First of all let me say categorically that I do not ascribe to the pop culture snow job called ‘diversity’. Not only do I think the word is a contrived bunch of manure intended to cover only the rights of blacks and gays, but frankly the notion that I have to respect people of all backgrounds, races, religions, etc. simply because of who they are is outright nonsense.

Which brings me to America’s seemingly favorite topic these days: Immigration. Well, first of all immigrants are people who go through the process of learning American history, the English language, our system of government, etc. Immigrants are not people who get a wild hair up their ass one day while sitting in their living room watching Spanish novellas and decide how great it would be to go to the United States. That’s not how it works, and frankly it doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.

Now that I’ve settled that score, it is time to examine what is driving people from latino cultures here in the first place. Their family structure is based upon the man of the family acting as some kind of godfather figure who sits around and dictates to the women what they need to do for them. It is basically in my humble opinion islamofascism-lite, i.e., it is family-oriented fascism with a twist of democracy. Women have rights to do some things like cooking, cleaning, having children, caring for children, working, shopping, etc. Men have the right to sit and be the dictator, albeit benevolent.

The fact that these people think they can fit in with what America is today in terms of women’s roles in society is preposterous. Mind you, I am not speaking about racial diversity. I am limiting my rant about this topic to the role of women in modern American society, something Hillary Clinton might have wanted to clue herself into while her husband was having a roll in the hay with his various and sundry harem members. In fact, I will bet you that if a survey were taken most latino women would identify themselves with Hillary Clinton, but of course the polls and the media won’t touch that one with a ten foot pole because it doesn’t respect diversity. Gag.

Latino culture is its own worst enemy. It isn’t that Americans don’t want them here, it’s just that American culture is inconsistent with latino culture. And the mere fact that the sheer numbers of them is so great is something that is cause for alarm in America, because I do not know one single solitary liberated American woman who wants to opt to go back into the kitchen and wear the proverbial Father Knows Best apron.

For all the big bold talk about diversity in this presidential campaign season, nobody wants to touch the issue of the culture war because in reality the culture war is a war against turning back the clock on women’s rights. Perhaps this is why so many women are jumping ship from their traditional Democratic Party leanings, and a President Hillary scares the bejesus out of them. Heaven help us if Obama is elected because frankly no one is convinced that the diversity agenda within the far left of the Democratic Party will not prohibit the systematic dismantling of American culture. After all, if you happened to catch the Democratic presidential contenders on PBS on Thursday the 28th of June 2007 at Howard University, basically you would have seen race hustlers like Reverend Al ‘Catfish’ Sharpton in the audience.

While the candidates, black and white, kissed up to the audience and used the old familiar buzz words like diversity, civil rights, federal programs, universal health care, etc., the audience lapped it up. Nobody mentioned that the same audience are the ones who have an agenda to dismantle free speech by censoring what people can and cannot say. They want control of the language, the media, the government and you and me. But do they really have a plan for America? Do they really care if our American way of life is being threatened by their myopic point of view? No. It’s all about them and their agenda for them, and the far left of the Democratic Party caters to these kinds of people in a very odd way that only vanilla white people can pull off in front of an all black audience.

American politicians are so busy catering to the media and the people who want to control what we say and how we think that the real danger in this coming election is the fact that America risks becoming an official third world nation. In backwater countries, people are told what to think by the government-controlled media, whereas in democracies people are free to think for themselves. To hell with diversity and media mind control and the pundits. To hell with fascist, lock-step group-think mentalities. To hell with machismo that keeps women down. And to hell with the race hustlers and egocentric armchair politicos whose agenda sounds really good but in fact it is only a cover for letting this country go straight to hell while they force their agenda down everyone else’s throats.

-TDN

Speaking of leaving a carbon footprint, let’s examine the facts. Six million Jews and millions of others were herded into camps and summarily put to death. Their bodies were cremated, and smoke billowed out of smokestacks for seemingly endless days and nights. April 20th was an especially auspicious occasion for killing, since it was Hitler’s birthday. Did Hitler or his henchmen ask what kind of carbon footprint their victims were leaving? Hell no. Did Chemical Ali ask what the Kurds’ carbon footprint will be when they were gassed to death and left to rot in the Anfal campaign of terror? Hell no.

Suddenly, the media wants us to consider our carbon footprint. What we inhale, burn and exhale every day of our lives has become the fancy of scientists in an almost exacting Nazi-esque methodology. We have to somehow consider ourselves as green and become one with the planet even before our imminent deaths. We are encouraged to think of ourselves as part of the earth even before we meet our maker. In short, the liberal media would have us dead and buried even before we breath our last breath because after all, we are to blame for all the earth’s woes.

Bullshit. Human life when lived properly is not a detriment to the earth but rather a compliment to the earth’s great balance. The problem with the media is that they want us to think that the very fact that humans exist in the numbers that they do in modern times is the essence of what is wrong with earth. If the media as it exists today existed in the 1940’s Hitler would have found a dear friend in them.

I find it hard to believe all the global warming bullshit. I am sick and tired of hearing that were it not for the fact that people existed on this planet the planet itself would be better off. Dictators have tried this many times throughout history and failed miserably. Sometimes I wonder if the media is in its own unbiased, Consitutionally-protected world its own worst enemy.

Screw dictatorships and tyrannical regimes. Fuck communism, fascism, islamic sharia law, and all forms of human egoism. There is but one force on earth that deserves recognition despite the numbers of people who adhere to any particular philosophy, and that is the force of reason, law, and justice. To prove how left of left the media is just take a look at gay politicians who support the death penalty. Wait a minute, there’s got to be something wrong with this picture. You never hear about those people. All you hear about are the stereotypical, easily-formatted individuals who can be easily digested by the masses and fit with the media’s outrageously bizarre and narrow viewpoint that they want you to fall into. For all of those who never use cocaine and who don’t use the carpool lane after 4pm but who blame others for everything under the sun like the preachers who get caught in a motel room with a hooker I say, fuck off. The child abusers can all go to hell, too. People who care and share and love and do what is right are not part of the right wing conservative nonsense or even the left wing liberal goostepping my-way-or-the-highway crowd. To hell with people who say one thing and do another.

America is the best country on the fact of the earth only if the people who enjoy its freedom understand the responsibility of history that freedom imposes upon them. My only hope is that people of the world educate themselves about what freedom means so that if they happen to set foot in this great country they will make a footprint on our history above and beyond any tiny particle of carbon they will ever emit from their nostrils.

See the light and you won’t feel the heat.

-TDN

Weir delivers bias, bigotry in anti-Israel talk
Journalist’s biased claims go unchallenged
Excerpted from The Northwestern Chronicle
by Richard Goldberg
Meet Alison Weir, self-proclaimed journalist, savior of the Palestinian people and anti-Semite extraordinaire. Around 100 people had the unfortunate pleasure of hearing Weir speak on the night of Nov. 11 in Harris Hall. But this was no ordinary lecture.

Weir brought shame to the journalist’s trade that night as she regaled her sorrowful journey through “Palestine,” witnessing the racist treatment and brutal occupation of the innocent, loving Palestinians by the Israel Defense Force. This high-tech presentation was accompanied by a slide show of photos Weir collected during her one month in Gaza and the West Bank-pictures of children on respirators, broken homes and caring families.

The speech went further than just calling for an end of Israeli occupation or cutting off foreign aid to Israel. (For the record, she did suggest both.) Weir began with a brief overview of Zionism from the late 19th century until the creation of the State of Israel. Her presentation was filled with lie after lie, distortion after distortion, and propaganda after propaganda.

Zionism, Weir claimed, was a movement founded by Jews who wanted to live in Palestine and forcibly remove the inhabitants of the land. False!

The true origin begins with a French journalist named Theodore Herzl. He had been covering the Dreyfus Affair, in which Alfred Dreyfus, a French military officer, was framed, tried and convicted of treason because he was Jewish. Herzl understood that anti-Semitism in the world would never dissipate and the Jewish people needed a homeland-a refuge for any Jew fleeing persecution and oppression.

Also, the Jewish National Fund provided the money which legally bought every piece of swamp land that the “evil Zionists” developed in Palestine.

What Weir refers to as the Arab Uprising of 1929, most legitimate historians call the Hebron Massacre of 1929. On a Sabbath day in August, 67 Jewish seminary students and families were murdered in cold blood while they learned their holy texts and recited the Sabbath prayers. If that is an uprising that “caused deaths on both sides,” than the Jews and the Nazis worked together during the Holocaust in some grand conspiracy.

According to Weir, during World War II there was a secret “Zionist-Nazi” co-conspiracy to relocate the Jews of Europe to Palestine in an effort to flood the country with an enormous Jewish population. Words cannot describe such a dehumanizing, bigoted and ignorant statement.

The Jewish Agency tried its best to evacuate as many Jews from Nazi Germany in order to save them from Gestapo beatings, ghetto liquidations, death camp gas chambers and SS firing squads. Between 1933 and 1939, when Adolph Hitler closed the borders, 350,000 Jews were evacuated to the United States and Palestine. To even suggest such a conspiracy shows a complete disregard for the millions slaughtered by Hitler, as well as a clear anti-Semitic agenda. Perhaps it would interest Ms. Weir to know that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was very close friends with Hitler and visited him several times throughout the war.

Weir suddenly decided to cut short the history lesson “for lack of time” and skip ahead to the current Israeli barbarism in “Palestine.” However, she neglected many important facts because of this shortcut. The audience deserved to learn that in 1947 the United Nations ratified a partition plan for Palestine-establishing a Jewish state, an Arab state and Jerusalem as an international city. She also forgot to mention that Israel accepted that plan, the Arabs did not and five Arab countries attacked Israel moments after David Ben-Gurion (who of course was one of the conspiracy masterminds, according to Weir) declared independence.

The other issue that Weir entirely skirted was how the Palestinian refugee problem came about. Could it be that when anti-Israel Arabs refused to live as citizens under an Israeli flag and returned to their respective homelands, the Arab countries barred them from entering and instead forced them into refugee camps?

Does she realize that the Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank existed from 1949-1967, before Israel won the territory in battle during the Six Day War?

It’s fascinating to note that the living conditions in East Jerusalem actually improved with Israeli rule-when the IDF entered the city in 1967 they found sewage in the streets and disease everywhere.

Apparently these facts do not enter into the non-biased journalism that Weir practices.

But even if none of that seems false or misleading, what Weir said next cannot be rationalized or excused. She claimed that in the Apartheid State of Israel today there are military checkpoints that sometimes deny Palestinians permission to pass. According to her “personal accounts,” the Israeli soldiers have flashlights at night that point at you and motion you in different directions-these she referred to as “death points” because some Palestinians don’t receive the right flashlight motion and are killed. The parallel that she is drawing is evil, blatantly false and a major affront to anyone who was victimized by the Holocaust.

In the death camps, the Nazi guards would motion people into two lines, one line of women, children and the elderly and the other line of strong, working-age men. The first line would go through one gate leading to the concentration camp and the other line would go through a second gate leading to extermination. IDF checkpoints that ensure that no terrorist can pass from the West Bank to Israel to mass-murder innocent civilians is in no way analogous to the atrocities of the Holocaust. Only a sick, perverted mind would make such a connection. A mind like Weir’s.

It’s not journalism to spend a month with Palestinian “victims” of Israeli brutality and not spend a month with the parents of the teenagers who were blown up at a Tel Aviv disco. It’s not journalism to attend the funeral of a member of Islamic Jihad (of which she showed pictures and then referred to the black masks worn by the terrorists as ritualistic) and not grieve with the children of a 39-year-old mother ambushed and killed on a highway when coming home from work.

Medill sent out an e-mail on its listserv to all students encouraging them to attend the event because Weir was labeled a journalist. For such a highly esteemed school of journalism to encourage students to attend the lecture of a poor journalist and high-quality bigot calls into question the values and principles it instills in its students.

What’s the matter with the Northwestern community these days? Pat Buchanan gets a candlelight vigil protest and a rabid anti-Semite like Alison Weir gets free publicity from the school.

http://www.chron.org/tools/viewart.php?artid=225

-TDN

Let me tell you who the terrorists really are, or do I even have to remind you. Even though the media is reporting Palestinians killing Palestinians and Iraqis killing Iraqis, the media just can’t help itself and is looking for someone to blame. Oh yeah, sure, it was inevitable this would happen when things don’t go the way they were planned. Israel takes the hit.

Sites have sprung up like ifamericansknew.org, which depicts a conspiracy of Israeli spies that have infiltrated the U.S. for the purpose of something or other that I don’t think even the people at the site know much about. I would like to tell these knuckleheads firsthand though what Israel is up to: NOTHING.

Sure, wars are ugly and shit happens. There are winners and there are losers. People die, people get hurt, people scream and yell and jump for joy, and all kinds of emotions boil over and people say the damndest things. In the case of what Israel stands for, there really shouldn’t be any misconception, because I for one can tell you categorically that Israel is not a terrorist nation. Israelis don’t go wild in the streets and bomb and shoot one another. Israelis don’t fly airplanes full of civilians into buildings. Israel has laws on the books, judges in the courtrooms, police in the streets, an army with one central command, and an elected representative government that provides oversight. And mind you, Israel opted for these things voluntarily. No one came in and demanded at the point of a gun that Israelis be democratic. They did it on their own, and they did it even despite the fact that they were surrounded by monarchs, dictators, and theocracies.

Shame on Americans who think that Israelis are up to no good. I ask who on Gods green Earth would choose to have a democratic free country given all the resistance that it would cause and the wars and needless deaths it would cause? Sure, it is easy for the media to sit around and postulate about who is at fault when things are not going quite right in the war on terror. It is easy for them to do this when they have not had a gun pointed at them and had their life threatened simply because of what they stand for.

The REAL terrorists are those who are willing to kill others for what they believe in. The peacemakers are those who have to kill those who would otherwise kill you simply because of who you are. Golda Meir once said that she can forgive the Arabs for killing Israelis but she couldn’t forgive the Arabs for making the Israelis kill them.

Freedom is not free, and the ultimate price to pay is with ones life. I respect anyone who is willing to risk everything for what they believe in as long as it is for the cause of freedom, liberty, justice, democracy, and yes, the little dirty word that is undeniably something even terror organizations hold dear, captialism. How dare anyone point a finger at Israel and say that this tiny country is not a staunch supporter of all of these tenets of civilized society. Israelis and American Jews fought for the end of soviet communism, but they did not stop their support there. They absorbed the ones who wanted to get out and be free people.

My oh my, how quickly people forget how much people have sacrificed to end the march of fascism, communism, and now terrorism. The fight for freedom is something that is a daily struggle that the media obviously should take into consideration before handing the spotlight over to people who are just looking for someone to blame when the war doesn’t suit their particular short-term needs and expectations.

-TDN

Let’s face it. None of the candidates, Democrat or Republican, make a damn bit of sense. The only person I can think of who has basically told the radical Islamists that we mean business is George W. Bush. In fact, the only person who has gone after them without flinching is George W. Bush. Bush has relentlessly gone after them and killed them and not lost one night’s sleep. This is the kind of person who can keep the United States free of this element that has basically taken over Europe and turned it into an offshoot of the muslim world.

Sure, Ron Paul sounds great when it comes to the fact that the government is out of control and is spending too much money on programs for people who ought not to be dependent upon government at all. And Joe Biden is probably the toughest sounding Democrat of the whole lot of them. But neither of these two have said the one thing that we need to hear: I will kill radical Islamist fascists and keep America and the world free of this fascist ideology. Period.

Even though Bush doesn’t say these words per se, at least his actions are consistent with this agenda. Every time the Sunni insurgent bastards and the Iranian loving Shiite pricks go on their ritual blood letting with their death squads and bombers, Bush answers them with force. Force is the only thing these people understand, and this is where none of the candidates “get it”.

Oh, I know what everyone is thinking. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. That sounds great, but there are just a couple of problems with this. First, the Arab world may have countries with borders, but the people are tribal. The Sunni Arabs of Saudi Arabia who bombed us on 9-11 and the Sunnis of Iraq are still Sunnis. The Shiites of Iraq and the Shiites of Iran are still Shiites. The war that is being fought is a war against an ideology in many ways like the Second World War was a war against a radical fasicst ideology that spread all over the world, not just in Germany.

Second, the problem with George W. Bush is that he won’t say the obvious, which is that this is a world war against a religion that has morphed itself into a political movement. Perhaps it is because he does not want to risk being called a racist, but frankly Islamic fascism is a racist ideology that is rooted in hatred and contempt for practically every freedom that America stands for. (I will forgo the list, because if you don’t know what American freedom is about then lord help you.)

The problem with this election is that none of the current candidates get the point of this war and will tell the truth about it. The other problem with this election is that George W. Bush needs to be allowed to say exactly what this war is about rather than worrying what the reaction might be if he called Islamic fascists what they really are. And frankly, the media needs to become more appreciative of the freedom they have in this country and start telling the truth about what this war really is about. Otherwise, if you approve of Iran wanting to blow up Israel, and if you approve of women being required to cover their head and face, and if you approve of gays being executed in the public square, and if you approve of having your hands chopped off if you are caught stealing, and if you approve of being jailed for being a “non-believer”, then go ahead and keep ragging on George W. Bush. Believe me, when you see how your freedom begins to be diminished and finally taken away you will lament the fact that you didn’t give the man a third term in office.

-TDN

The media is so busy pushing their agenda of diversity and turn the other cheek that they won’t tell you that there are a large number of muslim terrorists sitting right here in the good ole U.S. of A. At last count some 299,000 of them in a recent survey believed that suicide bombing is a darned good thing. Hold on now, because what the survey did not say is how many of the rest of American muslims believe that bombing is okay regardless of whether they die doing it.

And then there is the Kennedy airport plot. Lo and behold the statistics are proving correct. Why must we fight a jihad in America, when all we have to do is send these people back home? Or at least we can do to them what we did to the Japanese, which was to put them in camps. The statistics have told us that the American muslims believe it is okay to use violence in America, and they have proven it twice-, once at Kennedy airport and once before in New Jersey at Fort Dix. What does it take to get the point across that we have a jihad going on right here in our own country?

Keep in mind that the name of this site is The Daily Nigger, but the point of it is to say that when language is being censored and certain words cannot be said you are dire straits when it comes to your freedom. Nigger is a word just like muslim is a word. Unfortunately, there are a lot of white people who are niggardly, just as there are a lot of people who are not muslims who are terrorists. Nevertheless, people learn from niggardly behavior just as people learn from muslim terrorists. Just look at the name of “Ismail” Ax, the Korean with a muslim name who went on a killing rampage at Virginia Tech.

Islamic fundamentalism has to be pulled up by the roots, and the only way you are going to do this is by getting rid of the problem from the bottom up. The people who preach terror, the people who believe in terror, just like the people who follow the precepts of terror must be gathered up and sent packing where they practice their particular brand of psychosis among their own kind. Maybe Iraq would be a good place for them. They can bomb and be bombed all the live long day for all I care.

But of course, the media won’t tell us this because it might hurt these people’s feelings….

-TDN

By Fareed Zakaria
Newsweek
March 14 issue - Events in the Middle East over the past few weeks have confirmed the theories of that great scholar of the region, Thomas (Tip) O’Neill. The late speaker of the House’s most memorable aphorism was “All politics is local.” It’s true even of the politics of rage. As long-repressed societies in the Middle East open up, we are discovering that their core concerns are not global but local. Most ordinary Arabs, it turns out, are not consumed by grand theories about the clash between Islam and the West, or the imperialism of American culture, or even the Palestinian cause. When you let the Lebanese speak, they want to talk about Syria’s occupation of their country. When Iraqis got a chance to congregate, they voted for a government, not an insurgency. When a majority of Palestinians were heard from, they endorsed not holy terror to throw Israel into the sea, but practical diplomacy to get a state.

Tomorrow, were the Egyptian Street to voice its views—I mean the real Egyptian Street, not President Mubarak’s state-controlled media—we would probably discover that its deepest discontent is directed not at the president of the United States, but at the president of Egypt. Perhaps Arabs and Muslims are not some strange species after all. It is their rulers who are strange.

The other noted political scientist who has been vindicated in recent weeks is George W. Bush. Across New York, Los Angeles and Chicago—and probably Europe and Asia as well—people are nervously asking themselves a question: “Could he possibly have been right?” The short answer is yes. Whether or not Bush deserves credit for everything that is happening in the Middle East, he has been fundamentally right about some big things.

Bush never accepted the view that Islamic terrorism had its roots in religion or culture or the Arab-Israeli conflict. Instead he veered toward the analysis that the region was breeding terror because it had developed deep dysfunctions caused by decades of repression and an almost total lack of political, economic and social modernization. The Arab world, in this analysis, was almost unique in that over the past three decades it had become increasingly unfree, even as the rest of the world was opening up. His solution, therefore, was to push for reform in these lands.

The theory did not originate with Bush’s administration. Others had made this case: scholars like Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, Thomas Friedman of The New York Times, the Arab intellectuals who wrote the United Nations’ now famous “Arab Human Development Report” and even this writer. (Three weeks after 9/11 I wrote an essay titled “Why Do They Hate Us?” that made this case.) These ideas were gaining some ground in the Arab world, especially after 9/11. But Bush’s adoption of them was absolutely crucial because he had the power to pressure the region’s regimes. Efforts to change the dynamics of the Middle East had always collapsed in the past as its wily rulers would delay, obstruct and obfuscate. Bush has pushed them with persistence and, increasingly, he is trying to build a broader international effort. The results might surprise.

Repressive regimes are often extremely fragile. Syria is the perfect example. Bashar al-Assad’s rule rests on the narrowest base of fear and coercion. His ruling clique, mostly coming from the country’s small Alawite sect, is well aware that it lacks support in their society. That’s why it is so easily rattled and why the events in Lebanon could snowball into something much, much bigger. The other Arab regimes are less fragile. Mubarak, while unpopular, is not despised. The Saudi royal family is more stable than many think. It uses money, marriage and connections—and yet more money—to create an elaborate patronage network that sustains it. But everywhere, there is pressure to change.

The Middle East would do well with incremental but persistent reform, as is taking place in Jordan, Qatar and Dubai. But in too many places, small, gradual reforms have been a smoke screen for doing nothing. Economic reforms are the most crucial because they modernize the whole society. But they are also the most difficult because they threaten the power and wealth of the oligarchies that run these countries. So far there has been more talk than action on this front.

People have often wished that the president had traveled more over the years. But Bush’s capacity to imagine a different Middle East may actually be related to his relative ignorance of the region. Had he traveled to the Middle East and seen its many dysfunctions, he might have been disheartened. Freed from looking at the day-to-day realities, Bush maintained a vision of what the region could look like.

But therein lies the danger. It is easier to imagine liberal democracy than to achieve it. Ronald Reagan imagined a Soviet Union that was politically and economically free. Twenty years later, except for the Baltic states, not one country of the former Soviet Union has achieved that. There have been more than 50 elections in Africa in the past 15 years—some as moving as those in Iraq, had we bothered to notice them—but only a few of those countries can be described as free. Haiti has had elections and American intervention, and still has foreign troops stationed there. Yet only a few of these elections have led to successful and free societies.

Every country, culture and people yearns for freedom. But building real, sustainable democracy with rights and protections is complex. In Lebanon, for example, the absence of Syria will not mean the presence of a stable democracy. It was the collapse of Lebanon’s internal political order that triggered the Syrian intervention in 1976. That problem will have to be solved, even after Syrian forces go home. In Iraq, the end of the old order has produced growing tendencies toward separatism and intolerance. Building democracy takes patience, deep and specific knowledge and, most important, the ability to partner with the locals.

If Bush is to be credited for the benefits of his policies, he must also take responsibility for their costs. Over the past three years, his administration has racked up enormous costs, many of which could easily have been lowered or avoided altogether. The pointless snubbing of allies, the brusque manner in which it went to war in Iraq, the undermanned occupation and the stubborn insistence (until last summer) on pursuing policies that were fueling both an insurgency and anti-Americanism in Iraq—all have taken their toll in thousands of American and Iraqi lives and almost $300 billion.

Perhaps an even more lasting cost is the broad and deep shifts in public opinion against America around the world. Look at countries as disparate as Britain, Poland, Turkey and Japan, all allies of the United States. In every one of them, public views have changed significantly in the past few years, and being pro-American is now a political liability. Tony Blair, once the most popular British leader in decades, has fallen far in public esteem, largely because of his unflinching support for the Bush administration.

For most countries, the debate over Iraq was not really about Iraq. It was about how America would wield its enormous global power. And to many countries, it seemed that the Bush administration was doing it irresponsibly. On this front, the signs from Bush’s second term are heartening. In the Middle East, however, everything will depend on success on the ground. If, five years from now, Iraq, Afghanistan and perhaps an independent Palestine and a democratic Lebanon are thriving countries with modern political and economic systems, America will be honored and respected—and the talk of anti-American terror will have dissipated considerably. If, on the other hand, these countries are chaotic and troubled—more like Central Asia than Central Europe—people there will blame America. Remember, all politics is local.

-TDN