Who is Really Responsible for the Mumbai Massacre?

Now that the Mumbai massacre is done and the bodies are being cleaned away, business can continue on as usual, but let's interrupt the proceedings for a moment to drag some of those bodies back on the floor, with a level of detail that the same media which has censored 9/11 footage and prefers to show wreath, rather than the crimes to which they themselves are accomplice to, would prefer to hide

Photographs taken after the shootout give a vivid picture of the brutality unleashed on the Holzbergs and their friends after the terrorists took over the house on Wednesday, speak volumes of the nightmare the family and their friends must have gone through before they died.
The Rabbi’s body was found in a room on the second floor, with his legs sticking into the hall where his wife’s body was found. Rivka’s body was found near the legs of the Rabbi. His legs had been tied with a belt. His wife’s limbs were, however, not bound.

Two other Israeli girls were found dead with their hands and legs bound. They were lying next to each other. Another body was found in a decomposed state, indicating he was killed when the attack had begun.

It is a horrifying scene, but it is not an isolated scene. Muslim terrorists have been murdering innocent people in this way for decades now, body piled upon body, men, women and children, murdered year after bloody year. And what has been heard from politicians and reporters, from activists and our public voices of conscience? Calls for justice? Calls for vengeance? No, time and time again, it has been calls for accommodation with the terrorists.

No it is not the terrorists alone who are responsible for what took place here, but their accomplishes who sit in Fifth Avenue high rises, in the State Department, in the plush offices of a thousand humanitarian organizations, in the CNN offices in Atlanta and the Newsweek offices and a hundred thousand others pulling down six figure salaries while pulling for terror.

Let them now bring forth their usual charade of sorrow, the nodding and the pretense of sympathy-- as if the terrorists of Mumbai were some uncontrollable and unpredictable force-- rather than the outgrowth of decades of pro-terrorist politics on the left.

It was Jimmy Carter's administration which began funneling money to Pakistan's ISI, building the growth of a Southeast Asian terrorist network that encompasses Al Queda as well as the Mumbai attackers and the endless terror in Kashmir. Zbignew Brezinsky, the mastermind behind those pro-ISI politics, and Brezinsky is no fossil, but remains close to Barack Hussein Obama.

It was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto who aggressively used the ISI to promote Jihad, and his daughter, the much mourned martyr Benazir Bhutto, who openly used it to aid terrorism in Kashmir against India, while backing the Taliban. Had all those who wept over that corrupt vicious witch spent a fraction of the time mourning her victims in Kashmir, murdered, beheaded, rape and blown up, perhaps Pakistan's government, whose president today is Asif Ali Zardari, Benazir's husband, would not have been so blatant about getting back in the Islamic terrorism business.

But the West, particularly Western liberals, seems hopelessly addicted to Pro-Terrorist politics.

With the fall of the USSR, there was no longer any excuse to play footsie with Muslim terrorists. The Soviet Union had been overthrown and a new day was upon us. And the new day saw the transition from pro-terrorist politics for the sake of fighting Communism to pro-terrorist politics for the sake of pro-terrorist politics.

The two Bush. and Clinton administrations cracked Israel, forcing the creation of a cancerous PLO state, that currently hosts the Muslim Brotherhood's Hamas, a wing of Al Queda and the PLO's Fatah. Concession after concession has expanded their capabilities from suicide bombings to bus bombings and now to full on rocket barrages with the technology supplied by Iran.

The same left wing media talking heads, the State Department bureaucrats and liberal activists that continue to demand another pound of flesh from Israel's population and then another, blood upon blood, more terrorists freed, more land turned over-- can then pretend that they are not on the side of the terrorists. Not when Samantha Power, who called for invading Israel to protect terrorists, heads up Obama's State Department transition team.

Was Mumbai some unique phenomenon? Have Muslim terrorists not left similar carnage behind in New York, Paris, Madrid, London, Jerusalem, Haifa and a hundred other places? Have not Western liberals repeatedly urged rewards for those terrorists, have they not protected them and shielded them?

And what of Al Queda, the cancerous growth of ISI? The Al Queda denizens of Gitmo can only bestow blessings on the endless assortment of liberal groups who have agitated for them and fought for them over these years.

From the ACLU to the AJC, from the World Council of Churches to nearly every single major liberal organization in America, has worked on behalf of Al Queda, even as they pause on September 11th to leech a few crocodile tears out of their cold dead eyes, before getting back to the bloody business of enabling terrorism.

No, they will protest. We did not work on behalf of Al Queda. We worked on behalf of liberal principles, tolerance, justice, hope, change and that bundle of nonsense words with which they have done their ugly work of brainwashing the West.

Let us ask ourselves, when a terrorist bomb goes off, who is it that calls for concessions to the terrorists... and are not such people accomplices of their crimes?

Can you negotiate a ransom on behalf of a kidnapper, turn it over to him and then expect not to be jailed for it? Yet the pro-terrorist politics of the past few decades consist exactly of that. Their collaboration with evil is sickening and yet it is a staple of their ideology.

Now they will briefly pause, after spending years screeching that global warming and endangered polar bears were a bigger threat than terrorism, to shed their obligatory crocodile tears, even if they have to bring them beforehand in a dropper, before going back to doing exactly what they have been doing all along.

Why does treason not prosper, is the old cynic's question. Because when treason prospers, none dare call it treason. Why don't terrorists prosper? Because when terrorists prosper, you call them President. Just ask Arafat or Abbas or Obama by way of Rashid Khalidi or Billy Ayers.

The terrorist accomplices are happy enough to let the public briefly mourn the dead, throw a wreaths on the caskets, and go back to shopping for consumer electronics. After all even Caesar's murderers let him have a funeral.

It is not funerals or memorials that the men and women who drive us to make common cause with terrorism fear, but the damning finger, the Mark Antony who will condemn the conspirators whose confessions are printed in issue after issue of the New York Times and the Washington Post, read over the air on NPR and issued as press releases by the State Department.

And too few who would make no common cause with terrorist, speak softly when it comes to criticizing them. In doing so they echo the early Antony, who said;

I should do Brutus wrong, and Cassius wrong,


Who, you all know, are honourable men:


I will not do them wrong; I rather choose


To wrong the dead, to wrong myself and you,


Than I will wrong such honourable men.

And so time and time again, we choose to wrong the dead, rather than the "honorable men" writing for Time Magazine, working in Washington D.C. and being waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay.

But perhaps it is time to speak truly, to go look upon the bodies, to see the bullet wound in the chest fired by David Remnick, the stab wound inflicted by Joshua Hammer, the arm torn by Condoleeza Rice, the head severed by James L. Jones, the arms bound by Samantha Power, the whole catalog of crimes that continues on seemingly without end.

To close with Shakespeare's Antony once more.

O, what a fall was there, my countrymen!


Then I, and you, and all of us fell down,


Whilst bloody treason flourish'd over us.

We have all fallen down, nations and individuals, in the face of terrorism. We are not weak in the face of terrorism carried out by barbarians with a handful of stolen weapons. We have been weakened, we have been made weak by the bloody treason that flourishes over us.

When you read another news story criticizing the US for taking away control of Somalia from Al Queda, there writes a traitor. When you hear a call to dismantle Gitmo, you are listening to a traitor. When you hear more prattle about peace in the middle east, you are hearing treason, first or secondhand.

And so the killing goes on, and the terrorism goes on, and the police burst into hotel rooms, clean up bomb sites and sift through the ashes, an hour or a day too late. Too late each time for long before the terrorist struck, bloody treason had seeded the ground and done its work.