Beginning around 2006, the Left began threatening that if Israel does not remove itself from Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, the US will abandon us. On Sunday night, former prime minister Ehud Olmert presented this argument in his keynote speech before the Geneva Initiative's annual conference.

If Israel does not withdraw from the territoires occupied after the 1967 war, its cities will remain secure and its population will not be in crisis. But Israel will have to contend with a hostile US government threatening to take unknown steps to force it to contract to within indefensible borders.

What will those US threats involve? Washington is already arming and training a Palestinian army. It is already selling the Arabs the most advanced weapons in the US arsenal. It is already providing military assistance to the Hizbullah-controlled Lebanese army. It is already permitting Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

Would Olmert and his leftist colleagues have us believe that the US military will invade Israel to force us to exit Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem?

If that is what the Left is hinting, let us assume it is right. But if the Left is right, is Israel better off preemptively dooming itself to chronic wars and strategic vulnerability by accepting indefensible borders than by refusing to do so? At least if we refuse to stick our neck in the noose, the US government will be forced to make the case for destroying Israel to the American people.

You have to hand it to Turkey's Islamist leaders. They sure know how to get their way. In the seven years since they first took power, the Islamist AKP party has successfully transformed Turkey from a staunch ally of the US and Israel and a member of NATO into a staunch ally of Iran and a member of NATO.

And that's not all. Turkey's Islamist leaders have used the Western language of democracy and freedom not only to abandon the West. They have used that language to destroy the foundations of Turkey's Western-style secular democracy and transform the governing system of NATO's sole Muslim member into a hybrid of Putinist autocracy and Iranian theocracy.

The current flurry of diplomatic activity is deeply disturbing. It isn't simply that the Obama administration has strong-armed Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu into participating in diplomatic theater with the PLO whose successful completion will leave Israel weaker and less defensible. It isn't merely that the newest "peace process" diverts our leadership's attention away from Iran and its nuclear weapons program.

The most disturbing aspect of the latest round of the diplomatic kabuki is that Israel's leaders and Israel's staunch friends in the US are enthusiastically participating in this dangerous project.

I came to the World Trade Center in early 2002 expecting to find a disaster zone, which I certainly did. But I also found an important surprise. I can't imagine that I was the only one to walk away from the WTC with these impressions and with these ideas running through my mind, but if anyone else has tread this ground, I haven't seen it, and it is far too important to let pass in silence.

Last weekend the mullahs took a big step towards becoming a nuclear power as they powered the Bushehr nuclear reactor.

Israel's response? The Foreign Ministry published a statement proclaiming the move "totally unacceptable." So why did we accept the totally unacceptable?

The answer to this question was provided in large part in an article in the National Interest by former Clinton Administration National Security Council member Bruce Riedel. Titled, "If Israel Attacks," Riedel -- who reportedly has close ties to the administration - asserts that an Israeli military strike against Iran will be a disaster for the US. In his view, US is better served by allowing Iran to become a nuclear power than by supporting an Israeli attack against Iran.

Riedel's reason for deeming an Israeli strike unacceptable is his conviction that such a strike will be met by an Iranian counter-strike against US forces and interests in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan. While there is no reason to doubt he is correct, Riedel studiously ignores the other certainty: A nuclear-armed Iran would threaten those same troops and interests far more.

Antique laws endanger America.  It's as if, in the age of the automobile, we relied on traffic laws from horse-and-buggy days.  Absent appropriate legal codes, our government turns to lawyers without laws.

Cyberassaults go on, 24/7. Security leaks haunt the Internet (and our amoral media). Terrorists kill, then sue us. In the first case, we take our beatings and slap on bandages. In the second, we huff, puff and do nothing. In the third case, an apprehended terrorist gets better medical care than an out-of-work American.

Even the civil laws and military codes we do have on the books are not enforced. If found guilty, that Army private who allegedly passed over 90,000 classified documents to WikiLeaks should get the "full Rosenberg," a shortened life and a hot exit. Instead, he'll do a few years at most -- at most -- then get a book contract. (Can't wait for the movie!)

Congress is AWOL in these undeclared wars us.  Legislators in both parties play for short-term political advantage, while our enemies act with impunity. If a cyber-Pearl Harbor -- on a far-greater scale than that savage attack -- hits our country, don't blame our military or call it an intelligence failure.

Or will Barack Obama and the Democratic party abandon Iraq prematurely, as the Democrats did South Vietnam?

Our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have done their job.  But Iraq needs energetic American diplomatic and political engagement to finish the job.

Iraqis have begged us to help them.  They've pleaded with this administration to stay in the ring and referee their pols.  But President Obama has disengaged.

One of the many great things I took from my Army career was the rule that "the maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters." But excuses are all we have in Afghanistan. Among the worst of the countless follies that make an old soldier sick is the endless excuse-making for the sloth and cowardice of the Afghan National Army and the extortion culture of the Afghan Police -- while Taliban warriors fight to the bitter end. The bottom line is that Taliban fighters are willing to die for their cause, while the Afghan soldiers we've tried to train don't even show up for formation. And the NATO-trained cops are so corrupt they've driven Afghans into the arms of the Taliban. Meanwhile, nearsighted generals and clueless politicians make excuse after excuse... while leaving our soldiers on their own on the battlefield.

Michael Moore's new docutribe Sicko is set to unleash a torrent of disinformation about the U.S. health care system that will play into the hands of those who wish to turn our entire health care industry over to government bureaucrats. However, we're firing back with a new internet movie that attacks one of the central premises of his propaganda: that 45 million Americans have no health insurance - and no access to health care. Uninsured in America is a new 9-minute film which examines the facts behind the oft-repeated cries of an "uninsured crisis".

The newspaper I read regularly carried a story on June 20th, 2007, from Cox News Service, under the byline of a Bill Hendrick, reporting on a finding at Emory University's primate center that "the local customs that define human cultures also exist in the world of chimpanzees." The story goes on to say, "That means that humans aren't the only animals with culture, said Frans de Waal...." The evidence for this is that when a couple of chimps began to use a new method for mutual cleansing, in a while the entire group adopted the method but chimps outside the group kept to the old ways. The first question is, is the report itself accurate-

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's latest moves show he now clearly understands he has no option but to decisively settle the question of who governs California: the taxpaying middle and entrepreneurial classes, or their nominal servants in state and local government-employee unions. The stakes in November are enormous for both sides. If voters reject his reform package, Mr. Schwarzenegger is weakened going into 2006, when he grapples again with the unions and the Democrat legislature over the chronic budget deficit while running for re-election. On the other hand, voter approval of Mr. Schwarzenegger's reform package entails dire consequences for California’s Axis of Evil between the Democrats and public employee unions, because Propositions 75 and 77 pose a very real threat to their suzerainty over state government.

If you bought a home 10 years ago for $100,000 and just sold it for $300,000, have you engaged in price gouging? Most people would say "no," provided there were willing buyers and sellers of both sides of the transaction merely responding to the market at the time. As a result of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, some politicians have demanded prosecution of "price gougers." In many states, like Florida, "price gouging" is illegal. The Florida statutes say, "It is illegal to charge unconscionable prices for goods or services following a declared state of emergency." Hmmm, I know what the law means when says burglary or murder are illegal, but an "unconscionable price"?

Assume you were a regular blood donor but had an accident in which you lost a considerable amount of blood. Do you think you should increase or decrease the size and frequency of your blood donations until you recover? Though most politicians are smart enough to answer, "decrease the blood donations," many seem not smart enough to understand that, when you take an economic hit, you don't want to unnecessarily add burdens to the economy. I refer to the call from some politicians to increase taxes or not extend President Bush's tax cuts to "pay" for Katrina.

This past Sunday, September 11, Palestinian mobs torched and destroyed four synagogues left behind by Israel in the evacuated Gaza strip. The Palestinian Authority (PA) police did nothing to intervene, while the PA President - Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) - justified the violence as the people “expressing their emotions.” The torching of houses of worship, just like the lootings, beatings and home burnings carried out against a Christian Arab town near Ramallah at the beginning of this month by Palestinians shouting “Allahhu Akbar” (God is Great) as the PA police stood by, bode ill for peace in the Middle East. Religious hatred inspired by Jihadi Islam is clearly no local matter. It is part of a broad conflict unfolding between radical Islam on the one hand and Christianity, Judaism, the Bahai faith, and Buddhism on the other.

News media reports from meetings organized by billionaire George Soros say he and some rich allies are now funding groups intended to counter the efforts on college campuses of conservative educational organizations such as the Leadership Institute (LI). Although Soros and his allies hope through their spending to increase the effectiveness of the left on campus, I do not fear that activities they bankroll will significantly increase the left's campus influence. Nor can Soros stop the growth of campus conservative activities.

Why is this cold, rainy land with its stark volcanic landscape, without much in the way of natural resources, one of the wealthiest places on Earth? Small states, in the past, were most often poorer on a per capital income basis than large states, but in the last half-century many have become much richer then their large neighbors. Among the wealthiest places on the planet, we now find Luxembourg, Hong Kong, Denmark and Ireland, none with many natural resources. In a just-concluded meeting of the Mont Pelerin Society in Iceland, some leaders of small states that have developed very successful economies met with some of the worlds' leading free-market economists and policy institute professionals, partly to discuss what lessons the rest of the world can learn from these small states. Here is what they concluded.

From the moment President Bush set his war policy after the 9-11 attacks, our country has been divided into two factions. The first faction supports the President because it believes he’s doing the right thing, while the second faction opposes the President because it believes he’s doing the wrong thing. Now a third faction has emerged, comprised of those who believe the President is doing the right thing - but that he isn’t doing it very well.

Europe is in crisis. It is depopulating because of birthrates well below replacement. Weighted down by oppressive taxes and onerous regulations, the economies of the major European nations are barely growing. Pessimism reigns. Yet there are the little flickers of light in the form of bright and energetic young people pushing constructive change, and increasing public recognition from some European leaders that the present course is unsustainable. In times of crisis, some nations find a Ronald Reagan, a Winston Churchill, or a Margaret Thatcher. If one looks closely at the increasing political divisions in France, Germany and Italy, it is now possible to imagine a future Continental version of Mrs. Thatcher or President Reagan.

You first learned in The CIA in Deep Qaaqaa last October about a group of left-wing “Rogue Weasels” that incoming CIA Director Porter Goss was purging from Langley. It’s important to understand that the CIA has been a left-wing outfit since the 1970s. The Watergate Scandal was pretty much a coup to oust Richard Nixon from the White House conducted in a cooperative effort by the CIA left-wingers, the Democrat Party, and the Media. This same cabal thinks it can conduct a similar coup against George Bush and Karl Rove over the ridiculous Plamegate nonsense. Problem is, Bush is smarter than Nixon, the bloggers are smarter than Old Media, and Porter Goss is smarter than the Weasels. In fact, many of the Weasels are unbelievably stupid. Take ex-CIA analyst Larry Johnson...

A private Israeli intelligence service reports that Al Qaeda is shifting more than 1,000 of its operatives from Iraq for terror offensives in Europe and elsewhere in the Middle East.The countries it named as targeted were Britain, Italy, France, Denmark, Russia -- with the UK and Italy at the top of the list; and in the Middle East, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Note the US is not on the list. One reason is that, except in liberal news reports, the war in Iraq has been going poorly for Al Qaeda.

[Just after Rena Cohen wrote this on July 12, she learned of a Moslem terrorist attack in Netanya, Israel, killing two and wounding several others. Her daughter is spending the summer in Netanya and was nearby when the suicide bomber hit. Thankfully she was unhurt.]Before our horrified eyes, terrorism has just struck again in London, killing and wounding scores of innocent civilians, as terrorism always does. The pictures of bloody carnage are now becoming so familiar, from New York to London, from Jerusalem to Madrid, from Baghdad to Moscow, from Riyadh to Kashmir, from Bali to Manila. Just a few short days ago on July 4th, the American people celebrated freedom, and honored the courage of the men and women who have given so much to keep it and to protect our country. That same day, a deadly charade was being carried out in another part of the world under the banner of democracy. While Israel is pulling out of Gaza and parts of the disputed territories of the West Bank to foster peace, the Palestinian Authority (PA) and its allies are preparing for the next terror war.

For many families of the 3,000 American citizens murdered on September 11, 2001, the worst that could happen would be for their loved ones' sacrifice and loss to be forgotten. To ensure that didn't happen, federal, state and local authorities have put millions of tax dollars toward a memorial on the site of Ground Zero -- where the twin towers of the World Trade Center once stood in Lower Manhattan. Incredible as it may seem, those charged with translating that laudable commitment into reality have come up with plans that could surpass even the September 11 families' worst fears: A scheme for the design and use of the Ground Zero complex that threatens, at best, to obscure and, at worst, to defame the memory of those lost on that day.

The result of an extensive research and five months of field interviews in numerous schools in 20 French provinces by a distinguished group of French educators should be sobering for anyone who values European civilization. The report documents the extensive Islamization of French schools in the vicinity of Moslem ghettoes and the imposition of strict conformity with Islamist dictates through violence and intimidation. Having by and large completed their takeover of the Moslem ghettoes, often by “targeted violence” against non-Moslems and moderate Moslems alike, the Islamist fanatics are making great progress towards achieving control of the educational system as well.This is not just France’s problem. The same phenomenon of large numbers of angry young Moslems who totally reject European civilization is easily observable in virtually every large urban center across the EU.

As demonstrated by the French and Dutch "no" votes, Europeans are increasingly frustrated living under a bureaucratic (as contrasted with a democratic) state where national sovereignty (and democratic control) continues ebbing. What should be done? Europe needs for a couple of leaders not directly tainted by the recent "constitutional" fiasco to call for a new convention to write a real constitution, which would protect the democratic and most of the sovereign rights and personal liberties of the European peoples. To succeed, the new constitution would need to allow for social and economic differences among the European states, unlike the just defeated "constitution." Delegates to the new constitutional convention would be well advised to look at the U.S. Constitution and the Federalist Papers for guidance. Most of the basic arguments about the proper role and structure of governmental units and the protection of individual liberties and national identities and rights can be found in these documents. The U.S. has evolved into a much more centralized state than our Founding Fathers envisioned, but their original vision is much closer to the type of Federal Republic with sovereign states that Europe needs today.