Lindsey Graham Blames Kooky Koran-Burning Pastor for Animalistic Beheadings of United Nations Workers in Afghanistan

This story got going yesterday with Senator Graham's comments on Face the Nation. I've never been a Graham-hater, but I'm definitely not a fan at this point. The dude fails the most basic lesson of the First Amendment: The antidote to offensive speech is more speech. I hate flag burning, but the Supreme Court's 1989 ruling in Texas v. Johnson is central to preserving the marketplace of ideas. By allowing someone to burn the flag we uphold the values for which the flag stands. It's extremely offensive. But as symbolic speech it affirms our freedoms.

So I cringe at this interview with Senator Graham at National Review. I denounced Koran-burning last year during all the controversy surrounding the Ground Zero mosque. Pastor Terry Jones is an idiot, and while I support his right to burn Islam's holy book, the same rule applies: Burning the flag is extremely offensive, and so is Koran burning. I don't endorse either form of expression, but I wouldn't attack either as un-American. That's not to say burning the Koran is the right thing to do, especially with how freighted the act is in this environment. But one lone wacko is not responsible for rampaging murderous Muslims 6 thousand miles away. What's evil is the reversal of responsibility game that everyone's playing, from the White House on down. And the headline sets the debate at New York Times, "Afghans Avenge Florida Koran Burning, Killing 12." And also, "Afghans Protest Koran Burning for Third Day." Well, at least the editors at the Baltimore Sun get it. "The U.S. has condemned Quran burning; will Afghans condemn the violence?":

There's no doubt that the publicity-seeking Florida minister who burned a Quran to demonstrate his hatred of Muslims committed a pointlessly provocative and reprehensible act. But the reaction of Afghan rioters who killed at least innocent 20 people in retaliation for what they saw as an intolerable insult to Islam is even more indefensible. And while there are plenty of Americans willing to speak out against anti-Muslim intolerance, where are the Afghan leaders willing to condemn the violence committed by their fellow Muslims?

And check this out:

To their credit, the national news media withheld the lavish coverage it had previously provided the minister's obvious play for attention. As a result, Mr. Jones' reckless provocation initially went largely unnoticed in the Muslim world. But then for some reason known only to himself, Afghan President Hamid Karzai chose to resurrect the issue in a speech on Thursday, in which he sharply criticized U.S. forces for accidentally killing innocent civilians and called for Mr. Jones' arrest for the "crime" of insulting Islam.

Having lived in the U.S., Mr. Karzai knows perfectly well that U.S. law doesn't permit police to arrest people simply for exercising their right of free speech — however repugnant such speech may be. He also had to know that publicizing Mr. Jones' lunacy during a televised address might very well stoke extremist elements in his own country to commit acts of violence and cause the loss of innocent lives. But whatever twisted political calculation led him take such a risk, Mr. Karzai's criticism of his American partners and his calls for Mr. Jones' arrest have only grown more strident since the rioting began on Friday.

One almost gets the impression the Afghan leader is deliberately fomenting unrest among his people, perhaps in a desperate attempt to deflect criticism from the corruption and incompetence of the government he leads. He has always been a shaky ally whose integrity was doubtful at best.

But Mr. Karzai's is not the only voice in Afghanistan. Where are the other leaders of that country who have the moral authority to condemn the violence and the courage to speak out against bigotry and intolerance? Mr. Jones acted recklessly and without regard to the danger others might find themselves in as a result of his shameless self-promotion and puffery. He is a vain, selfish man, the exact opposite of what a true spiritual leader should be. Perhaps that is why he has never been able to attract a flock of followers and relies instead on the anonymous audiences provided by the television news cameras to get his twisted message across.

Yet for all his failings, Mr. Jones did not commit a single act of violence or cause any person physical harm. It was the mullahs in Afghanistan, who whipped their congregations into a frenzy, and the rioters themselves who are to blame for the 20 deaths so far around the country, including seven at a United Nations compound, and injuries to dozens more.

Nope. Not a single act of violence, but Graham's ready to criminalize political opinion in America. (And President Obama's "condemning" the "hate speech.") Boy, wouldn't want to offend those murderous mobs across Afghanistan.

See also Mark Steyn, who calls Graham a "wretched buffoon": "Re: Lindsey Graham and the First Amendment."

Pig's Foot and 'Evil Jews' Message Sent to Congressman Peter King's Office

From CNN's Dana Bash (via Memeorandum):

Washington (CNN) - A frozen pig's foot and a note laced with anti-Semitic rants were sent to Rep. Peter King's Capitol Hill office, a congressional source familiar with the situation confirmed to CNN Monday.

The source said the note included statements such as "evil Jews will return this hoof to Palestine." Neither King nor his aides have seen the package, the source said, because all mail sent to the U.S. Capitol is now screened and the package was intercepted before it went to his office. King's office was notified Monday afternoon.

There was no direct threat to the congressman and law enforcement officials know who sent the package, the source said.

Peter King is Catholic, so the message to gentiles? Watch your back because we'll be coming after you as well. Which is expected. Israel is the canary in the mine, as David Horowitz likes to say. Defense of Israel is defense of moral right and Western civilization.

More on this later. I'd like to see what else the terrorists wrote at that note, which, by the way, never made it Representative King's office. Postal inspectors check all congressional mail for bombs and other contraband before delivery. So add severed pig's feet and anti-Jewish hate mail to the list.

Added: At Pamela's, "Bloody Pig Foot, Jew-Hating Ramblings Sent to Rep King's Office --- Hamas-Tied Hate Group CAIR, "It was an anti-Muslim bigot, not being brain surgeons they got their signals crossed."

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, 9/11 Mastermind, to Face Trial in Guantanamo

At Michelle's, "Obama administration retreats (again) on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed civilian trial; Holder blames Congress."

Also at LAT, "9/11 suspects will be tried at Guantanamo, not in New York, Atty. Gen. Eric Holder announces." And Fox News, "Holder Blames Congress for Forcing Hand on Military Commissions for 9/11 Detainees" (via Memorandum).

John Yoo spoke at the Horowitz West Coast Retreat. He mentioned the need to keep Guantanamo open, and this administration keeps proving it.

Unions Hijack MLK Legacy in Assassination Day Exploitation

I suggested this morning that Barack Obama, in launching his 2012 reelection effort on April 4th, the anniversary of the death of Martin Luther King, Jr., "might have used this day to remind Americans of his commitment" to family values and to the restoration of the black family in American life. Absent that, the president's launch frankly seems a bit disrespectful. But that's nothing compared to the big labor unions, who're shamelessly exploiting King's death to make strained comparison's between the assassination and today's controversies over unions and state budget crises, etc. See the Soros-funded Think Progress, "43 Years Ago Today, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Died Fighting For The Rights Of Public Workers" (via Memeorandum). And at the AFL-CIO, "We Are One Honors MLK, ‘A Champion for All’."

They're calling April 4th a "national day of solidarity." It's certainly true that Dr. King's vision placed him on the left on occasion, but his overall program of individual liberty was an affirmation of this nation's founding --- and inherently conservative. It's thus horribly shameful for progressives to hijack the King legacy as if they own it. "Solidarity"? Civil rights protesters marched against Democrats throughout the South who for decades had disenfranchised blacks and had denied them of equal protection of the laws. Dr. King carried out the vision of Abraham Lincoln, and President Lyndon Johnson warned that he was consigning the Democrats to minority status by signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It's just sickening to see progressives not just cheapen the legacy, but to conflate this nation's historic legacy of victory over discrimination with the union entitlement culture that's bankrupting the states.

Obama Launches Reelection Campaign on Fourth Day of Fourth Month, Same Day as MLK Assassination

At Politico, "President Obama launches reelection campaign with video" (via Memeorandum).

Seems to me the Obama camp might have taken advantage of the historical symbolism, if you're going launch on the fourth day of the fourth month, which happens to be the day Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated. Obama could have returned to the rhetoric of his 2004 keynote address to the Democratic National Convention:

Go into any inner city neighborhood, and folks will tell you that government alone can’t teach our kids to learn; they know that parents have to teach, that children can’t achieve unless we raise their expectations and turn off the television sets and eradicate the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white. They know those things.

Obama might have used this day to remind Americans of his commitment to these values. He might have spoken on the crisis of education in the black community, and the need to strengthen the family and commit ourselves to a politics of life. For more on this, see Ken Blackwell and Robert Morrison, "Crisis in the Black Community."

Islamists Seek Takeover of Egyptian Revolution

I'll have lots of commentary on the Middle East over the next few days. Especially noteworthy is Victor Davis Hanson, who gave a phenomenal keynote speech on Saturday morning at the Freedom Center's Western Retreat. More on that later. Meanwhile, looks like the Los Angeles Times is playing catch-up to the New York Times on the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egyptian politics. See, "Islamists in Egypt seek change through politics":

Egypt has long been the touchstone of the Arab world. The protests in Cairo's Tahrir Square that ended with Mubarak retiring to his villa on the Red Sea riveted the Middle East. That drama suggests that Egypt's post-revolutionary era — its emerging blend of politics and Islam — will have tremendous influence on what evolves in coming generations across the region.

The political Islam popular in Egypt strikes more the tone of the moderate Muslim party running Turkey than the fundamentalist theocracies presiding over Saudi Arabia and Iran. Political parties based solely on religion are still illegal here, but the military council ruling the country has astounded many by permitting Islam a wider role. Analysts suggest this tolerance is calculated so that in coming months the army can hand over the nation to an elected parliament after assurances from the Brotherhood that it will not run a candidate for president.

Egypt is not the only nation where Islamic messages are whispering alongside the clamor of revolt. In Yemen, religious radicals are seeking to exploit anti-government protests against President Ali Abdullah Saleh, a U.S. ally against Al Qaeda. In Syria, conservative Sunni Muslims more antagonistic toward Israel than President Bashar Assad could fill the vacuum if his government is toppled.

The Muslim Brotherhood's calls for a relatively mainstream Islamic government appeals to its majority of educated and professional members. In Egypt's first taste of true democracy, the Brotherhood and more fundamentalist Salafist organizations, however, told followers that it was their religious duty to vote to approve a referendum on constitutional amendments that benefited Islamists by speeding up elections.

One of Egypt's leading ultraconservative sheiks, Mohamed Hussein Yacoub, influenced by Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi strain of Islam, was quoted as saying after the referendum had passed: "That's it. The country is ours."

Such sentiment shows that in a span of weeks, age-old religion, not the enthusiasm and slogans of the Facebook generation, is likely to be a crucial factor in choosing a new Egyptian government. This swift change has surprised even the Brotherhood, which avoided references to Islam during an uprising that was not inspired by religion.

More at the link above.

And at the New York Times previously, "Islamist Group Is Rising Force in a New Egypt." And at Director Blue, "The Rise of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, Right on Cue."

'I'm In!' — Michele Bachmann Weighs Bid for GOP Presidential Nomination

Well, can't complain about the timing, as this gives me another chance to run this lovely picture!

And check the link at New York Times, because Representative Bachmann's wearing the same outfit at the photo, "A Tea Party Star Stirs Iowans, and She Isn’t Palin":

WEST DES MOINES, Iowa — Sarah Palin, the reigning heroine of many social conservatives, has given few signals that she will make a presidential bid. Mike Huckabee, who won the Iowa caucuses in 2008 on the strength of his appeal to evangelicals and other constituencies, has mostly offered reasons for not joining the race.

So into that space has come Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota.

Best known as a fiery presence on cable television and the founder of the House Tea Party caucus, she is now exploring whether to seek the Republican presidential nomination. And early reaction to her in Iowa, where she was born and raised, suggests not only that she might do it, but also that she could have a substantial impact on the race.

On a break between meeting voters and conducting radio and television interviews — a staple of nearly every day — Ms. Bachmann took a seat in the bar of a hotel here and left no doubt that she was serious about running.

“It isn’t that I was born thinking I had to be president,” she said, leaning in and talking softer than she does on television or at Tea Party rallies. “I’m getting a lot of encouragement to run from people across the country. I don’t believe this is a rash decision.

More at the link. The picture's from AP, and the caption doesn't indicate the location. It looks almost like the lobby at the Terranea Resort, where the Horowitz retreat was held.

There's no doubt Bachmann's serious about running. She delivered a barnbuner keynote speech in Palos Verdes on Saturday, focusing almost exclusively on President Obama's failures and endless hypocrisy. She hammered ObamaCare, saying that the country doesn't want it, and that the law is stripping people of their liberty. We heard some of these same lines in Palos Verdes:

“What we need is a change of address form for the person living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,” she said over loud laughter. As she talked about what she contended was government expansion under the new health care law, she declared, “I want a waiver from the last two years of President Obama!”

Sarah Palin's mentioned at the piece, and Bachmann has nothing but kind words for her. And just think of it: Both Bachmann and Palin running head to head in the Iowa caucuses? The New Hampshire primary and beyond? I think progressives would die from an overdose of demonizing conservative women!

David Horowitz: 'It's Time for the Jews to Stand Up for Themselves'

I've been home from the Freedom Center's West Coast Retreat for a few hours. I'm decompressing. I've attended loads of professional conferences in the past, but never to one as intellectually stimulating as this one. I've got more photos to upload and publish, and I'll be doing some long-form analysis of events here and at NewsReal Blog. (Previous entries are here and here.) At the check-in table on Friday, I picked up some of the literature from the Freedom Center. Available in a glossy print format was David Horowitz's essay, "It's Time for the Jews to Stand Up for Themselves." It's a report from David's lecture at Brooklyn College, which was touch-and-go for a while, due to a campaign of intimidation that was being planned by pro-jihad campus organizers. It turns out that CUNY trustee Jeffrey Wiesenfeld put some heat on Brooklyn's administration, and security was beefed up in time, which facilitated a successful event. It's worth reading the whole essay at FrontPage Magazine. Meanwhile, it's also worth sharing the related smear job on Horowitz at Mondoweiss, the rabidly anti-Israel hate-site which I referenced recently on the five-year anniversary of Mearsheimer and Walt's "The Israel Lobby." The fiends at Mondoweiss spliced a video hit-job on Horowitz, taking his comments out of context in an attempt to smear him as "racist." The Freedom Center put together a rebuttal, and both those are below. And here's this from Mondoweiss' Zoe Zenowich, "King hearings come to Flatbush: David Horowitz stokes anti-Muslim sentiment at Brooklyn College":

Brooklyn College had its own Peter King hearing last night when right-wing commentator David Horowitz spoke to a feisty crowd of students and faculty.

At first I debated whether or not to even give voice to what David Horowitz said. After all, it is pretty well known that Horowitz is the Glenn Beck of Zionists—a rambler of hate who continually contradicts himself and history.

But given the current political climate and the audience filled with faculty and students who eagerly echoed Horowitz’s calls of anti-Muslim sentiment, I feel it is important to document.

Outside the library where the lecture was held, security guards insisted that ten or so peaceful protesters huddled in the rain stand behind steel gates they had brought out for the occasion. Inside, security guards searched bags before running a handheld metal detector over everyone entering the lecture hall—security measures I have never before experienced in my four years of attending guest speaker events at the college. In his opening comments, Horowitz remarked, “How does it feel to go through a check point? I’ll tell you one thing, I feel safer and that’s what check points are about—making people feel safe when they’re under attack by terrorists and Middle East Jew haters. “ Later, Horowitz added, “check points are there to protect the innocent from the guilty.”

Perhaps it was no coincidence that Horowitz was brought on campus with the help of two faculty members only a month following the controversy over the school administration’s decision to reinstate Political Science adjunct Professor Kristofer Petersen-Overton, who was fired following outside political motivation due in part to his scholarly work on Palestinian national identity. Horowitz was sure to make reference to the apparent “hostile environment” that “liberal professors” create and to which students are subjected. Apparently, “Jewish organizations across the country have been intimidated from presenting their case.”

But it became all the more clear last night that this so-called “hostile environment” is something being created by the very people pointing to its existence.

You can continue reading this lying manifesto here. Zoe Zenowich quotes Horowitz comments on the Palestinians, but offers no factual rebuttals, only more allegations of "hate speech."

Michele Bachmann at David Horowitz West Coast Retreat in Palos Verdes, April 2, 2011

Well, if at first you don't succeed!! Here's Congresswoman Michele Bachmann after her keynote address last night to the awards dinner at David Horowitz's West Coast Retreat:

It's been a whirlwind weekend, and I have lots to report --- and loads of great photos to post. But I'm about to grab a quick shower and head back up to Palos Verdes for Day 3 of the conference. Check back later this afternoon for an update!

David Horowitz's West Coast Retreat — Terranea Resort Palos Verdes, April 1, 2011

The weather warmed up just in time for the conference, no doubt to the great pleasure of those who traveled from out of area. It was in the mid-80s yesterday. Here's the view as I arrived at the Terranea Resort, which is situatuated on the Palos Verdes peninsula overlooking the Pacific Ocean. Catalina Island is in the distance:

Walking down to the lawn, I follow the walkway to the point. I'm looking back here at the coastal bluffs south from the resort:

Here's the Wall of Lies set up at the reception area:

David Horowitz opens the event:

There was a screening of the Freedom Center's "Wall of Lies" film:

Fox News contributor Charles Payne delivered the keynote address. He gave an excellent talk, speaking of his own life and development, and the crisis of personal responsibility in America today.

David Swindle is updating with frequent posts throughout the event, so check back ...

I'll have an update later ...

Penn State Young Americans for Freedom Assaulted for Putting Up David Horowitz's 'Wall of Lies'

Totally predictable.

Confront a pro-terror fanatic with the facts and he'll resort to violent thuggery.

The report's at FrontPage Mag, "VIDEO: Penn State YAF Students Assaulted for Putting up Palestinian Wall of Lies." And you gotta love this Arab student, at 1:30 minutes, "I don't have problems with the Jews. I have problems with Israelis, okay?" Oh brother. Get along to class now. Critical Thinking 101? Hey, smart pick:

Wisconsin Supreme Court Election

The latest in progressive douchebaggery, from John Nolte, at Big Government, "Devastating New Ad Might Be Game Changer in Wisconsin’s Crucial April 5th Election" (via Memeorandum):

We all know Democrats and public unions plays dirty. That’s not the question. The question is only how dirty, and in their bid to get [Joanne] Kloppenburg on the court, they played it as dirty as anyone can ...

Click through above for the Kloppenburg ad. You'll have the context for this response:

And then check over at Althouse for more: "2 new anti-Prosser/pro-Kloppenburg ads... presented for discussion purposes here."

RELATED: "Palin endorses Prosser in Wisconsin supreme court race."

Michele Bachmann Collects Over $2 Million in First Quarter, Tops Romney in Presidential Fundraising

From Rachel Weiner, at Washington Post, "Michele Bachmann collects $2 million in first fundraising quarter" (via Memeorandum).

I'm a huge Bachmann fan, as long-time readers will recall. I still get a kick out of this clip, so here's a flashback:

I covered Bachmann's town hall event at Knott's Berry Farm last year, although I didn't have a chance to meet her personally. But she'll be speaking this weekend at David Horowitz's West Coast Retreat, at the Terranea Resort at Palos Verdes, so perhaps this time. I'll be attending events there through Sunday, so blogging will be spotty. Here's the line-up:

Charles Payne, Dennis Prager, Victor Davis Hanson, David Horowitz, Congresswomen Michele Bachmann, Renee Ellmers, Marsha Blackburn, Congressmen Steven King, John Eastman, Tom McClintock Thaddeus McCotter, and Ed Royce, Kansas Sec. of State Kris Kobach, Andrew McCarthy, Ralph Peters, Tammy Bruce, John Yoo, Pat Caddell, Steven Emerson, Robert Spencer, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, and Andrew Klavan.

Tonight's the opening banquet. I'll try to post a few pictures later this evening.

Until then ...

UC Irvine's Terror-Supporting Olive Tree Initiative

There's a new report at FrontPage Mag, "UC Irvine Students’ Secret Meeting with Hamas."

I wrote on this earllier: "UCI's Olive Tree Initiative Met Secretly With Hamas Speaker Aziz Duwaik."

And Professor Gary Fouse also reports, "Olive Tree Initiative -- Was There a Meeting With a Hamas Official in 2009?"

In way of background for those readers unfamiliar with the Olive Tree Initiative, it was formed in 2007 at UC-Irvine in order to send selected groups of Jewish, Muslim and other students to Israel and the West Bank to meet with various figures on both sides of the Israel-Palestinian dispute. To date, there have been three trips, 2007-2008-2009. In addition, the program has spread to other UC campuses. Funding for the travel of Jewish students is handled primarily by the Rose Project, which was established by the OC Jewish Federation. In addition the OTI, in its brochure, solicits public donations. Finally, it is known that the Federation and Hillel of UCI have supported OTI-the Federation monetarily. At the university, the program falls under the Dept of Social Sciences.

In the past few months, there has been an on-going controversy within the Jewish community concerning some of the Palestinian figures that the Jewish students have been meeting with in the Holy Land. They include figures who have been part of or even helped found the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), an international organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel.

As stated, the OTI claims that it is exposing the students to both sides of the dispute. The Jewish Federation claims that this exposure makes the Jewish students better equipped to argue Israel's side. Yet, many members of the local Jewish community, including those who have donated money to the Federation, are questioning the wisdom of sending Jewish students to be influenced by older, experienced activists who are dedicated to deligitimizing Israel through so-called peaceful protests and the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions movement (BDS). The OTI-sponsored speaking appearance in November of 2010 of George S Rishmawi at UCI also sparked questions. Rishmawi, is a Christian Palestinian figure, who was a co-founder of ISM, with whom he claims not to be presently involved. He is one of the top OTI contacts in the Palestinian territories.

More at the link.

RELATED: The Jerusalem Post reported the story, "UC-Irvine students secretly met with Hamas official."

Plus, Hamas Speaker Aziz Dweik met with Mahmoud Abbas earlier this week to work out a reconciliation: "Palestinian leader Abbas meets with Hamas leadership for first time in two years." The meeting was repudiated by Israel:

Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu said last week that reconciliation of the Fatah-run Palestinian Authority with Hamas, which Israel considers a terrorist organization, would seriously hamper peace talks with the Palestinians.

And from last year, at the Wall Street Journal, "Israel's Foes Embrace New Resistance Tactics: Hamas and Hezbollah Find Inspiration In Flotilla, Support Protest Movement." It's all one big campaign to delegitimize and eventually destroy Israel.

There'll be more on this ...

Who Stands With Israel?‎

Glenn Beck has been developing his theory of war in the Middle East, and all indicators point to a progressive campaign to destroy Israel. Here's the March 29th transcript, "Beck: Who Stands With Israel?" Also below are clips from the March 30th and 31st broadcasts.

Beck mentions top State Department official and Harvard Public Policy scholar Samantha Power, who has long been considered hostile to Israel. She was featured in a Los Angeles Times puff piece yesterday, "Samantha Power, long a critic of U.S. foreign policy, now helps shape it." God bless Glenn Beck. He pulls together snippets and strings of information that mainstream outlets refuse to touch, lest they incite the anger of the global progressive left's Israel demonization industry. It's pathetic.

Lieberman and McCain: Regime Change Should Be Goal in Libya

From my favorite senators, at WSJ, "In Libya, Regime Change Should Be the Goal." After laying out praise for President Obama's stirring words of support for Libya, and also identifying the military and communications requirements needed beyond airstrikes and humanitarian assistance, the senators indicate:

Some critics still argue that we should be cautious about helping the Libyan opposition, warning that we do not know enough about them or that their victory could pave the way for an al Qaeda takeover. Both arguments are hollow. By all accounts, the Transitional National Council is led by moderates who have declared their vision for (as their website puts it) Libya becoming "a constitutional democratic civil state based on the rule of law, respect for human rights and the guarantee of equal rights and opportunities for all its citizens."

If there is any hope for a decent government to emerge from the ashes of the Gadhafi dictatorship, this is it. Throwing our weight behind the transitional government is our best chance to prevent Libya's unraveling into postwar anarchy—precisely the circumstance under which Islamist extremists are most likely to gain a foothold.

We cannot guarantee the success of the Libyan revolution, but we have prevented what was, barely a week ago, its imminent destruction. That is why the president was right to intervene. He now deserves our support as we and our coalition partners do all that is necessary to help the Libyan people secure a future of freedom.

I love the robust moral vision, but after nearly two months of studying change in the Middle East, I'm much more skeptical of the prospects for Western-style democratization. Of course, the U.S. is fully deployed at this point, and despite announcements of a handoff to NATO, the U.S. will continue to play first among equals in this war, and despite Secretary Defense Robert Gates' assertions to the contrary, it's increasingly plausible the U.S. ground contingents could be sent in. Shoot, the CIA could be preparing covert operations as this post goes live. Lots of scenarios are unknown except to those in the highest ranks of power. And I'm not convinced that Lieberman and McCain represent the bulk of thinking on the conservative right. Ann Coulter penned an excellent critique of the administration earlier, and Victor Davis Hanson warns against the deployment at Pajamas Media, "Libya: The Genesis of a Bad Idea." (Hanson does indicate that by now we'd better get Gaddafi or look out for some major blowback.) And at Flopping Aces, "Arming Libyan rebels? The Deaf, Dumb and Blind errors of western leaders."

And to round it out, see Ron Radosh, who's not quite so skeptical, "Our Libyan War: What Position Should Skeptical Conservatives Take?"

More later ...

Community Colleges Make Sharp Cuts in Enrollment

My college is discussed, at LAT, "California community colleges to slash enrollment, classes":

Facing a state funding cut of up to 10%, California's community colleges will enroll 400,000 fewer students next fall and slash thousands of classes to contend with budget shortfalls that threaten to reshape their mission, officials said Wednesday.

The dire prognosis was in response to the breakdown in budget talks in Sacramento and the likelihood that the state's 112 community colleges will be asked to absorb an $800-million funding reduction for the coming school year — double the amount suggested in Gov. Jerry Brown's current budget proposal.

As it now stands, the budget plan would raise community college student fees from $26 to $36 per unit. The fees may go even higher if a budget compromise is not reached.

Keep reading at the link above. LBCC President Eloy Oakley is interviewed. And below is Ann-Marie Gabel, Vice President of Administrative Services:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates Rules Out Ground Forces for Libya

At LAT:

In his strongest statement yet on Libya, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reiterates that the U.S. would not send ground troops. The administration is still considering whether to provide arms to the rebels, but what opposition forces need most is training, he says.

And at Hot Air, "Gates kinda sorta threatens to resign if Obama sends ground troops into Libya." RELATED: At NYT, "Gates Says Other Nations Should Arm Libyan Rebels" (via Memeorandum).

'We've got something stronger than bombs, we have solidarity ...'

What's perplexing is not that Obama hired this guy, but why Van Jones thought it good to sign on with a Democratic presidential administration. Musta thought he'd be getting some reciprocal solidarity from folks within and around the Oval Office.

At Gateway Pundit, "SHOCKING DISCOVERY: The Day After 9-11 Van Jones Led Rally Where They Cheered American Killers." And Big Government, "Racist Van Jones Rally Cheered 9/11 Attacks" and iOWNTHEWORLD (via Memeorandum):

Obama Authorizes Covert Support for Libya Rebels: Progressives All Messed Up

The Libya campaign is really sorting out a lot of partisan recrimination dating back to the early Bush administration. CNS reports on Barack Obama's 2002 campaign ad that claimed:

"I don't oppose all wars. ... What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne."

Now the president's saying that it's our responsibility as world leader to "protect fellow human beings" facing extermination at the hands of their own governments.

Oops.

And to top it off, lefties are a little discombobulated that Obambi's authorized covert action in Libya. Seriously. Emptywheel wants "The One" placed before a war crimes tribunal, and Excitable Andrew Sullivan just can't accept the truth:

I simply cannot believe it. I know the president is not against all wars - just dumb ones. But could any war be dumber than this - in a place with no potential for civil society, wrecked by totalitarianism, riven by tribalism, in defense of rebels we do not know and who are clearly insufficient to the task?

Contrast that to Ann Coulter, who's hardly dumbstruck at the president's perfidy, "Obama Cried, Kids Died":

... Democrats couldn't care less about the interests of their own country. Indeed, if there were the slightest possibility that our intervention in Libya would somehow benefit the United States, they would hysterically oppose it.

When it came to the Iraq War -- which actually served America's security interests -- Democrats demanded proof that Saddam Hussein was 10 minutes away from launching a first strike against the U.S. They denounced the Iraq War nonstop, wailing that Saddam hadn't hit us on 9/11 and that he posed no "imminent threat" to America.

What imminent threat does Libya pose to the U.S.? How will our interests be served by putting the rebels in charge?

Obama didn't even suggest the possibility that our Libyan intervention serves the nation's interest. Last weekend, his defense secretary, Robert Gates, said the uprising in Libya "was not a vital national interest to the United States, but it was an interest." So, not a vital interest, but an interest. Like scrapbooking, surfing or Justin Bieber.

Julian Schnabel's Anti-Israel Propaganda

From my review of "Miral" at NewsReal Blog: "Movie Review: Julian Schnabel’s Anti-Israel Propaganda “Miral”":

I went to see this movie without prejudice or preconception. I’d heard only minor details of the controversy surrounding “Miral,” most notably the vehement denunciation that was issued by the American Jewish Committee upon the film’s screening at the United Nations. I thus hoped my mind would be clear of preformed bias or ideological castigations. As it turns out, then, I was perhaps even more surprised by Schnabel’s vision of a hellish, Jewish police state. With the exception of a sympathetic Jewish Israeli woman (played by Stella Schnabel, the director’s daughter), Israelis are portrayed as police enforcers and murderous military bureaucrats in the Schutzstaffel mold. It’s one faceless scene after another where Palestinian homes are razed by Israeli heavy machinery and Muslim street protesters are gunned down by police bullets during the uprisings. But never does Schnabel offer a hint of background information, thus viewers are robbed of the chance at greater understanding of the issues and causes — especially those deeply gripping humanitarian violations rooted on the Palestinian side of the Middle East standoff (think Itamar).

Read the whole thing at the link above, FWIW. And see Phyllis Chesler's much superior essay, "Anti-Israel Agitprop on the Silver Screen."

PHOTO CREDIT: At top, Julian Schnabel pictured with Rula Jebreal (left) and Freida Pinto, c/o Wikipedia.

UCI's Olive Tree Initiative Met Secretly With Hamas Speaker Aziz Duwaik

I just recently learned of the Olive Tree Initiative.

The group's not on the up and up, it turns out (although this isn't a surprise to folks following the Muslim Students Association at UCI). See Roger Simon, "UCI Facilitates Secret Meeting with Hamas for their Students." Also, at the O.C. Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism, "Letter: UC Irvine Olive Tree Initiative Students Met with Hamas Leader in 2009 trip." Read the letter here. And an excerpt:

On Sunday, September 20, 2009, the second class of the Olive tree Initiative (OTI) returned from their travels in Israel and the west Bank. As its largest funder, Jewish Federation has strongly supported the concept and development of OTI from its inception.

... We expected, and believed we had received, full disclosure about program details. This is why we were quite surprised to learn, following the recent return of the OTI group, that they conducted an unapproved, off-itinerary meeting on September 16th with Aziz Duwaik, a notable Hamas figure.

We were further distressed to learn that, ostensibly, the students were asked to keep this meeting a secret. We have been informed by OTI student participants, that they were instructed by [name redacted] ‘not to tell anyone about the meeting with Duwaik. According to the information we received, the students were given two reasons to keep the meeting under wraps; (1) to avoid being detained upon reentering Israel from the west bank or being held at the airport before leaving the country; and (2) to avoid confrontation with anyone who would have disagreed with this meeting had they known about it in advance – namely Orange County Jewish community and leadership, and UCI administration. One UCI faculty member and two UCI doctoral candidates were in charge of arrangements on the ground. [Name redacted] was well aware of Jewish Federation's ‘redlines’ – what could or could not be done on an OTI trip. Taking UCI [students] to meet a Hamas leader crossed those red lines, and put the University and Jewish Federation in a precarious position. We are deeply troubled that this incident could potentially derail the substantial progress we have made together in building multicultural bridges at UCI ...

Hamas remains on the State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO). So hey, no wonder UCI's organizers tried to keep this secret. Oh boy. Talk about derailing "the substantial progress" toward building "multicultural bridges" at UCI! And the letter is from October 2009, almost 6 months before Ambassador Michael Oren was shouted down by fanatical MSA activists last year. See also the furious response from The Institute for Jewish & Community Research (IJCR):

This disclosure comes as the University of California system faces federal anti-Semitism complaints against the Santa Cruz and Berkeley campuses. The Olive Tree Initiative was intended to address similar problems at Irvine. Kenneth L. Marcus, Director of The Anti-Semitism Initiative at IJCR, comments, "Now the University of California must explain how introducing its students to Hamas leadership was supposed to address this serious problem." The meeting with a U.S. designated terrorist organization follows years of controversy on the UC Irvine campus, including a federal investigation of anti-Semitism. Charges are currently being pursued against 11 members of the UCI Muslim Students Association for repeatedly disrupting Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren’s speaking engagement.

IJCR urges UC Irvine to respond to this serious misuse of funds and gross violation of public trust. It is not known how many such meetings took place or whether UCI has arranged any meetings with Hamas since. Ironically, UCI obtained funding from the Jewish community to support the Olive Tree Initiative. Kenneth L. Marcus, commented, "It is inconceivable that UCI would expose its students to a recognized terrorist organization, and then try to conceal the matter from the public. This not only jeopardizes UCI’s ability to address the anti-Semitism problem on its campus today, but also UCI’s academic integrity.”

Look, the Olive Tree Initiative was set up as a front organization for the Muslim Students Association. The MSA in turn is a U.S. branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the original ideological and Islamist foundation for Hamas. But everything's so politically correct that it takes Freedom of Information Requests to get the truth out there. Shame on UCI! Faculty and graduate students are organizing student organizing junkets for Palestinian terrorism! Jeez, something's the matter with that, you think? But no, backers of the Olive Tree Initiative are working feverishly to silence critics of the group --- as recently as last week, it turns out. See the Jewish Journal, "Groups clash over public discussion of Olive Tree Initiative."

Expect updates ...

Obama Authorizes Covert Operations in Libya!

I confess this is a wow! kinda moment. Obambi basically declared victory in his address to the nation on Tuesday, and now he's going all Nixon-Kissinger on us with some CIA action.

At Los Angeles Times, "CIA officers in Libya are aiding rebels, U.S. officials say." And also ABC News, "President Obama Authorizes Covert Help for Libyan Rebels: Head of House Intel Committee Says Arming Unknown Rebels May Be a Mistake" (via Memeorandum). This part's the best:

Earlier this week, Obama declined in an interview with ABC News anchor Diane Sawyer to rule out arming the Libyan insurgents. When asked by Sawyer whether he would consider sending weapons to the rebels, Obama said, "We are examining all options to support the opposition."

White House spokesman Jay Carney repeated echoed Obama today saying the president is "not ruling something in or ruling something out in terms of lethal assistance to the opposition... We're coordinating with the opposition and exploring ways that we can assist them with nonlethal assistance. And we'll look at other possibilities of assistance as we move forward.

Rep. Mike Rogers, head of the House Intelligence Committee, warned the Obama administration against sending arms to the Libyan insurgents.

"It's safe to say what the rebels stand against," Rogers, R-Mich. said. "But we are a long way from an understanding of what they stand for. We don't have to look very far back in history to find examples of the unintended consequences of passing out advanced weapons to a group of fighters we didn't know as well as we should have."

"We need to be very careful before rushing into a decision that could come back to haunt us," Rogers said.

As always, the fear is that Islamists may end up in power, and thus the U.S. will have backed a (new) regime opposed to American interests and those of our allies, especially Israel. Not only that, the administration's been all over the map, with confused and contradictory statements, and of course a Jello policy on regime change or not. More on that from Melanie Phillips, "Humpty in Toytown and the Arab Boomerang."

'Antiwar' Protesters Call for Revolution in U.S. — Nationwide ANSWER Rallies Ignored by Mainstream Media Organizations

This isn't news to me, although I'm glad that a growing number of bloggers and citizen journalists are paying attention. The Los Angeles ANSWER organizers held their annual march in Hollywood on Saturday, March 19th. I had my taxes done that day and missed it, but veteran protest photographer Ringo was on the scene, and he reports: "Anti-War Demonstration, Hollywood, CA - March 19th, 2011." I've been focused lately on Israel and the rising tide of global anti-Semitism, and recall the ANSWER folks are at the forefront of the campaign for a new Jewish Holocaust. Naturally, the "push-the-Jews-to-the-sea" crowd was well represented in Hollywood. I'll have more on this in continuing coverage here. Meanwhile, Rebel Pundit has an excellent report from the event in Chicago on March 19th: "Exclusive: Chicago Media Covers Up Socialist Revolution Extravaganza!!" (also at Breitbart and Memeorandum).

After arriving at the protest, we began to notice a trend in the message of the day. The message was transitioning back and fourth between ‘Anti-War, and ending the occupation of Iraq’, to a ‘blatantly obvious and proud Communist/Socialist revolutionary’ message. Threats of taking to the streets, with directives to become ungovernable and to mimic the revolutions spreading across the Middle East and North Africa were prominent in the speeches, most of which were given by radical left wing socialist activists and organizers.

There was clearly no intent on anyone’s behalf at the rally to cover up their radical views. However, in each case of the local mainstream media coverage, (CBS 2 News, NBC 5 News and ABC 7 News) it appears there may have been a deliberate intent to conceal this prominent message, that was delivered loud and clear by the protesters and speakers, or perhaps they decided to just simply ignore it, hoping it wouldn’t be noticed. In ABC 7 Eyewitness News’s coverage, they didn’t even mention the words; socialist, communist, or revolution once. However our footage reveals this was a prominent and consistent theme present during the entire march, and to no one’s surprise, considering the radical ties of those who organized it.

Rebel Pundit argues for a media cover-up of the revolutionary agenda, but that's pretty much standard operating procedure. Some of the first days of the Wisconsin budget protests saw the exact same comparisons between the U.S. and the Middle East (Mubarak), although it was mostly bloggers that brought the news to the wider audience. Last year's pro-immigration march in Phoenix was dominated by communists calling for revolution and the destruction of nation-state borders. I specifically highlighted mainstream coverage of the march at the Arizona Republic and the Los Angeles Times. They treated the event, with dishonest reports and photos of children protesters, etc., as a "civil rights" march. Meanwhile, we've got leftists who continue to insist that revolutionary agitation --- not to mention the left's global anti-Israel campaign of annihilation --- is "imaginary" and the product of a "persecution" complex. It's thus all around us, the lies and subterfuge relentlessly grinding away at the basic fabric of society, warping young minds with anti-American, pro-Holocaust propaganda. Add on top of this the growing black bloc movement of anarchist violence, which despite the "anarchist" label is really about state destruction to prepare for the communist takeover, and folks can get a pretty good picture of the current revolutionary agenda on today's progressive left. Also reporting: Another Black Conservative, The Blast, Left Coast Rebel, and Weasel Zippers.

Obama's War That Isn't

From ReasonTV (via Theo Spark):

Nick Gillespie is so intellectually attractive, with his careful and deliberate speaking, and his arguments indicating the hypocrisy of it all. But libertarians always short change moral values, so I rarely go all in for them. Not only that, libertarians have strange bedfellows in the America-hating antiwar left, for example, in Freddie deBoer, "An Open Letter to Juan Cole on Libya." I despise the pro-war left as well, but it'd be a shame not to share Freddie's juvenile whining.

Crystal Bowersox: 'Farmer's Daughter'

Via Theo Spark:

The Lies of 'Israel Apartheid Week'

From the David Horowitz Freedom Center:

I Was Born in a Cross-Fire Hurricane...

I don't care about the politics. How'd you like to sit down the Mick and Keith for a couple of beers, and maybe sing a song two, drunk and loud? Beautiful stuff, and double clips for you, years apart. I'll be on afternoon drive time until later ...

'The Ron Paul people are the biggest a-holes of them all...'

I was crackin' up at this!

At Daily Caller, "Levin takes on Ron Paul supporters: ‘I promise you his followers are the biggest a-holes of them all’."

“And so we get into these debates on constitutional issues, on economics, on history,” he continued. “And that’s a good thing. But the Ron Paul people are the biggest a-holes of them all. Now some of you may be thinking about Ron Paul – I promise you his followers are the biggest a-holes of them all. Not necessarily because of what they believe, but the way they express themselves. They’re obnoxious. They’re like Marxists, really. The mob mentality, the language, true believers, and yet there is a lot that is sensible, particularly on the Rand Paul side of the family when it comes to the Constitution, and economics and so forth.”

Well, it's not sensible when these same cranks start spouting ugly anti-Semitic rants. Bunch of freakin' dwids. And funny thing is that these bashers are flocking to my site from Conservative Times, the guy Red Phillips, for example. The dude's in my comments claiming how Levin's getting his butt kicked or something. Mostly looks like amusement to me.

Scott Marshall, Vice Chair of Communist Party USA, Stoked by Radicalization of Wisconsin's Democratic Party!

Yo, Tintin!

More imaginary communists!

And from Doug Ross, "Radicalization of Democrat Lawmakers Surprises Even Communists":

The Democrat Party is so poisoned, so laced with the traitorous and defective ideology of Marxism, that it must be flushed into the toilet bowl of history ...

Word.

Sarah Palin Slams Obama's 'Profoundly Disappointing' Speech on Libya

This is great.

At Politico, "Sarah Palin 'profoundly disappointed' by Obama's Libya speech," and Gateway Pundit, "Sarah Palin on President’s Libya Speech: “It Proved That the Obama Doctrine is Still Full of Chaos and Questions”."

What's interesting is not so much that she hammer's Obama, but that her comments raise implications for the debate on the "Neocons vs. the Anti-Jihad Movement." Palin sounds like a neoconservative regime-changer, but that's a dangerous bet at this point. See David Horowitz, who continues his campaign against Obama's intervention: "Bill Kristol Drinks the Kool Aid."

Melanie Phillips: 'The People Who Carried Out the Massacre in Itamar Were Indeed Morally Depraved and Savage'

And it's not just the murderers, but those who incite them. Melanie Phillips is a treasure (via Blazing Cat Fur):

'Abortion is Black Genocide'

At PuffHo, "Obama Featured On Chicago Anti-Abortion Billboards Targeting Black South Siders."

Also, at Jill Stanek's, "Breaking: New “abortion is black genocide” Chicago billboard to feature Obama." And Moral Outcry, "New Billboard Campaign against Abortion Features President Obama."

RELATED: At That's Abortion, "Life Always Rebuttal to Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar":

Anti-Semitism in Norway

From Alan Dershowitz, at Wall Street Journal, "Norway to Jews: You're Not Welcome Here: Anti-Semitism Doesn't Even Mask Itself as Anti-Zionism":

I recently completed a tour of Norwegian universities, where I spoke about international law as applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But the tour nearly never happened.

Its sponsor, a Norwegian pro-Israel group, offered to have me lecture without any charge to the three major universities. Norwegian universities generally jump at any opportunity to invite lecturers from elsewhere. When my Harvard colleague Stephen Walt, co-author of "The Israel Lobby," came to Norway, he was immediately invited to present a lecture at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim. Likewise with Ilan Pappe, a demonizer of Israel who teaches at Oxford.

My hosts expected, therefore, that their offer to have me present a different academic perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be eagerly accepted. I have written half a dozen books on the subject presenting a centrist view in support of the two-state solution. But the universities refused.

The dean of the law faculty at Bergen University said he would be "honored" to have me present a lecture "on the O.J. Simpson case," as long as I was willing to promise not to mention Israel. An administrator at the Trondheim school said that Israel was too "controversial."

The University of Oslo simply said "no" without offering an excuse. That led one journalist to wonder whether the Norwegian universities believe that I am "not entirely house-trained."

Only once before have I been prevented from lecturing at universities in a country. The other country was Apartheid South Africa.

More at the link above. Norway's university professor attack not Israel, but "the Jews," who are alleged to be just like "the Germans around 1938."

New Britney Spears Album‎ Out Today

A review at the Hartford Courant, "Britney Spears' 'Femme Fatale' Is Her Best Yet." Also, at MTV, "Britney Spears Was 'Over-The-Top' In Las Vegas, Palms Owner Says."

And here's another FMJRA effort, with a big thanks to Jonn Lilyea for the linkage.

And see the other friends of American Power: American Perspective, Amusing Bunni's Musings, Astute Bloggers, Bob Belvedere, CSPT, Dan Collins, Eye of Polyphemus, Gator Doug, Irish Cicero, Left Coast Rebel, Mind-Numbed Robot, Legal Insurrection, Lonely Conservative, PA Pundits International, Pirate's Cove, Proof Positive, Saberpoint, Snooper, WyBlog, The Western Experience, Yankee Phil, and Zion's Trumpet.

Plus, top it off with Theo's Bedtime Totty.

BONUS: Linkmaster Smith: "Good Tactically, But What Of Strategy?"

'Man, the Donalde is such a douchey little freak'

From the comments at Rumproast, where those dolts are still trippin' on Sasquatch Israel. Pathetic bunch of asshats too. They're just steaming after being called out for backing the anarchists in London. Bloodthirsty mofos, the lot of them.

RELATED: Dr. Sanity has some comments on London's anarchy and the mental sickness of leftists:

The little children who make up the left side of the political spectrum have never learned that reality exists separate from their own wants or desires. They still want what they want when they want it no matter what. And they are prepared to stage a temper tantrum if Mommy or Daddy -- or Reality, in this case -- say, "No!"

You can ignore reality, but reality will not ignore you.

The question is why are so many so determined to ignore the fiscal reality that is taking down nation after nation; state after state; individual after individual?

Why, is reality no longer something that exists outside one's wishes, whims or wants for some people?

Obama's Speech on Libya: 'Wherever People Want to Be Free — You Will Find a Friend in the United States'

After all the fancy words and lofty rhetoric --- and this was one hella lofty speech --- the key question remains unanswered: What if Gaddafi hangs on?

The president said NATO and our European allies would maintain a no-fly zone and continue to monitor threats to the security of the Libyan people. But the mission won't be successful as long as Gaddafi remains in power, free to launch brutal reprisals against the opposition when Western willpower falters. But check The Economist, with one of the best commentaries ever, "The Challenge of Libya: Where Will It End?":

Colonel Qaddafi is the Arab world’s most violent despot. In one day in 1996 his men killed 1,270 prisoners in a Tripoli jail. He has backed terrorism and assassinated dissidents. Western leaders were right to have given him a chance to turn a new leaf after 2003, when he renounced his nuclear programme. But when peaceful protesters marched for change a few weeks ago he shot them—seemingly with relish. Whatever the course of the coming weeks and months, do not forget that the colonel and his sons had vowed to slaughter the people of Tobruk and Benghazi, house by house. In the narrowest of senses, a mission that many said was pointless and too late has already chalked up one success.

Moreover, what happens in Libya, for good or ill, will affect its more hopeful neighbours, Egypt and Tunisia. Farther afield, even Syria is beginning to stir and its government may be tempted to be as ruthless as Libya’s ... If violence prevails in Libya, the momentum for peaceful change across the Middle East may drain away, as both autocrats and protesters elsewhere in the Arab world conclude that violence is after all an essential tool for getting their way.

I'll give it up for Obama on his forceful affirmation of our values. But I'm more critical than William Kristol, who's going all out with effusive praise: "You’ve Come a Long Way, Baby." But there's a split in the neoconservative camp. Jennifer Rubin likes the rhetoric but calls out Obama for weaseling on the exercise of U.S. hard power, "Obama’s Libya speech":

Obama can’t bring himself to embrace the view of those conservatives, you know the ones who pushed to liberate Iraq. (“Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our troops and the determination of our diplomats, we are hopeful about Iraq’s future. But regime change there took eight years, thousands of American and Iraqi lives, and nearly a trillion dollars. That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya.”) Moreover, he won’t, he told us in no uncertain terms — despite all the interests he outlined — use our military to remove Moammar Gaddafi. And this is where he became, frankly, incoherent. WHY aren’t we using our military? Ah, the price of multilateralism.

Neocons vs. the Anti-Jihad Movement

Editor David Swindle has a nifty post at NewsReal Blog, "David Horowitz on Nation-Building: “I agree with Haley Barbour”." It's a summary of David Horowitz's recent comments on U.S. foreign military intervention. I laid out my position this morning at "Libya's Rebels?" I think things are a little more complicated than Horowitz has laid out, although David Swindle's contrast of the paradigms is excellent --- a conservative divide over regime change and humanitarian intervention:

The divide can be summarized in both movements’ reactions to one fact: 84% of Egyptians believe apostates from Islam need to be executed. The traditional neo-conservative establishment ignored that fact in their embrace of the revolts in Egypt. (Apparently traditional neoconservatives are so eager to remove one tyrant that they don’t care if a worse one steps in to fill the void.) The Anti-Jihad movement was more clear-eyed in realizing that “democracy” in such a country would be many things but “freedom” is not one of them.