Author: opinionstogo

Is not Michael Moore as bad an endorsement as any candidate could want? He supports Gen. Wesley Clark. And Clarke hasn’t handled the albatross well. Imagine not strenuously disavowing — on the spot — Moore’s defaming reference to President Bush as a “deserter?”

For those pondering the recent odd coupling of Cuban President Fidel Castro and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, the Christian Orthodox spiritual leader to Latin America, consider this:

Cuba officially switched from “atheist” to “secular” in 1998 — part of the public relations prepping for Pope John Paul’s visit. The Castro government needs all the help it can get to provide necessities to those citizens, which is virtually all, who don’t have access to dollars. In a quid pro quo for greater religious tolerance on the part of the Cuban government, various denominations are providing basic services in their communities.

Make no mistake, Castro is still Castro — whether pressed out in blue pin stripes or olive battle fatigues; whether in the company of Bart I, the Christian Orthodox Patriarch, or Hugo Sanchez, the rogue, unorthodox populist.

In fact, look no further than last weekend’s five-hour speech to Latin American activists opposed to the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas. Castro accused President Bush of plotting with hard-line Cuban exiles to kill him. The allegation was widely covered by foreign correspondents in Havana and dominated the domestic news.

It was vintage Castro. While he has certainly dodged his share of assassination threats, the 77 year old’s demise will likely be biological — not geopolitical.

But playing the assassination card still works as a rallying ploy against the U.S. — Uncle Scapegoat. When times are toughest in Cuba, Castro can be counted on to be Castro — whether it’s schmoozing a religious icon or reminding the natives who’s really to blame for Cuba’s failed social experiment.

While there’s always plenty of blame to share in the continuous bloodletting between Jews and Palestinians, this much needs to be said. Now more than ever.

It no longer matters who started it — or who has a better case for retribution. Neither is history an overriding factor. Everybody has their version — as well as a wholly convenient holy book to selectively cite. Proven true believers have all the proof they’ll ever need.

But here’s what does matter. Here’s where any sense of moral — or even immoral — equivalence summarily stops. It is this. Only one side would do the following: recruit a young mother to become a piece of shrapnel. Israel wouldn’t do that. The Third Reich wouldn’t have done it. Only the Tamil Tigers, the terrorists from Sri Lanka, have a similar modus operandi.

But becoming a human cruise missile is what 22-year-old Reem al-Reyashi, the mother of a 3-year-old son and a 1-year-old daughter, did the other day.

With marching orders from Hamas, she feigned a limp, requested medical help and then — in a fit of humanitarian irony — blew herself up at a Gaza Strip security inspection center for Palestinian workers. She had even strapped on ball bearings and screws for an extra measure of lethality. As a result of her suicidal homicide, she killed four Israeli security personnel and wounded — make that maimed — seven other people, some of them Palestinians. Collateral damage for the cause.

Another day at the office from hell.

But it gets worse. The twisted premeditation of it all was evidenced by the standard video that the bomber left behind explaining the inexplicable.

“It was always my wish to turn my body into deadly shrapnel against the Zionists, and to knock on the doors of heaven with the skulls of Zionists,” implacably noted the suicide killer.

“God gave me the ability to be a mother of two children who I love so,” said al-Shrapnel. “But my wish to meet God in paradise is greater, so I decided to be a martyr for the sake of my people. I am convinced God will help and take care of my children.”

Allah as nanny.

Such sick ambition, sophistic reasoning and perverted rationales underscore the only reality that matters. It IS about Islam. The movement comes from the mosques — not the universities. Terrorists now go imam-shopping.

For obvious reasons, President Bush can’t say that. Even had to apologize for using “crusade” as a verb. But we, at least, can acknowledge the obvious. Would that the sense of jihad were limited to the struggle for a Palestinian homeland. Were it, Yasser Arafat might have accepted the Bill Clinton-brokered deal.

This is not about compromise or coexistence. This is not about agreeing to find a way to end the bloodshed, for bloodshed is a Fundamentalist strategy. This is about victory — and pay back. A millennium’s worth of traumatized pride and underachieving Muslim cultures. The Middle East crucible is merely the most visceral of rallying points.

This is about Koranic parsing over suicide and justification for that which yields Paradise — 72 black-eyed virgins and all. This is about dividing the world into believers and infidels, the result of which too easily excuses and encourages any mistreatment of the latter. The Nazis — by dehumanizing and demonizing Jews — provided an excellent model to build upon.

It is also about picking on democracies, open societies that — in response to heinous acts — will stop considerably short of the “Mongol method” — the wholesale slaughter of a suicide killer’s native population.

Would that the contemporary threat to the West — and America — were confined to the evil likes of Osama bin Laden or Muhammad Atta. But the pernicious appeal of Wahhabism is growing — not slowing. The number of Muslims who applauded the World Trade Center atrocity was hardly limited to al-Qaeda fanatics.

The seeds of jihad are many places. As are infidels. And that’s us, the U.S.

It IS about Islam.

We ignore that cold-blooded reality at our own peril.

While there’s always plenty of blame to share in the continuous bloodletting between Jews and Palestinians, this much needs to be said. Now more than ever.

It no longer matters who started it — or who has a better case for retribution. Neither is history an overriding factor. Everybody has their version — as well as a wholly convenient holy book to selectively cite. Proven true believers have all the proof they’ll ever need.

But here’s what does matter. Here’s where any sense of moral — or even immoral — equivalence summarily stops. It is this. Only one side would do the following: recruit a young mother to become a piece of shrapnel. Israel wouldn’t do that. Neither would Nazis.

But that is what 22-year-old Reem al-Reyashi, the mother of a 3-year-old son and a 1-year-old daughter did the other day.

With marching orders from Hamas, she feigned a limp, requested medical help and then blew herself up at a Gaza Strip security inspection center for Palestinian workers. She had even strapped on ball bearings and screws for an extra measure of lethality. As a result of her suicidal homicide, she killed four Israeli security personnel and wounded — more like maimed — seven other people, some of them Palestinians. Collateral damage for the cause.

Another day at the office from hell.

But it gets worse. The twisted premeditation of it all was evidenced by a video that the bomber left behind explaining the inexplicable.

“It was always my wish to turn my body into deadly shrapnel against the Zionists, and to knock on the doors of heaven with the skulls of Zionists,” implacably noted the suicide killer.

“God gave me the ability to be a mother of two children who I love so,” said al-Shrapnel. “But my wish to meet God in paradise is greater, so I decided to be a martyr for the sake of my people. I am convinced God will help and take care of my children.”

Allah as nanny.

Such sick ambition and perverted rationales underscore the only reality that matters. It IS about Islam. The movement comes from the mosques – not the universities. Terrorists can go Imam-shopping.

For obvious reasons, President Bush can’t say that. Even had to apologize for using “crusade” as a verb. But we, at least, can at least acknowledge the obvious. Would that the sense of jihad were limited to the struggle for a Palestinian homeland. Were it, Yasser Arafat would have accepted the Bill Clinton-brokered deal.

This is not about compromise or coexistence. This is not about agreeing to find a way to end the bloodshed, for bloodshed is a Fundamental strategy. This is about victory — and pay back. A millennium’s worth. This is about Koranic justification for that which yields Paradise, however perversely defined.

Would that the contemporary threat to the West — and the US — was confined to the evil likes of Osama bin Laden or Muhammad Atta. But the pernicious appeal of Wahhabism is growing — not slowing. The number of Muslims who applauded the World Trade Center atrocity was hardly limited to al-Qaeda fanatics.

The seeds of jihad are everywhere. As are infidels. And that’s US.

It IS about Islam.

We ignore that cold-blooded reality at our own peril.

Howard Dean says he’s tired of being the designated “pin cushion” in the Democratic presidential sweepstakes. That’s understandable — although understated. He’s more like a punching bag.

Such status comes, of course, with the front-runner territory. No one is queuing up to skewer Carol Moseley Braun. Dean, for example, was on last week’s cover of Time magazine, while everybody else got a group photo in the Des Moines Register.

Most of the body blows Dean has received, however, are well within the norms of campaign in-fighting. Anything he might have said in another time and in another context is fair — even if unfair — game. That’s part of the trade-off for being the leader in polls, money, organization and key endorsements. Everything he says is scrutinized for quid pro quotes.

Whether America is safer as a result of Saddam Hussein’s capture is part of the hardball, rhetorical mix. Whether Dean is anathema to party centrists is up for grabs. Whether his Vermont record — liberal on abortion and conservative on gun control, for example — can be squared with enough voters is a valid question.

But what isn’t relevant is what made all the headlines recently in Iowa, when Dean was challenged on race by the irreverent Al Sharpton. The latter rebuked Dean for his all-white cabinets while governor of Vermont.

To note that Vermont had Caucasian cabinets during the Dean years is meaningless, except as a reminder that Sharpton earned his way into the national consciousness as a professional race opportunist. The black population of Vermont is virtually nil.

It would make as much sense to criticize Sharpton for not having had a more diversified entourage for James Brown, when he was “The Godfather of Soul’s” road manager.

But let’s hear it for Moseley-Braun, the other black candidate, for putting the proper spin on Sharpton’s racial cheap shot. “You can always blow up a racial debate and make people mad at each other,” she told Sharpton. “It’s time for us to talk about what you want to do to bring people together.”

Don’t be surprised, however, if Moseley-Braun has more such opportunities as the campaign heads into more racially diverse states, such as South Carolina.