Judith at Kesher Talk reports that nothing will get in the way of the Church of England doing its duty by voting for divestment from Israel:
As appears now to be par for the course in such decisions, no time was made for Anglicans for Israel, the new and influential pro-Israel lobby group, to debate the issue. [There is, by the way, a very interesting interview by Tovia Singer on Israel National Radio with the founder of Anglicans for Israel, Simon McIlwaine, on the website on the upper right hand side of the page.]
Anglicans for Israel
Shalom Lappin at Normblog, on the AUT boycott of Israeli universities
Jason Holliston at Columbia Gorge Dispatch has got his hands pretty full these days, but he's made time to put together a very good roundup of links on the cartoon business. Go visit the post, and don't forget to bookmark Columbia Gorge Dispatch.
ShrinkWrapped sees little reason to be complacent about the Iran situation, despite some optimistic assessments:
While some observers have suggested we may have as long as 5-10 years before Iran has a deliverable nuclear bomb, their threat to immediately begin enrichment suggests that they will have a dangerous amount of fissionables well before then; further, it is hard to have any confidence that they do not already have a nuke or two (perhaps from the AQ Khan and/or North Korean bazaar.) Certainly the Iranian behavior suggest that the leadership is either supremely confident, extraordinarily foolhardy, or some combination of the two leavened with an apocalyptic vision.
My speculation is that the Administration knows that much of Saddam's WMD ended up in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, home of Hezbollah, and in the dessert in Syria. The race is on to attain regime change in Syria before the Israelis (or Americans) feel compelled to act. Finding proof of WMD in Iraq, moved to Syria prior to the invasion of Iraq, will force the West vs. Iran/Syria confrontation to ratchet upwards which is why the administration is not eager to translate all the documents found in Baghdad. The Democrats have no interest in the papers either since they have staked their party's position on "Bush lied" and the post-war intel could blow that meme to shreds along with the last vestiges of authority of the Democratic left.
Patrick Lasswell at Meaningful Distinction thinks the old slogan "Global War On Terror" is a bit clunky. He's got one that's short and to the point ... with an illustration to match.
Fausta has a roundup of "How Muslim Clerics Stirred the Arab World Against Denmark".
Meanwhile, far-flung Portlanders bring their reports. We've already mentioned Michael Totten's dispatch from Lebanon, but here's that link again. Michael's closing thoughts:
I strongly suggest the civilized people of Lebanon, Muslim and Christian alike, stage a counter-demonstration downtown where flags are not burned and where buildings are not set on fire.
And finally, Sean LaFreniere is in, of all places, Denmark. On the Mohammed cartoon mess he says this:
One cartoon shows a man with a bomb in his turban, but given the fact that an explosive device has been detonated in the name of Islam daily for three years in Iraq (and for decades in Israeli pizza shops, in French cafes, and German discos) I don't think the cartoon is surprising.
The Muslim community in Denmark promptly erupted and demanded that the Prime Minister explain why he did not have the paper shut down and its editors arrested.
Perhaps they do not realize that when they escaped oppression in their home countries they left that kind of fascism behind as well?
We should keep in mind that the publication of this Danish newspaper is for domestic consumption in a country that is not Muslim and does not follow Islamic laws (although some Muslim immigrants do live here). They did not send copies to the Middle East in order to make people angry (and they responded politely to the domestic Muslim population). Rather, it was a legitimate editorial discussion of a domestic issue that only tangentially touched on Islam - namely typical Protestant censorship of difficult issues.
Additionally we should remember that the controversy actually erupted two months after publication, when the Prime Minister refused to discipline the paper or to apologize for its actions (as he noted he does not authorize its publication). This was seen in the Middle East as a sign of official support for the cartoons and an intentional offense by the Danish government against Muslims, since in the Middle East there is no freedom of speech or independent press.
In the end the newspaper, and other European governments, did apologize or make conciliatory gestures, and the United States government called the cartoons irresponsible. Today there are many Danes who would like to discuss this controversy but will not out of fear. However, the Danish PM continues to defend their freedoms and rights, now Denmark really "has a dog in the fight".
Be sure to follow Sean's homepage for the latest from Denmark ... with lots of great photographs!