ZUS map from France a warning to Americans

By Dave Petteys (dpetteys@comcast.net) Have a look at this website that lists 751 areas in France that basically are no longer French, but Muslim. French authorities can no longer enter these areas. "Sensitive urban zones," they're called; the French acronym is ZUS.

And when our Islamic community leaders in this country depict themselves as a "persecuted minority" and demand special accommodations, understand that the real motive of some is to carve out similar areas of Islamic Republic in these United States.

It’s happening in France, and points to the end result of "tolerance" and multiculturalism: to wit, the complete loss of freedom, democracy and eventually the Nation itself. I wonder if the politically correct realize this.

West endangered by the Jimmy Carter mentality

By Dave Petteys (dpetteys@comcast.net) There is a fundamental flaw in the thinking of the Jimmy Carters in our society, and it endangers Western Civilization itself.

It is the implicit subconscious assumption that we are the most powerful and wealthiest country in the world. And in the minds of the Jimmy Carters, this status will remain inviolate, because our victory in 1945 has cast it in stone forever! Several mistaken assumptions flow from this:

** No further conflict anywhere at any time will ever be necessary to protect our interests

** So if there is conflict, it is our fault, resulting from our unnecessary ‘bullying’ of others

** We can afford to be magnanimous about encroachments against our interests, and even tolerant of internal treason, because our omnipotence makes defense unnecessary

** When we show ‘restraint and forbearance’, others will express gratitude and respond in kind -- since we are the most powerful, are we not?

Unfortunately, this point of view exists only in the minds of the Jimmy Carters, and nowhere else: certainly not with policymakers in Asia, South America, or the Middle East.

In the late 1970’s President Carter curtailed our naval building program. His assumption was that the Russians would respond in kind, convinced as he was that their buildup was only a response to ours, (in other words, “our fault” as always). In fact, the Russians accelerated their buildup, and announced the Mediterranean was no longer an “American lake”. President Carter’s feeble response was that he “felt betrayed” by the Russians.

Today, you hear the same sort of thing. George Soros holds that our “war on terror” is what’s causing it. (See his article “A Self-Defeating War “ in the Wall Street Journal 8/15/06.) Again, this demonstrates the “It’s always our fault” point of view. Soros carefully ignores the attacks prior to Sept 11 when America did NOT respond.

But what the Jimmy Carters regard as “restraint and magnanimity”, just about everyone else regards as a sign of weakness. And rather than responding in kind, our enemies push even harder to achieve their goals. This builds a momentum against us that could quickly destroy all of Western Civilization. It’s happening now.

Mideast repercussions from Dems' election win

By Dave Petteys (dpetteys@comcast.net) Appeasement in the Middle East is moving rapidly as a result of the American elections:

** Civil war in Lebanon, resulting in a Hizbollah-run Islamic state, is immanent. UN “peace keepers” will only watch, pointed as they are against Israel.

** America will do nothing, wanting Syria’s “ help” in Iraq.

** Syria will demand that we force Israel give up the Golan Heights, for which Israel and America will receive nothing.

**The Catholic Near East Welfare Association will soon make an emergency appeal for all the Christian refugees fleeing Lebanon for their lives. It seems the clergy prefer to hold candlelight vigils for the thousands slain than take any preventive action.

As the position of Israel becomes more and more untenable, contingency plans to evacuate the whole population of Israel to say, New Mexico, will need to be drawn up. The silence of the Democrats in Congress in the face of these democracies being snuffed is deafening.

What was that proverb about feeding the Alligator, hoping he will eat you last?

Trying to wish away our enemies

By Dave Petteys (dpetteys@comcast.net) There is a perception on the part of the “progressives” that we have the option to walk away from the struggle with Islam without consequence. (Was this not the case in Vietnam?) It is consistent with the belief that "we are the problem," that "fighting the war on terror is what’s causing terror."

But that’s like saying a police department is what causes crime in a big city. And as the world ignored what Adolf Hitler had written in Mein Kampf, so do the progressives choose to dismiss the fatwas of Osama Bin Laden and the pronouncements of the President of Iran and other various blood-thirsty Islamic clerics.

Apparently, the subconscious conviction of the progressives is that since we won our war in 1945, our place as the preeminent power in the world is set forever. You see the nostalgia and continual praise for the Army of 1945 while they undermine the Army of 2006. The real issue for them is the need to dismantle “American arrogance and tendency to empire”. (Though they immediately blame America for the 1994 massacre in Rwanda because we failed to "do something"! They also urge intervention in Darfur to fight the same Islamic militias in the Sudan that they would cease to fight in Iraq!)

Progressives are convinced that anything can be solved by dialogue and negotiation. But, to dialogue with the wolf in the sheep pen doesn’t change the motives of the wolf. The flock can actually be put in greater jeopardy if the shepherd refuses to recognize the danger when the wolf assures him that his only intention is to “fight hunger, and what more nobler cause could there possibly be?”

What the progressives forget is the fragile, interdependent nature of modern society, and the very real threat of nuclear weapons that could be placed in US urban centers by very small groups of people -- to whom those same progressives would give free run of our society in the interest of "civil rights."

When one contemplates the disruption caused by the destruction of two buildings in New York on September 11, 2001 (dismissed as something we "deserved" by the progressives), what would be the effect of the simultaneous destruction of several cities with the death toll in the hundreds of thousands? Evidently, it will take a further ocean of blood to wake up America.

Stay the course or widen the war?

By Dave Petteys (dpetteys@comcast.net) One of the principles of military victory is to isolate the battlefield, cutting off the enemy’s supply. We are apparently not doing that in Iraq. We are apparently reluctant to be accused of “widening the war” by our critics. So we continue to fight the war on our enemy’s terms. Thus, “Staying the course” under these circumstances means continuing indefinitely the meat grinder for our blood and treasure.

For their part, despicably, the Democrats would be the first to howl “widening the war” if we did the right thing and struck insurgent staging and supply areas in Iran and Syria. The Democrats want to preserve this latter day “Ho Chi Minh Trail” that assures our defeat.

Perversely, they would consider it not an American defeat, but a Bush defeat, which they hope will give them political power. They are unconcerned that our defeat in Iraq will give the Islamics a first critical key victory they need to build their Caliphate from Indonesia to Spain. That the Caliphate’s only stated goal is to destroy Western Civilization doesn’t even register with the Democrats.

And why are the Democrats unconcerned? They subconsciously reside in 1945, and take American power and wealth for granted. They extol the army of 1945 as the “Greatest Generation” and at the same time undermine the army of 2006. The only Democrat concern is to achieve political power so they can pursue agenda items that “really matter”, such as wealth redistribution, global warming, clean drinking water, and homosexual scoutmasters.

The question one has to ask: if nuclear weapons were to begin detonating in American cities, would the survivors really care about homosexual scoutmasters or global warming? And would the response of a President Pelosi (since the Speaker the House is first in line to succeed a slain president and vice president, God forbid) be anything more than bursting into tears?