We can’t say Islam is basically incompatible with civilization and hope to prevail against the most radical part of Islam. I hope that protests have been made privately, but I doubt it. Pakistan is an ally of convenience in this war, and they’ll do exactly what we bribe or pay them to and no more.
Slightly off topic, but could imagine being Musharraf? Can’t trust your own intelligence service or parts of your army, getting squeezed by both sides, had multiple attempts made on your life?
Short of killing all the radical Imans who spread this hate, I see no answer. Most of the country doesn’t even see this as a war for our survival yet. It’s going to get worse.

MarkD on April 14, 2006 at 7:55 am

Admittedly Pakistan sucks and Musharraff is a fickle “friend” but the alternatives there are worse.

Ripper on April 14, 2006 at 9:08 am

Looks like MarkD answered his own question-killing all the radical imams is the only answer. Too bad Musharaf does not see it yet as the only way to save himself.

sk on April 14, 2006 at 12:51 pm

Many thanks debs. With allies like Pakistan, who needs enemies.
Don’t they too, possess a nuclear weapon?

Plantagent_Palliser on April 14, 2006 at 1:50 pm

WHAT…you forgot to mention the JEWS CANNOT GO TO HEAVEN quote GW made on the campaign trail?

EminemsRevenge on April 14, 2006 at 2:54 pm

Sooner or later every couuntry on earth is going to see the Religion of Islam for what it is.
The so called “Moderate Muslims” had better start being as aggressive in their Moderation as the Islamofacists are in their extremism.
It has always been the Arabs hated the Jews. and Israel has been fighting for its life.
The world as a whole is starting to realize what Israel has been saying since the 40’s

Bushwack1 on April 14, 2006 at 10:02 pm

I sense that GWB made a deal with India (in addition to any public nukeDeal) to allow India to “freely” invade Pakistan in the event of ANY shooting from Iran. I intuit that Musharaff and company know this and Musharaff can’t contain those “dissidents” in his government. Hence the cover of “moderate Muslim ally” is coming off whether Musharaff likes it or not. I dont think GWB much cares what happens to Musharaff/Pakistan in this scenerio.

F.Marrion on April 14, 2006 at 11:42 pm

Pakistan not only possesses nuclear weapons, and there was worry about India and Pakistan engaging in a nuclear weapons exchange during the height of aggression in Kashmir, but in 2004, Musharraf had to admit that Pakistan’s “Father of the Bomb,” Abdul Qadeer Khan, had been selling Pakistani nuclear technology to North Korea, Libya, and Iran!
Nice friends we keep.

hqsbud on April 15, 2006 at 3:00 am

Admittedly Pakistan sucks and Musharraff is a fickle “friend” but the alternatives there are worse.
Posted by: Ripper at April 14, 2006 09:08 AM
NO! The right thing to do, regardless of the consequences, is to call Musharraf’s bluff! Anything else is appeasement of Islamic republic of Pakistan, the same country that fed, raided, nurtured and finally, unleashed Taleban and Al-Quida. Give them a free pass after 1st WTC bombing, and you have 9/11.
As for the alternatives (in this case), giving tyrants a free pass shuts doors to alternatives. If they turn out to be worse, they need to be addressed accordingly. Giving a free ride to thieves is not the way to keep murderers at bay, if you see the point.

Alert on April 15, 2006 at 8:22 am

Call his bluff and do what, invade Pakistan? Help the radicals who are fighting us topple his government?
Because Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran are not problems enough? Then North Korea decides it’s time to head South, or China decides it’d rather see Taiwan dead or red and we’re going to do what?
No matter what our capabilities, there are limits. Until the world makes me emperor with unlimited powers, we’re going to have to live with imperfection.

MarkD on April 15, 2006 at 9:46 am

And we have an idiot for a president who isn’t going after Osama bin Laden, invest in the same company (CFR) the bin Laden family are, keeps open up the borders to allow illegals in that Clinton failed to secure and now tolerates Paki?

KOAJaps on April 15, 2006 at 11:12 pm

Yahood is not a derogatory term for Jews.
WRONG. IT IS CERTAINLY DEROGATORY IN THIS CONTEXT.
DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL

lawman on April 16, 2006 at 12:40 am

Lameman(THE muslim man):Yea?Your arab to english translations are twisted.Like you trying to call your faith ‘peacefull’.And lameman,what are you + your’s plans after another 9/11.You cry now that you cannot go to the muslim potluck at the park because who your picture will be taken with.Just watch how the muslim is viewed in the near future here in the U.S.A.

danny on April 16, 2006 at 11:57 am

Debbie,
There is nothing derogatory about the term ‘Yahudi’ by itself. It means a person of Jewish faith in Arabic.
Of course the rest of the letter is vile. Though that does not mean that the term ‘Yahudi’ by itself is a derogatory term for Jews.
I AM WELL AWARE OF WHAT IT MEANS. NO NEED TO TRANSLATE IT FOR ME. IT IS NOT “BY ITSELF.” IT IS DEROGATORY IN THIS CONTEXT, “YAHOOD & KNANOOD.” JUST AS IT IS ALSO DEROGATORY WHEN JEWS ARE REFERRED TO AS “YID,” WHICH ALSO MEANS ONLY JEW IN YIDDISH, BUT IS USED BY ANTI-SEMITES AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS AS A SLUR. DITTO FOR “SCHVARZE” OR “SCHWARZE,” WHICH MEANS ONLY BLACK IN GERMAN AND YIDDISH, BUT IS USED AS A DEROGATORY TERM FOR BLACK PEOPLE. THE SAME APPLIES HERE.
DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL

lawman on April 17, 2006 at 8:26 pm

Lameman;In English(non muslim)we say suicide/hom icide bombings.In (muslim)lameman’s translation they say Self defence.In english we say faith,love.In lawman’s (muslim)you say Hate.In Israel you say life. In lameman’s(muslim) world you say Die Yahood.

danny on April 18, 2006 at 6:16 am