They'll have to wait for us to liberate them, because we're busy cleaning up the mess they made in Iraq. They could always try capitulation to stall for time.

Oh, yeah, we should learn from this what the consequences are of an unchecked immagration policy. Can anyone spell "national security"?

This is going to get worse, and the strategy of information and democracy we are using to wage war will LOSE us this war. Those are secular solutions to a religious issue.

Islamification isn't just happening in France, or Britain, or some lone country. It's happening ALL OVER the world. I wrote an article about how serious this is and how it is NOT being reported on:

READ HERE.

This is a religious war and we in America are trying to treat it as just a few radical Islamic hotheads. We're purposely being blind to what is happening and this will lose us the war.

Consider:

Our government is busy supporting CAIR and the establishment of Islamic religious centers here in America (3,000 so far and rising). Our government continues to send aid to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the two primary funders and suppliers of Islamic murder. Our government pontificates that Islam is peaceful, despite what history is trying to teach us. Our government is wringing their hands about being "inclusive" of Islam and not "offending" them. Our government is worried about muslim murderers civil rights. Our government is trying to be "sensitive" to Islamic "needs." Our government refuses to acknowledge that we are in a war against a RELIGION.

With our own government against us, we cannot win.

We did not beat Britain by being "sensitive" to them. The North and the South did not (either side) win by "spreading information." We did not beat the Islamic terrorists in the BARBARY Wars by being concerned for their religion. We did not beat Hitler with pontificated platitudes.

Islam has NEVER been defeated. Islam has only ever been "pushed back." Islam was not pushed back with platitudes, inclusion, sensitivity, or the spreading of democracy.

Islam was only ever pushed back when we were KILLING THEIR ASSES.

Islam is attacking us, as they have been since 640AD. This will not be won with platitudes and self-righteous imitations of politically correct news anchors in the pursuit of sounding intellectually cosmopolitan. Those things do not matter to a muslim.

Islam is a disease. You don't make friends with a disease. You don't "include" it. You don't be "sensitive" to it. You quarantine it and KILL it.

Bah, I guess html tags for links don't work here.

This is the url for the link:

http://www.williamthrash.com/#COMMENTARIES

The french are fighting an illegal and immoral war against these poor practitioners of the religion of peace. Most of te stuff they are burning doesn't even belong to muslims, so it's not really 'stuff'.

I am amazed that the French government does not even have an exit strategy. How long will they occupy this land? When will the troops finally come home to Vichy?

Lastly, I lit a fire in my fireplace last night to help ward off the cold. Is that really so different from lighting a bus, car, building, or person on fire?

I fear that history will show that our containment strategy against the political ideologies of totalitarianism and communism, usually called the Cold War, will prove to be a mere skirmish compared to the future all-out conflict against the radical ideology of Islam.

How can one reason with radical Islam's belief that the West is somehow evil and must be destroyed? How can we deal with people who continually pray for our destruction and send children and women to be suicide bombers?

Yes, I know the arguments: how can one ban a religion without creating a slippery slope for all others? How can a country fight an idea? Wouldn't enforcing order around the world be akin to holding water in one's hand; the harder you squeeze, the more water runs out? And so forth and so on.

This is the historical trap in which we find ourselves: we sense something is wrong; we fear to act to anything about it out of fear of either offending someone or receiving criticism; we live with the irony of having incredible power but lack the will to use it; and all the while, our enemies plot against us with insatiable hatred for who we are, and our enemies (if one only counts the Islamic faith) easily outnumber us by over 3 to 1.

Looking deep into the future, I see but only two possibilities for the West:

1. The West fades into decayed oblivion, hand-wringing as we go, but convinced of our own greatness until the last, while our society becomes fat and lazy with its own entitlements and largess without defending or advancing it, and while our intelligensia lull us into a sense that that tolerance of the enemy is the road to peace; or
2. The West wakes up and reacts with imperialistic zeal, striking out and subjugating our enemies and those who oppose democracy and thus buying us all a few more decades, perhaps as much as a century -- though the world will tear itself apart in eventually resisting, resenting, and overthrowing the "democratic empire." Anarchy temporarily reigns, followed by one or more opportunistic dictators rising from the chaos.

Pessimistic, you say? Perhaps.

However: study history and the great empires and give me alternatives. I see none.

I agree. I we explode in a politically incorrect way and stamp on Islamic extremism the "proper" way, we'll only buy a little time before having to do it again.

The other alternative is Islamification.

This battle will not end until either Christianity (which the West is trying to marginalize and kill) or Islam (which is the fastest growing religion in the world) is dead.

Bets are on Islam surviving.

I bought a little book in 1999 about Nostradamus, mostly because I did not know what a quatrain was, and it was in the 50 cent rack. I still don't know, but I think t means "poem 4 lines long that doesn't make sense".

To make a long story slightly less long, I never got around to reading more than the first 3 or 4 pages, because all it had in it were these 4 line poems that were nonsensical to me. In 2002, I heard someone say that Nostradamus predicted the Trade Centers falling, so I went back and found the book (copyrighted in 1997 btw). the last chapter is called "what's next?"

The guy made predictions based on these utterly meaningless poems that:

1) NYC would be destroyed by missiles from the north in 2002 (the writer thought they'd be nukes).
2) France would fall to the enemy, either in 5 years, or for 5 years. I can't remember, and lent the book to my mother 2 years ago, so can't check.
3) Italy would mostly fall to the enemy.
4) The battle would last 27 years.
5) The west would at that point utterly destroy their opponent (the writer thought nukes would again be used).
6) Oh yeah, the enemy will come from Arabia.

It's spooky that #1 was close to correct, but if #2 happens, I'm becoming a cultist ;)

When I see info like this online, I immediately assume they are predicting the past, using quatrains to explain what 'did' happen, not what 'would' happen. This guy certainly did not do that, as I owned the book before 9/11. Here's a similar view (http://boisdarc.tamu-commerce.edu/www/w/willmc/nostra.htm), supposedly written in 1993, but I have no way of verifying it. Scroll down to the bottom for the agreement part.

Take it with a grain of salt, but it is indeed intriguing.