blair.jpg

Yes, Mr. Blair, look down–it is difficult to look people in the eye when your dignity and courage have moved to the gutter.

But we shouldn’t be surprised, should we? This is a world, after all, that proves time and time again that they think nothing is worth fighting for. Take France for example. Well, just take France. Here’s Jack’s response to Israel having had enough:

US, major allies differ in response to Israeli attack

French President Jacques Chirac questioned whether Israel was seeking Lebanon’s destruction. “One may well ask if there isn’t today a kind of wish to destroy Lebanon — its infrastructure, its roads, its communications, its energy, its airport. And for what?

“I find honestly — as all Europeans do — that the current reactions are totally disproportionate,” he said in a live television interview on France’s national Bastille Day.

Not surprising from a nation which has proven its preference to do nothing in the face of evil. Hitler. Saddam. Vichy. We’re impressed.

And this from Spain, the new standard-bearer of How to Surrender to Terrorists As Quickly As Possible When They Bomb You:

“In my view, Israel is making a mistake,” said Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. “It will only lead to an escalation of the violence.”

This comment is especially important as it furthers the ‘moral equivalency’ argument pushed by leftists around the world. By referring to an “escalation of the violence” he’s saying that Israel’s defense response to being attacked and their search for kidnapped soldiers is the ‘moral equivalent’ to the terrorist attacks which caused the need for Israel to respond in the first place. To him, the two are morally the same. This is rank nihilistic moral relativism and explains in great part why terrorists around the world still believe the terror tactic will work–because it has against countries like Spain, which drown in their own indistinct and cowardly muck.

But it doesn’t stop there. Consider this absolutely obscene moral relativism spewing from the mouth of Britain’s Tony Blair:

British Prime Minister Tony Blair called for restraint on all sides but kept closer to the US line.

“I totally understand the desire and the need for Israel to defend itself properly and I also understand the plight of Lebanon and the Lebanese government, not to say the many Palestinians that are suffering as well,” Blair said in London.

That’s just lovely. Yes, let’s mention the “plight” of the Lebanese, who voted Hezbollah terrorists into their parliament. And let’s discuss so-called “Palestinian suffering.” They, too, should have thought about that pesky ‘suffering’ potential before they elected terrorists to head their government. That act is called Bringing on the Suffering Yourself. And perhaps Mr. Blair hasn’t seen this recent poll, which explains what exactly those so-called suffering Palestinians think of terrorism, the kidnapping of soldiers and the actions of their terrorist leaders.

I can hear the world now– “Jews die every day, and have been killed for thousands of years, so what’s the big deal anyway? Israel goes on a rampage, ‘And for what?’ A few Jewish soldiers? Bah!”

In a world that looked away when 6 million were murdered, I’m sure it is inexplicable to them that anyone would care about two or three missing Jews. Which is exactly why Israel deserves to exist, should exist, and needs to exist. The world’s reaction to Israel’s defense response is also proof that she needs and deserves unmitigated support– Because Jew-hatred is alive and well, and the rest of the world is as depraved as it was in the last century.

And then there is the Vatican.

It’s funny how the Vatican shoots out of the gate with a sweeping condemnation of Israel’s attack on Lebanon in defense of itself, and yet it said nothing after Islamist terrorist group Hamas murdered Israeli soldiers and kidnapped Shalit.

Vatican condemns Israel for attacks on Lebanon

Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Angelo Sodano said Pope Benedict and his aides were very worried that the developments in the Middle East risked degenerating into “a conflict with international repercussions.”

“In particular, the Holy See deplores right now the attack on Lebanon, a free and sovereign nation, and assures its closeness to these people who already have suffered so much to defend their independence,” he told Vatican Radio.

This is especially interesting. Israel has been at war with terrorists for decades, but the world has managed to make it just Israel’s problem, or at least we thought so. The Vatican now seems more worried that the Islamist cancer Jews have been fighting forever now might overflow into the international arena. Newsflash for the Vatican–It already has and it’s called worldwide Islamist terrorism.

And last time I checked, Your Holiness, Israel was the ‘free and sovereign nation’ that was invaded by that other ‘free and sovereign nation’ which then murdered some of its soldiers and took two others hostage. Why is your statement of concern not based in that unprovoked attack on a people who have also ‘suffered so much to defend their independence’?

Oh yeah, I forgot, they’re Jews. At this stage, with the situation being so ridiculously obvious, what else is a reasonable person to think?

No longer does the world dare look away because it’s “only” Jews being attacked. No longer can they care only when it might hurt “us.” We can assess the condition of humanity based on how humanity treats the Jewish community.

Right now, ranging from Europe to the Vatican, humanity should be ashamed of itself.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
16 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. Paper_Tiger says:

    Well … Benedict XVI was a member of the Hitler Youth and served in both the Air Auxillary and Wehrmacht. To be fair he was unenthusiastic in his service but he still served.

  2. MoverMike says:

    Let Israel settle the issue without yanking on their chain.
    What would Tony Soprano do?

    That only leaves one option. CRUSH the opposition in the most brutal manner possible. This is war! They have an option of seeing the blood of their nation slowly seep into the battlefield over a period of years or they can wipe out all thoughts in the enemy’s mind that they can compete on the battlefield.

  3. Talkin Horse says:

    The key problem with the “disproportionate response” argument is that the attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah are not isolated incidents but part of a huge pattern of sniping and bombing and killing. These are not accidents or rogue elements at work, as the European position implies. The Arab militants are soldiers in a larger and ongoing campaign to murder Israelis, and this campaign is run by the local governments, supported by nearby terrorist states. The demand that Israel respond “proportionately” to each outrage is too ludicrous for words. It would be like suggesting the proper US response to Pearl Harbor would have been a resolution to sink 10 Japanese warships and call it a day.

    It’s very easy for us to sit at home and ask the Jews to play the role of target in a shooting gallery. I can see why it’s politically expedient for outsiders to prefer the Israelis take some more damage. Better them than us, the theory goes. A reaction on the part of Israel may set in motion a chain of events that will disrupt the flow of oil. That would be a big problem at home. So I understand where the Europeans are coming from, and I even have some sympathy. They’re scared, and understandably so. But I wish they wouldn’t express their selfish and cowardly position in terms of moral superiority. There is nothing noble about what they do, and in fact it’s simply craven and disgusting. Let’s be clear on that, and then go on to deal with the mess as best we can.

  4. Keep going Tammy, great post. When can we start to get you broadcast on a radio station in the UK. We need you here.

    Brian of London

  5. craig says:

    Tammy,
    You have done an amazing job of reading my mind. Only you’ve articulated it better. Thank you.

    The Vatican’s response is particularly onerous. If not downright reprehensible.

  6. The Israel-Hezbollah War Part Three

    This is a developing post; scroll down for more stories July 14, 2006 News Breaks (blogs and opinion below) 14:04 PDT Iraqis stand with Hezbollah: “Thousands of Iraqis demonstrated in Baghdad on Friday praising the leader of Lebanon’s Hezbollah…

  7. spectre765 says:

    A fine post. There must be something deep in the human psyche that compels many people to develop a passionate hatred towards something, usually some other group or race. For centuries, it has been the Jews. I don’t know why. When I look at the Middle East, the only victims I see are Jews. What are all of these people looking at? What do they see that I don’t?

  8. SteveOk says:

    You are being too hard on Tony Blair. He is America’s greatest ally. Ok, so he used the “r” word (restraint). Restraint is a good thing. Everybody should have some of it. What’s wrong with calling for restraint. Al-Qaida and Iran instigated this current situation because they want all out war in the Middle East. They want a complete showdown, especially while we are tied down in Iraq and N. Korea is giving us fits. We need restraint now in a big way. How many fronts can we fight at one time? Germany found out the answer to that question during WWII.

  9. Akatsukami says:

    Ah, Steve, that is why Iran and their puppet Hezbullah should show restraint. The Coalition has been fighting a restrained war in Iraq. If pushed to the wall by Islamic fundamntalism, they might — just might — have to fight an unrestrained one.

    And what would that look like? The living memories are, alas, dying of old age by the thousands every day, but those who can read history can still offer a second-hand view…

    It is where every city that does not look like Hiroshima looks like Dresden. THAT is unrestrained warfare, war to the knife and, after the knives break, with boots and fists and teeth, WAR.

  10. RagingBullmoose says:

    All of these reactions are both predictable and equally lamentable.

    Europe is bereft of both spine and the realization that this isn’t the flash point which pushes the whole world into war. World War 3 is already upon us all, and Europe needs to wake up to this reality before they wake up to a city demolished by a couple of Islamist fanatics with a suitcase bomb.

    Russia, with it’s history of murdering Jews throughout it’s existance almost as if it were sport, will sell weapons of just about any kind to anybody because at this point, it’s the ONLY market they have any success in. No real change since the Soviet era, I suppose.

    And lastly, The Vatican. The Papacy has a less than stellar track record when it comes to sticking up for Jews…come to think of it, it has NO track record of sticking up for Jews. DOES have a nasty niche in history for either sanctioning or ignoring attacks on Jews, most notoriously in it’s silent complacency during the Holocaust.

    In regards to restraint, I will just say this: The reason there was no armistace in Korea, the reason we lost in Vietnam, and the reason we had to go back into Iraq 12 years after the first Gulf War and the reason progress in the present conflict in Iraq is moving so slowly is BECAUSE of restraint. If we fought these wars like we fought World War 2, they’d have been won and the world would probably be a better and safer place for it.

    Last I checked, in World War 2 The U.S. was victorious because, unlike our enemies, WE were more than capable of fighting a multi-front war.

    WE had natural resouces, manpower, agricultural and industrial bases that Germany and Japan simply didn’t have, and due to geographical constraints, could never attain without conquest.

    It was specifically because of these constraints, that Germany and Japan invaded their neighbors. Hitler laid out the concept of the German “race’s” need to aquire “living space” quite clearly in “Mein Kamph”: They needed more land for more agricultural production, mineral resources, etc…at the expense of the Slavs. The Japanese sought to destroy the U.S. Pacific Fleet on December 7, 1941, to eliminate the final obstical to it’s ultimate objective in the Pacific: The oil rich Dutch East Indies, crucial to fuel it’s ecconomy and it’s wars in China and south east Asia.

    When we went into World War 2, it was not with restraint. It was to win, to destroy the forces and mindset that drove our enemies. Back then, it was understood by one and all that failure to do so and failure to achieve victory would lead to only one end: our very destruction as a nation.

    Time for a wake up call for many amongst us, citizens and government alike.

    We can fight this war to win, without restraint, or we can slowly bleed to death, patting ourselves on the backs all the way to the ash heap of histroy for our ability to show restraint.

  11. Does Clinton ‘redeploy’ to Israel, soon?

    Do you think the situation in the Middle East will come to this?
    The Israelis know that if the Iraqi or the Iranian army came across the Jordan River, I would personally grab a rifle, get in a ditch, and fight and die.”
    – Former US President Bi…

  12. Europe’s justification for terror

    What the U.N. Human Rights Commission did on April 15, 2002 according to the National Post (my emphasis): Six European Union countries yesterday endorsed a United Nations document that condones violence as a way to achieve Palestinian statehood

  13. SteveOk says:

    I disagree with your analysis of WWII. FDR showed a lot of restraint during the war especially when it came to the invasion of Europe. He waited until 060644 even though he was under tremendous pressure to launch an invasion earlier. He knew we weren’t ready until then especially while fighting Japan in the Pacific. The invasion at that late date was only successful because of the grace of God, it could have been repelled if Hitler wasn’t sleeping while Rome burned. We choose the date, we choose the beach, and we choose the time, the enemy didn’t.

  14. ahwatukeejohn says:

    How did we drag the Vatican into this. And the fact that the pope (a German citizen during the war) was in the Hitler youth (a place many were sent to) and the Army. St. Paul began his journey into christanity sending christians to their death for their faith. Let us remember the great opertunity we all are given for redemtion.
    As far as the Vatican and their foreign policy advice, the pope is believed (by Catholics) infalable in matters of faith and morals. The Vatican should limit their focus to those areas and leave to Cezar what is Cezar’s.

  15. Mike H. says:

    I’m going to rip all of you apart on the Holy See thing, are you ready?

    Actually the person that made the statement (while the Pope was not at the Vatican, but on vacation) evidently is, on the way out, not speaking for the Pope, and in a bit of hot water. If I can remember the place that I saw it I’ll bring back a link. See you in a bit.

  16. Mike H. says:

    Isn’t history a wonderful thing? Through the magic of the history menu here is The Pope Thingy. It has a lot of Vatican politics.

You must be logged in to post a comment.