Mexico to 'support the end of Chavez's government'

Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez has begun his political self-destruction.

Mexico, of all countries, has taken the lead against the Caracas colonel.

President Fox has supported the Bush administration's plan for a hemispheric free trade pact, but little else.

The trade pact support riled Chavez, who called Fox an American imperialist "lap dog."

Now those are about the foulest words anyone can call a Mexican leader. But Fox, for all his professed conservatism, has proven himself to be anything but an ally of the Unites States. His government has been trying for years to break up the US-dominated inter-American security system, and has acted as a major annoyance at the United Nations. Fox was one of the last international leaders to express his country's condolences to the US after the 9/11 attacks.

So it is especially sweet to see the president of Mexico taking the lead against Chavez.

After the Chavez outburst and a series of heated exchanges between the two leaders, Mexico and Venezuela withdrew their embassadors. The head of Fox's National Action Party called for convening 30 conservative parties from the Americas, according to Reuters, "to support the end of Chavez's government."

The leader of Fox's party said that conservative parties in Latin America have rejected "Chavez's shameful attitude which denigrates Latin American politics, embarrasses the Venezuelan people and attacks the sovereignty of the Mexican people." The party leader, Manuel Espino expressed hope that Venezuelans should defeat Chavez's congressional allies who are facing a by-election on December 4.

Said Espino, "I have asked the political parties [of the Americas] to join in solidarity with the Venezuelan people to come together to weaken Hugo Chavez's authoritarian in December and change the government in Venezuela next year."

Fox is carrying out what this blogger suggested May, which was to keep the Chavez problem a Latin American problem to be solved by Latin American leaders, that the US should work with Chavez on political warfare operations to solve the Chavez problem by political warfare means, and Western Hemisphere countries should work together to hasten Chavez's demise before the end of 2006.

In a May 2005 paper for the Center for Security Policy, this blogger proposed helping Chavez "hasten his own political demise" by working with other Latin American countries to provoke him to overreact.

The US should "improve its psychological strategy and help the Venezuelan leader to hasten his own political self-destruction," I said in the paper.

"

The Venezuelan dictator is mentally unstable and has been under psychiatric supervision for years. He overreacts to criticism, weeps in front of others, and dreams messianic fantasies that make him especially vulnerable as well as dangerous.

"
In August, on the Center for Security Policy website, this blogger criticized the Bush administration's do-nothing stance toward Chavez and proposed:

"Here's something the administration can do, while there is still time: It can atone for its acceptance of Jimmy Carter's phony certification of the voting processes that Chavez manipulated to stay in power, and ramp up a public diplomacy and political warfare campaign to expose the corrupt Venezuelan regime and its threats against its neighbors. It can help the sharply divided Venezuelan people, including the armed forces, to come together and wage their own pitched political battles against the regime to restore democracy and remove a growing threat that is headed for a terrible human catastrophe. It can help the Venezuelan people lay siege to the fanatical and paranoid Chavez regime and bring it down without need of an assassin's bullet."

Chavez recently told Fox, "Don't mess with me, mister, or you'll get stung."

Coincidence: French Muslim riots began after Charles Martel anniversary

This could be a stretch, but the coincidence of some major Islamist terrorist attacks, occurring on Christian feast days that mark Muslim defeats, causes this blogger to wonder:

Is there any significance to the fact that the Muslim riots in France began right after the anniversary of the Battle of Tours, where in 732 AD Frankish Prince Charles Martel smashed the Islamic armies of Abd ar-Rahman and stopped the Moorish advance?

Is a pattern emerging?

The 9/11 attacks occurred on a feast day for a 13th century German saint who died on his way to the Sixth Crusade. The March 2004 Madrid subway bombings took place on a Christian feast day marking the beheading of a Spanish bishop at the hands of the Muslims of the Cordoba caliphate. July 7, date of the first London transit bombings, is the feast day of English Catholics martyred under Henry VIII, and one of the only days on the Christian calendar marking English saints or martyrs. The July 21 London transit attack coincided with the Christian feast day commemorating a 17th century German prince who defeated the Muslims in Hungary. I raised these coincidences last September 11.

Now come the riots in France that are spreading to other countries in Europe.

Radicals in a Muslim ghetto started the attack against France on October 25, pelting Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy with stones and bottles as he pledged to rid predominantly Muslim immigrant slums of "gangrene" and "rabble."

October 25 is one of the two dates (the other is October 10) on the Gregorian Calendar marking the Battle of Tours (Poitiers) in 732, when Prince Charles Martel and his Christian army defeated a far larger invading army of Moors, slaying Spanish Muslim Governor Abd ar-Rahman and stopping the Islamic advance on the rest of what is now France. The Christian church does not observe the Battle of Tours as a feast day.

For now, the coincidences of dates remain merely coincidences. Let's keep watching.

Toward a post-France France in a post-Christian Europe

Violent mobs chanting Allahu akhbar attack public schools, torch hundreds of cars and buses, and burn a handicapped lady while demanding that police stay away - arming and fortifying their extremist shari'a enclaves in the heart of France.

The French intifada marks Stage 2 of Europe's post-Christian descent. Europe's post-European era has begun.

Europe discarded its moral and religious identity as the core of Western civilization. Now Europe starts to shed its very being.

The mobsters warring on their adopted country introduce us to the France of two generations ahead. Unless the French take their country back now, the post-Christian France of today will be the post-France France of the future.

French weakness against internal Islamist subversion will only invite more violence and destruction.

Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy still has time to come out of hiding, quit squabbling with his pansy archrival Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, and save his country before the crazed mobs fortify their slums into permanent shari'a bantustans.

It's hard to see how he can do it effectively without provoking more violence - not only within France, but around the world. But do it he must, and he must not be gentle.

De-fund those caring for the terrorists

Why should anybody fund an organization that obsesses over the human rights and safety of terrorists?

The leadership of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has become so out of touch with its humanitarian mission that it has become an intercessor and advocate for terrorists held by the United States.

I first noted this three years ago, when I visited ICRC headquarters in Geneva. The ICRC's obsessive concern for captured terrorists seems to outweigh its concern for innocent victims of terrorists - and for the prevention of future victims. Its supposedly neutral leaders in fact showed hostility toward the United States.

Until it has a change in leadership, it should be de-funded. The US government should cease trying to accomodate it.

(Important note: The ICRC should not be confused with the American Red Cross, which handles blood drives and takes the lead in aiding victims of catastrophes. They are two entirely different organizations.)