Two things you ought to read

I know, I said 'night', but I just ran across these.

First, a piece by Judea Pearl, Daniel Pearl's mother. It includes this:
But the clearest endorsement of terror as a legitimate instrument of political bargaining came from former President Jimmy Carter. In his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," Mr. Carter appeals to the sponsors of suicide bombing. "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel." Acts of terror, according to Mr. Carter, are no longer taboo, but effective tools for terrorists to address perceived injustices.

Mr. Carter's logic has become the dominant paradigm in rationalizing terror. When asked what Israel should do to stop Hamas's rockets aimed at innocent civilians, the Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, did not hesitate for a moment in her response: "They should end the occupation." In other words, terror must earn a dividend before it is stopped.


Second, this piece on the strikes that have gone wildcat in Britain:
Today the strike in Lincolnshire has spread across Britain to contractors at the nuclear power plants Sellafield and Heysham, to Grangemough oil refinery and power stations at Longanet, Warrington and Staythorpe, to contractors at the South Hook LNG terminal in Milford Haven, and to Croyton oil refinery in Essex.

Thousands have gone out. The strikes have gone wild cat.

And all of it is right. For what else can British workers do when their own parliament has turned over the power to control Britains' borders and Britain's labour laws to the Brussels empire?

There is no point in saying, 'The workers must obey the laws that govern employment.' The laws which now govern employment in this country are no longer legitimate. They are no longer the laws drawn up by British democracy.

They are the laws drawn up by the European Commission. They are laws to which a generation of Britain's politicians have signed up, giving away powers they had no right to give away.

Britain's politicians signed up to these laws in Treaties most of them have never read, and if they did read them, they didn't believe every 'Europe without frontiers' clause would be enforced.

Well, surprise: the rootless cosmopolitan euro-zealots all over the Continent (though mostly in France) and the career eurocrats in Brussels (mostly led by the French) who wrote the European treaties put this stuff in because they meant to see it enforced.

But just listen to the whining of Peter Hain, the former work and pensions secretary who was part of Tony Blair's EU-pandering government, at the weekend. He told one paper that he thought something had gone 'badly wrong' with the way EU legislation was being enforced.

What he means is it is actually being enforced. The only thing that is 'badly wrong' is that Britain should ever have agreed to it in the first place.

It sounds like a lot of the people in Britain have finally found a way to say "Enough!" that the politicians can't avoid hearing. Understanding, that's a different thing, but they're damn well hearing it from the sound of this. The EUnuchs are, too; look for them to do/say something about forcing the peasant to obey that'll really set some things off. I hope.