. Why don’t we have any counter-jihad slogans of our own?

In his own blog, Crusader, ScottSA offered his own contribution

Slogans? We need a lot more than slogans. We can't even decide WHAT to call this war. Heck, we can't even decide to CALL IT WAR.

We better get our act together. We need to get our own house in order. The time is now. We cannot allow the US to go the way of Europe.

Linked with Assorted Babble, "Terrorist Ranting and Open Trackbacks"
Anti-Idotarian Rottweiler, "Quit Being So Neurotic and Self-Hating, Israel"

Comments

[Debbie]

Oh, Bernie, can we use your last suggestion for a slogan??? Please???

"Leftist don't have appease-pot to pee in."

I love it! Thanks

[bernie]

Great roundup and thanks for the link.

As for slogans:

Nasrallah = Nasty Fella

Your KOS has Flaws

Nod to terror - bend to slavery

Nasrallah never met a child he didn't like to blow up

Leftist don't have appease-pot to pee in.

[ScottSA]

I think its wise to do one thing at a time, which is why I suggested we use slogans. The left uses them all the time and manages to mobilize people quite well.

[Mike]

I hope that, when the full scale of this most recent attack is realized, we will all finally wake up, see that we really are in serious trouble, and ACT, before it's too late. But I doubt it.