The moment Samir Kuntar walked into Lebanon as a free man spelt the end of a hard earned 60 years cultivating the image of Israel as a capable, tough and proud state. Samir Kuntar is one of the most despised villains of Israeli society: a vicious murderer, his crimes included the inhuman beating to death of a three year old Israeli girl in front of horrified witnesses. In the eyes of the Arab countries and even among Western Arab communities, Samir Kuntar is the darling of the defenders of Islam – a brave resistance fighter.

My horror at the release of this epitome of evil is not the support for his crimes that is propagated among the Arabs; it is not even shock at the (frankly expected) Western indifference for this monster – instead I am appalled by the virus that goes by the name of appeasement that has risen again to infect the integrity or lack thereof, manifested by the weak politicians and the morally bankrupt Left of the “liberal” West.

One particular historical parallel that can now be applied to the Arab-Israeli conflict by supporters of Israel is the disastrous policy of appeasement practised noticeably by one of its true founders: Neville Chamberlain. Once the understanding of the West and even the byline of slightly cringe-worthy Hollywood films was ‘Never negotiate with terrorism’. Now appeasement and negotiation appears to govern international politics: from the hundreds of incentives made to the Iran by the EU, hoping to curb Iran’s nuclear weapons research, each new offer giving more and more away to the Iranians; to the ‘quiet diplomacy’ pursued by Thabo Mbeki with Mugabe’s Zimbabwe.

The release of Samir Kuntar, four other terrorists and the hundreds of remains of dead Lebanese murderers marks the beginning of the end. Israel, more than any country, should realise that appeasement is a policy that will never work to their advantage. It betrays the teachings of Machiavelli: “…one should never permit a disorder to persist in order to avoid a war, for war is not avoided thereby but merely deferred to one’s own disadvantage.” And it sends chilling reminders of Chamberlain’s efforts to secure peace; or the IRA murderers given their ill-gotten freedom by Blair’s government; the US government’s protection of Arafat in 1982; the attempted appeasement of Saddam Hussein before the 1990 Gulf War; the encouraged promotion of Islamic culture above all others in Western countries by Western governments; the suggestions of British judges for allowing some form of sharia law in Britain – the last hundred years have shown a frightening propensity for the West to fail to learn from its mistakes and to allow the forces of evil a chance to exist and prosper.

So why is Olmert’s government meeting Hezbollah’s demands? Why is it appeasing its enemies? Israel has owed 60 years of remarkable existence to ‘disproportionate’ response and a tough and no-nonsense attitude towards its enemies. Many would argue this is a key reason for her survival. The release of the five terrorists by Israel met one of Hezbollah’s few demands, another being the return of the Sheba farms to Lebanon. Is it that these unforgettable years of terrorism, torture, murder, cruelty unimaginable to civilized society have all just been for the return of a few hundred yards of farm and a child murderer? – the truth of course, is that Hezbollah, like the rest of the Arab world, seeks the destruction of Israel and its people. Olmert seems to have forgotten this. They have reversed the direction of sixty years of policies based on reality and common sense, and are taking an ill-fated chance with the future of their country.

For the despairing results of this cruel act of appeasement we have not even had to wait a few days. Immediately Hamas decided it was no longer going to agree to Israeli terms for the return of Gilad Shalit and was to demand greater returns for the terrorist group. Furthermore, a group of British MPs called for a dialogue with Palestinian terror groups, Hamas included; breaking the policy of no recognition that most Western countries have pursued.

But this author is not completely a pessimist and his writings shall not just be a harbinger of Israel’s complete failure – there is still a chance: Olmert and his coalition must be removed, a strong leader (preferably Netanyahu) must be elected, Kuntar must be assassinated, Hamas must be destroyed, Hezbollah must be removed, Iran’s nuke and missile sites must be obliterated and the supply of armaments to the Gaza Strip and West Bank must be stopped. Tough orders? These are problems all created by appeasement; it is war deferred to Israel’s disadvantage, and now Israel is forced to deal with it.

 Nile Gardiner, Director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, writes in the Telegraph:

Britain’s chattering classes should be careful what they wish for. Senator Obama promises change and a bold new course for the United States. The end result may be an America that looks away from Britain and erects higher barriers to trade and investment.

The special relationship has lasted over 60 years as the most powerful and successful partnership of modern times. Unfortunately it might not survive the next presidential election.

Read the whole article here.

David Frum, writing about Obama’s badly worded, sloppily thought-out Berlin speech, concludes – rightly in our opinion:

Obama’s vague language is the product of an unrealistic mind. He denies the reality of conflict — and flinches from the obligations of self-defense. Obama has risen to power by using a soothing cloud of meaningless words to conceal displeasing truths and avoid difficult choices.

Read all that he wrote in yesterday’s National Post. (Unfortunately we cannot link to it.) It’s good stuff.

 Adam Brodsky writes in the New York Post today about the growing unwillingness of Americans to continue pouring dollars into the coffers of states which use them to destroy the West. He says: 

Surely things are headed in the right direction: i.e., toward less US dependence on foreign oil.

Just fantasize the possibilities: Terror, bankrupt. Iran, shriveled. Chavez, history. Gore shuts up.

And SUVs rule.

All without firing a single bullet.

Oil’s well that ends well? Here’s hoping.

 

 Terry Sater writes in today’s Investor’s Business Daily:

We’ve come far from promises of "a chicken in every pot" to Barack Obama’s June 3 declaration that "the chance to get a college education is the birthright of every American." When did it become a birthright?

In his 1982 book, "The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism," Michael Novak noted that many who have lived under socialism would find it hard to believe "that other human beings would fall for the same bundle of lies, half-truths and distortions. Sadly, however, illusion is often sweeter to human taste than reality. The last Marxist in the world will probably be an American nun."

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism," said Norman Thomas, a U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate in the 1940s. "But under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day, America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

If it is to be, let’s do it with our eyes open, aware of every ponderous step.

 

His article is about the right name for Obama’s ideology. ‘Socialist’, ‘Communist’, ‘Marxist’? A discussion worth considering.   

 Here is an article in The Australian by David Evans, one of the people who made the mistakes with the computer modeling on which Al Gore based his prediction that THE END OF THE WORLD IS NIGH if we do not obey him – Al Gore! – and live nasty, short, cold, hard lives in order to ‘save the planet’. 

Dr Evans now admits he was wrong. 

We proclaim: 

There is no global warming.  

Carbon emissions never did cause it. 

Human activity does not cause it . 

It is time for this madness of crowds to die down.  

 Who is to blame for the sub-prime disaster? 

People who promised to pay more for their houses than they could possibly afford.

And the government.

Thomas Sowell goes to the heart of the matter in an Investors Business Daily article today.

Here’s an extract to whet your interest:

It was government intervention in the financial markets, which is now supposed to save the situation, that created the problem in the first place.

Laws and regulations pressured lending institutions to lend to people that they were not lending to, given the economic realities.

The Community Reinvestment Act forced them to lend in places where they didn’t want to send money, and where neither they nor politicians wanted to walk.

Now that this whole situation has blown up in everybody’s face, the government intervention that brought on this disaster is supposed to save the day.

Politics is largely the process of taking credit and putting the blame on others — regardless of what the facts may be. Politicians get away with this to the extent that we gullibly accept their words and look to them as political messiahs. 

 Little Green Footballs reports:

For the Pritzker family of Chicago, the 2001 collapse of subprime-mortgage lender Superior Bank was an embarrassing failure in a corner of their giant business empire.

Billionaire Penny Pritzker helped run Hinsdale, Ill.-based Superior, overseeing her family’s 50% ownership stake. She now serves as Barack Obama’s national campaign-finance chairwoman, which means her banking past could prove to be an embarrassment to her — and perhaps to the campaign.

Superior was seized in 2001 and later closed by federal regulators. Government investigators and consumer advocates have contended that Superior engaged in unsound financial activities and predatory lending practices. Ms. Pritzker, a longtime friend and supporter of Sen. Obama, served for a time as Superior’s chairman, and later sat on the board of its holding company.

Sen. Obama has long criticized predatory subprime mortgage lenders and urged strong actions against them.

 A letter we wholeheartedly endorse:

A letter to the editors of Townhall.com, from LGF reader Ross Kennedy:

————————

Townhall:

While I typically appreciate the trenchant analysis offered by some of your authors and contributors, I will not stand for Pat Buchanan accusing Israel and their “Fifth Column” of “seek[ing] to stampede us into war with Iran.” This kind conspiracy-mongering is increasingly typical for Mr. Buchanan, and is below the standard set for Townhall by its otherwise high reputation. Please, for the sake of rational conservatives everywhere, repudiate Mr. Buchanan. Further, please remove him from your roll of contributors, until he can see his way to reason and dignity.

Israel is a staunch U.S. ally, and is both spiritual and philosophical kin to the United States. They are one of the last bulwarks against tyranny and oppression in the Middle East, and as such deserve the unflinching support of this country’s political class. It is a crass, demeaning thing to denigrate the nation of Israel as seeking war with its neighbor states. Israel has long been under persecution by those who view themselves as existential enemies of the Jewish faith, and this situation will not change. Iran, along with their proxy terrorists (Hizbullah, Hamas, Iran Revolutionary Guard, etc.) has constantly advocated for the destruction of Israel and the murder of the Jewish people.

Mr. Buchanan, in attempting to paint the Israelis as nothing but bullies, has indeed shown himself to be an anti-Israel bigot. Politics and religion is inextricably woven together in that part of the world, and to denigrate Israel as warmongers is to paint the Jewish people of that country as villainous dogs. Like the Palestinians, the Israelis claim their land as their spiritual birthright; the tension between the two parties will never vanish, so we in the United States must choose sides. We have chosen Israel, for many sound reasons.

Mr. Buchanan owes a long and serious apology for castigating our staunchest ally, and Townhall should issue a retraction and purge their content of this specious garbage.

Sincerely,
Ross Kennedy

 A warning from the Investor’s Business Daily that should be taken to heart by everyone who is thinking of voting for any Democratic candidate:

With the advent of $4 gasoline, Democrats began sensing an opportunity to drive the country closer to their vision of utopia.

These are the people — or in some cases representatives of people — who want $8 a gallon gasoline so we’ll get out of our cars, turn off our air conditioners, dim our lights, strangle our commerce and impose a global asceticism in a post-capitalism wilderness.

Of course, this spartan existence would be for the masses only. The elites will still be able to live their lives of opulence, just as high-ranking communists in the Soviet Union, the nomenklatura, had private Chaika lanes in Moscow streets that members of the working class — Marx’s proletariat — were forbidden to drive on.

Al Gore provided a clear example Thursday of how such privileges are granted to the privileged by the privileged.

Gore, who wants to push Americans onto bikes and buses, used a convoy of two Lincoln Town Cars and one SUV to arrive for and then leave from his carbon-free speech at Constitution Hall in Washington.

As an American, Gore has the right to be a hypocrite. Neither he nor our elected officials, though, have the right to compel a free people to live the lives the Amerikan nomenklatura has selected for them. Washington’s role is to serve the people, not the other way around.