Monday, October 05, 2009

Israel and the Defense of Civilization

If Israel is quelled or destroyed, we will be succumbing to forces targeting capitalism and freedom everywhere. We will allow a fatal triumph of the barbarian masses that may well end up demoralizing and destroying the United States as well. --George Gilder

(Readers may want to warm up with the prequel to this post from two days ago, Israel Has No Right to Exist.)

I remember Dennis Prager making a point about how throughout history, the best humanity has to offer always suffers at the hands of the worst. Unfortunately, this is axiomatic, since bad people want to hurt others, while good people don't want to hurt anybody. So every time an American soldier is killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, it is a case of the worst killing the best. Every time a Palestinian monster blows himself up in Israel, the worst have murdered the best. Likewise, only God knows how much human greatness was denied the world due to the Nazi genocide of an earlier era.

So what do we do about it? We give the Palestinians another billion dollars to further cultivate their depravity. And tell Israel to close their settlements, since we don't want the good people to irritate the bad people.

The very existence of Israel -- which embodies the best humanity has to offer -- is now under imminent threat by the most evil regime on the planet, Iran. Once again, the worst wishes to annihilate the best. And if and when Israel does respond, you can be sure that she will be vilified by millions if not billions of enablers who allow evil to thrive. Iran has nothing to fear from "the world community." Nor is she fearful of good and courageous people, unless those people are prepared to unleash hell upon evil.

In The Israel Test, Gilder discusses how game theory explains why even (or especially) good people end up encouraging evil. This is especially true of the left, since in implementing policies, they only consult their good intentions, never the system of incentives -- the rules of the game -- they are putting in place. This is why they can never see that the long term results of those incentives usually aggravate the problem the policy was designed to address.

This is also true of the moral simpletons who imagine that wanting peace is the only barrier to having it. In reality, the more one communicates the desire to have peace with evildoers, the more power one gives them.

In the case of Israel, "by relentlessly seeking Peace Now," they have "predictably communicated to the Arabs that terror and aggression work. By repeatedly informing the Arabs that it wants peace more than victory, Israel evinces a short-term strategy that powerfully and consistently rewards bad behavior. As a result, Israel gets neither peace nor victory, and the Palestinians get neither economic growth nor political progress" (Gilder). By appeasing evil, only the good suffer, both in Israel and in the Palestinian territories (which, due to their proximity to Israel, had by far the highest standard of living in the Arab world before declaring the most recent intifada in 2000).

According to game theory, a long-term player will be penalized for doing business with a short-term player. Imagine if every business transaction were with someone you were never going to do business with again. This would encourage predatory and dishonest behavior on the part of the seller. We would live under the economic law of the jungle.

Note that this is not a result of anyone's intentions, just the rules of the game: "In a single exchange, the rational policy is predatory. If predatory action brings success, a player is never induced to extend the time horizon. By accommodating aggression, a nation invites it. Peace requires the imposition of penalties on aggression."

Oddly, the left understands how this principle applies to illegal and predatory activity on Wall Street, but does not apply that lesson to the world.

As Gilder explains, "the single greatest domestic threat to the United States is not the jihad but the peace movement." Just last week, Obama voiced his desire to rid the world of nuclear weapons, which makes him the most powerful ally and abettor of evil in the world. Again, his intention is "peace," but the result would be an unprecedented escalation of violence and aggression.

Obama simply wishes to change the rules of the game, so that it is less costly for evil regimes to compete. If we have overwhelming military superiority, criminal regimes can never catch up, so it's not even worth it to try. But imagine if the police were to announce to criminals that from now on, in order to reduce crime, they are only going to use knives. In reducing the potential cost of crime, it would increase both criminal behavior and the pool of criminals. The risks associated with criminality would plunge.

What is especially odd is that both Iran and the Palestinians have explicitly communicated their desire and intention to destroy Israel. Why don't we believe them? Why don't we take them at their word, and respond accordingly? If my neighbor communicates a desire to kill me and my family, I don't say to him, "would you settle for just taking a corner of my lawn?" What if I give him the lawn and he still wants to kill me? Then what?

What if my neighbor says to me that he wants my lawn because to him the lawn is "holy." Well, if you are a leftist, it's not a problem, since for you, nothing is holy, especially private property. But you can see where this attitude will lead, for if nothing is holy, there is nothing worth defending.

In truth, Israel is under no moral, legal, or political obligation to give land to people who explicitly wish to use that land for purposes of genocide. No one is morally obligated to participate in their own destruction.

Again, for us -- and for all decent people on earth -- Israel's moral obligation is to go on existing, given the staggeringly disproportionate contribution they make to the betterment of the world. This is not just Israel vs. Iran or the Palestinians. Rather, this is the leading edge of freedom, democracy, liberty, and capitalism vs. the atavistic forces that fundamentally oppose them. It is progress vs. misery, civilization vs. barbarism, light vs. darkness. If we don't wake up to the fact that Israel is the canary in the Islamist ghoul mind, we'll all be sitting ducks.

For as Gilder writes, "our loyalty to Israel arises, not from a cold calculus of survival, but from a sense of the holy. What Americans must fathom with both heart and mind is that this instinct is true -- and vital to our survival -- that if we would live, we must defend the Holy Land."

53 Comments:

Blogger debass said...

Mexico has more of a claim over California than the Palestinians have over Israel. What if Mexico started lobbing rockets into the US. Should we give up parts of the southwest to them?
We have essentially done this by not enforcing our borders. With the help of our gov., we are rapidly becoming a turd world country. Why do we always pander to the lowest common denominator? Instead of raising everyone up, we constantly want to bring the top down.
I came up with a motto for one of the bands I was in years ago. "Success through mediocrity"
We seem to be racing to the bottom, having given up on being mediocre.

10/05/2009 08:12:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

But imagine if the police were to announce to criminals that from now on, in order to reduce crime, they are only going to use knives. In reducing the potential cost of crime, it would increase both criminal behavior and the pool of criminals. The risks associated with criminality would plunge.

We've already seen exactly that scenario in England. I'm, sure that has something to do with the leisurely rate at which they tend to respond to home invasions, dangerous criminals, etc. - why put themselves in danger when there's nothing serious to defend themselves with? Some guy getting beaten to death by a gang of thugs? Sure they'll be there in an hour or two, once the bastards have scurried off into the darkness.

Under the guise of appearing nice and likeable, they've allowed evil to have free reign.

10/05/2009 08:27:00 AM  
Blogger debass said...

Julie,

I've always maintained that there is no money in solving crime. The big money is in writing tickets for parking, speeding, dui, etc. Solving crime costs the state money therefore there is no incentive for the state to waste valuable time and resources to bring criminals to justice. They just do it to appease the public.
For example, none of the gun laws that have passed have ever prevented a crime. Criminals, by definition, don't obey the law. Yet, more laws are passed every year. I have challenged people who want to ban guns to put their name and address on the web, so that the burglars can visit them without fear of being killed. I haven't gotten any takers yet. Lately, I have asked gun banners to put a sign on their house that says "No Guns Here", kind of like the sign that says "Driver carries no cash". They haven't done that either. I wonder why?

10/05/2009 09:04:00 AM  
Blogger Gecko said...

A great and important post, as always, and many thanks for the George Gilder shout out. He was a friend way back in the olden days when I lived in NY, and his sister was in my class. An unusual and modest man, always interested in the truth.
As you once said, these be nail biting times. Always grateful for your generosity of spirit. You keep me vertical.

10/05/2009 09:15:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Full disclosure about potential conflicts of interest: it just occurred to me that the first girl I ever kissed was Jewish; the girl I took to the prom was Jewish; my first girlfriend was Jewish (although I suppose that would constitute a demerit, for reasons we won't get into); my wife was Jewish (now Catholic); my favorite philosopher was Jewish (Michael Polanyi); my favorite talk show host and a huge influence on my life is Jewish (Dennis Prager); and the man who has signed my paycheck for 20 years is Jewish. I guess I'm a hopeless philo-Semite....

10/05/2009 09:15:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Great post, Bob. Short and sweet too.

Was thinking about this yesterday. It may not be that the left doesn’t like “holy” or is indifferent toward it. Or that say Charles J doesn’t like God. It’s that they don’t like the consequences of such thoughts. So they just don’t go there. And of course, there are no immediate consequences for these decisions. For example, let’s say you ask an atheist, your simple garden variety default otherwise good all around atheist, “What would be the implications, the consequences on you if there was a God? What would you do about it?”

10/05/2009 09:17:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Debass says:

“Lately, I have asked gun banners to put a sign on their house that says "No Guns Here",”

One may be able to make the argument that these people actually benefit by the fact that some homeowners have guns. Directly benefit. I mean, you can’t tell by looking at the house, can you?

10/05/2009 09:22:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Deepak gets it (the path to self-destruction, that is):

"There's the moral question of the fear we inspire internationally by our aggressive militancy, which is tragically at odds with our pronounced aim of world peace. Peace is achieved by being peaceful, no matter what the military-industrial complex claims to the contrary."

10/05/2009 09:28:00 AM  
Blogger Jim said...

Bob

I'm with you as a philo-Semite. Jesus was a Jew, I love Him...


w/v i on tiga, I might be give me the map, now where is tiga?

10/05/2009 09:33:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Not to mention Bob Dylan... Stan Getz... Paul Desmond... Leonard Cohen...

10/05/2009 09:40:00 AM  
Blogger debass said...

" I mean, you can’t tell by looking at the house, can you?"

That is why they need a sign, to make it fair for the burglar. Otherwise, he/she may be injured and probably doesn't have burglar insurance.
Another reason for gov. health care is the unavailability of health insurance for criminals. Their workers comp. must be tremendous what with the availability of guns by law abiding citizens in the US.

10/05/2009 10:01:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

How could any good person not love the Jews? I've never been able to wrap my brain around that one. Even though I know more than a few who feel that way, and will voice ugly stereotypes about Jews that they'd never voice about other minorities.

Baffling.

Then there's this, from Althouse:

"The most striking thing in the movie was the religion. I think Moore is seriously motivated by Christianity. He says he is (and has been since he was a boy). And he presented various priests, Biblical quotations, and movie footage from "Jesus of Nazareth" to make the argument that Christianity requires socialism. With this theme, I found it unsettling that in attacking the banking system, Moore presented quite a parade of Jewish names and faces. He never says the word "Jewish," but I think the anti-Semitic theme is there. We receive long lectures about how capitalism is inconsistent with Christianity, followed a heavy-handed array of — it's up to you to see that they are — Jewish villains.

Am I wrong to see Moore as an anti-Semite? I don't know, but the movie worked as anti-Semitic propaganda. I had to struggle to fight off the idea the movie seemed to want to plant in my head."

10/05/2009 10:04:00 AM  
Blogger mushroom said...

I had not heard any of Obama's UN speech until yesterday, and I still can't believe he actually used the word "occupation" in relation to Israeli territory taken in the '67 war.

Bush may have been an idiot and a cowboy but at least the world was scared of him. Obama is an idiot and a wuss. Tell me: which idiot gets run over on the playground?

10/05/2009 10:12:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Totally off-topic, but I just saw this in the comments at Lileks and thought someone here might be interested: for anyone who likes Coltrane, apparently there's a new box set coming out tomorrow, which Best Buy appears to be selling for the single-disk price of $11.99.

I can't imagine that deal is going to last long...

10/05/2009 10:28:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Definitely an error! Unfortunately, that particular box set covers the years prior to Coltane'e emergence as a saxophone colossus. He was still a man, not yet more than a man. Good solid hard bop, however.

10/05/2009 10:35:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

I'm always on the lookout for deals like that on amazom. I keep things in my wish list, and jump on them when the price goes down. I once picked up the Complete Prestige Recordings of Dexter Gordon, which lists for $135.00, for only $15. A few days ago I snapped up the complete early recordings of Merle Haggard for only $60, when some sellers have it for as much as $250.00. There's something about a good deal that is extremely bracing....

10/05/2009 10:42:00 AM  
Blogger Susannah said...

Re: Good deals...you have to bide your time for 'em,don't you? I almost always find things I want if I wait long enough. Those mommy blogs do come in handy...esp. the ones about saving the green stuff. On-topic: It's ironic, the political disconnect between Israel-supporters and prominent Jewish people in our country. I think a lot of little-o orthodox (often conservative) Christians feel a genuine affiliation with the Jewish people, having been "grafted in" to God's ongoing plan of redemption, so to speak.

10/05/2009 11:06:00 AM  
Blogger Susannah said...

OT: discovered this today. (I think Julie? mentioned private/homeschool recently.) Just scanning it'll make your eyes water: 101 Reasons to Homeschool

We are conscientious objectors to state-run education, but even if I wasn't...

10/05/2009 11:10:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

All of the seriously religious Jews I know are conservative, whereas all the irreligious ones are liberal. For the latter, liberalism has definitely displaced religion. Someone once said that reform Judaism is just the Democrat party with holidays thrown in....

10/05/2009 11:15:00 AM  
Blogger Mizz E said...

As Gilder explains, "the single greatest domestic threat to the United States is not the jihad but the peace movement."

" In the midst of the global war that radical Islam has declared on the West, the conflict in Gaza has revealed the presence of a fifth column in the West so detached from its own communities and civilized values that it now constitutes a clear and present danger to our survival." - David Horowitz

Front Page Magazine is publishing articles calling out some of the Jewish collaborators in the war against Israel and the Jews, showing how they give aid and comfort to the Islamist enemy.

In this August 24th piece, we learn that "one of the most public of these Jewish collaborators, in the Arab war against Israel’s survival, is Marc H. Ellis, a Jewish  “professor of theology” and director of the Center for American and Jewish Studies at Baylor, a Baptist University in Waco, Texas.  For most of the academic world, especially the world of Jewish scholarship, Ellis is a bigot residing in the lunatic fringe.  But in the eyes in the eyes of Holocaust Deniers and Arab terrorists, he is a distinguished theologian.  The racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright is a fan of Ellis’ books and often recommends them."

10/05/2009 11:59:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

UN tool, right on cue: ElBaradei says nuclear Israel number one threat to Mideast."

10/05/2009 12:37:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

"Blacks number one threat to peace at KKK meetings."

10/05/2009 12:39:00 PM  
Blogger Dougman said...

Contra Rebel,
Relax and know that all the pieces are in place.

Question for the philosophers in the gallery.

Is Justice vindictive?

wv=therhor

10/05/2009 01:36:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

Someone once said that reform Judaism is just the Democrat party with holidays thrown in....

And don't forget the bar/bat mitzvahs. Not just a celebration, a competition of one-upsmanship. I'm pretty sure my nephew and niece's parties were each more expensive than my wedding, and from what I heard theirs were fairly toned-down.

10/05/2009 01:39:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

Dougman, I would say that ideally, justice is not vindictive, it is dispassionate. Justice is supposed to be objective, and where punishment is due it should be appropriate to the crime.

In the real world, of course, that's not always the case. But essentially, no. It is just.

10/05/2009 01:46:00 PM  
Blogger Dougman said...

I posed that to the therapist at the county hospital, she's an admirer of Dr. Phil, and all she could do was stare at me.
That was a fun group session, lol.

10/05/2009 01:58:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

Really? Weird. It strikes me as a completely valid question. With a little more thought, I'd add that people are vindictive, including sometimes when they act under the guise of justice. Then again, people may also be merciful.

Kind of like how guns don't kill people, people do. Justice that is vindictive wouldn't be justice, it would be revenge, an action driven by passion.

10/05/2009 02:17:00 PM  
Blogger Anna said...

Dougman said...

Is Justice vindictive?

I think the only one authorized to be vindictive is God. One of the those 'only one holy enough' (absolute holy) to be vindictive. The main reason I say this is the place in the Bible that says "Vengeance is mine". He is the only one who can settle the score. He is the one who is hurt when one does evil. Take all that I just wrote with grain of salt. I am half speculating. And wrath is hardly neutral. There is the auto-incineration of results of being without Him and the active incineration by Him. Then it would seem there is the Holy which defends itself 'objectively' like when God says he is not a respecter of persons.

10/05/2009 04:19:00 PM  
Blogger Anna said...

I meant grains of salt. Somehow in my hurry I made it singular. Not that what I wrote was ground-breaking... am just a little hesitant or trepidatious when talking about what God does as applied to a concept that may or may not be related.

Interesting that the subject of vindictiveness came up when discussing Israel. Seems a apropos.

10/05/2009 04:46:00 PM  
Blogger Mikal said...

OT: The inevitable has happened over in Queegland.

"Zombie," the anonymous photojournalist who's spent years documenting the utter insanity and viciousness of the Bay Area Left, and who's been an incredibly prolific contributor to LGF, has been bounced by Cap Queeg hisself.

Zombie's offense? Leaving nasty comments about Chazz & Co. from other people on his/her blog.

When I found out, I publically left LGF, after five-plus years and 2,700+ comments there. Apparently quite a few others have done the same today. And I also found out that Zombie's fellow photojournalists "Ringo the Gringo" and "Urban Infidel" are also now persona non grata in the Lizard Kingdom.

Gagster, you and the other harsh critics of Chazz are right -- he's lost his mind. Bouncing these three hugely talented content providers from LGF is like slitting your wrist to water your lawn. May his once-great site continue its slide into irrelevance and obscurity.

MikalM
(who usually posts here as Aquila)

10/05/2009 05:54:00 PM  
Blogger Warren said...

>> Bob Dylan... Stan Getz... Paul Desmond... Leonard Cohen...

Felix Mendelssohn... Gustav Mahler... Ernest Bloch... Steve Reich...

(And don't even get me started on great comedians. It would be much quicker to list the non-Jews.)

10/05/2009 07:14:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

Warren, this site is for you:
Old Jews Telling Jokes

10/05/2009 07:21:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

This is off-topic again, but yet another example of the big o snubbing the good to impress those who hate us. This one is surprising, because I always thought the Dalai Lama was loved and admired by leftists. One more under the bus, I guess.

10/05/2009 07:24:00 PM  
Blogger Patm said...

Anchoress had a similar topic the other day

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/theanchoress/2009/10/03/will-tiny-israel-save-the-world/

also: "I always thought the Dalai Lama was loved and admired by leftists. One more under the bus, I guess."

I'm coming to the conclusion that they don't love anyone but themselves and their ability to accrue power.

10/05/2009 07:29:00 PM  
Blogger Warren said...

On a whim - because I've heard so many strange tales - I surfed over to Queeg's site for the first time in about a year to see what he was actually up to.

Holy freakin' crap! It makes the Daily Kos look like NRO...

Here's a line (one out of many) that jumped out at me:

>> ... like almost every Republican politician, Marco Rubio is a creationist

WTF?!? That's not even wrong, or stupid. It's just crazy babbling.

I think we may need to retire the name "Queeg" for this guy. I mean, seriously. Captain Ahab is closer to the mark. (Except that Ahab was brilliant as well as mad, so that one doesn't really work....)

10/05/2009 07:40:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

Yes; nothing is sacred except the power grab.

Susannah - add one more to that list you gave earlier. There's more about this Jennings character than I ever wanted to know; the thought of him having general power over school curricula nationwide is sickening.

10/05/2009 07:44:00 PM  
Blogger Warren said...

Julie,

Love it, thanks! L'chaim!

10/05/2009 07:45:00 PM  
Blogger Mikal said...

Julie,

Wonder what the Dalai Lama's genitocentric Western-Lefty fan club thinks of these quotes by him (source: Wikipedia):

"Buddhist sexual proscriptions ban homosexual activity and heterosexual sex through orifices other than the vagina, including masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand... From a Buddhist point of view, lesbian and gay sex is generally considered sexual misconduct"

In his 1996 book Beyond Dogma, [the Dalai Lama] clearly states, "A sexual act is deemed proper when the couples use the organs intended for sexual intercourse and nothing else....Homosexuality, whether it is between men or between women, is not improper in itself. What is improper is the use of organs already defined as inappropriate for sexual contact."[72] He has said that sex spelled fleeting satisfaction and trouble later, while chastity offered a better life and "more independence, more freedom." [73] He says that problems arising from conjugal life could even lead to suicide or murder.[74]

10/05/2009 07:52:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

That's interesting. To the leftist mind, though, it's likely filed away as "acceptable" under the guise of multiculturalism. Being opposed to homosexuality is only bad if you're a westerner, especially a white American male. Everyone else gets a pass.

10/05/2009 08:09:00 PM  
Blogger Northern Bandit said...

As I understand it Zombie (although an atheist) remains sane and consistent. Recently s/he has effective assaults on the great global warming hoax (a.k.a., Greatest Lie in the West).

I deleted LGF from the bookmarks on all my computers, but LGF still has this passing-a-car-wreck pull... The really big question for me is when he will flip on Israel. I predict it will be sudden, and ferocious.

Queeg is now swinging his electronic machete with abandon. Instead of "Queeg", how about we call Charles "Col. Kurtz" instead?

10/05/2009 08:44:00 PM  
Blogger Warren said...

>> "Buddhist sexual proscriptions... (snip)"

Yeah, the Anchoress has often pointed out this kind of thing.

And as we all know, the Dalai Lama's vow of lifelong celibacy shows him to be a serious and serene master of the spiritual life... while the Pope's identical vow proves him to be out of touch with the modern world, intolerant, narrow, bigoted and oppressive.

10/05/2009 08:44:00 PM  
Blogger Northern Bandit said...

And if CJ is Col. Kurtz, does that make Petey the Capt. Willard of the vertical blogosphere?

10/05/2009 08:47:00 PM  
Blogger Warren said...

>> Instead of "Queeg", how about we call Charles "Col. Kurtz" instead?

"The horror! The horror!... Exterminate all the brutes!"

Yeah - I think that works for me...

10/05/2009 08:49:00 PM  
Anonymous Petey said...

I don't see any method at all, sir.

10/05/2009 08:52:00 PM  
Blogger Warren said...

"Mistah Kurtz - he dead."

(Sorry to mix up quotes from the book with the movie... )

10/05/2009 09:00:00 PM  
Blogger Anna said...

wv: backsmog
This is apt as...

I was thinking about it last night and in re vindictiveness, realized it implies a degree of spite, which I'm not sure would be part of God's vengeance. So I don't think vindictive would necessarily be the right word. I was originally thinking of it in the vengeance department of the word, not thinking of the possible 'spite' or 'bitter' connotation.


Oh, and I also remember the Queeg coinage by Bob as well, to confer with Mizz E's comment the other day. This is a delayed conferring, as I meant to confer the other day.

10/06/2009 10:00:00 AM  
Blogger Anna said...

Um, I believe I meant ...concur. Still a little groggy this a.m.

10/06/2009 10:10:00 AM  
Blogger Susannah said...

Is "vindicative" a word? Because justice does, in a sense, vindicate those done injustices...doesn't it?

10/06/2009 12:56:00 PM  
Blogger Anna said...

Susannah,

I was also thinking last night and this morning about the relationship between the words vindictive and vindicate.

"Vindicative"... almost also including "indicative" - indicative of a vindictive that vindicates. I think 'vindicative' would be the word 'vindicating', i.e. in the adjective form.

10/06/2009 01:06:00 PM  
Blogger Dougman said...

vin⋅di⋅ca⋅to⋅ry  /ˈvɪndɪkəˌtɔri, -ˌtoʊri/ [vin-di-kuh-tawr-ee, -tohr-ee]

–adjective 1. tending or serving to vindicate.
2. punitive; retributive: vindicatory killings.

Also, vin⋅dic⋅a⋅tive  /vɪnˈdɪkətɪv, ˈvɪndɪˌkeɪ-/ [vin-dik-uh-tiv, vin-di-key-] Show IPA .

Origin:
1640–50; vindicate + -ory 1


wv=lessifi
In order for you to increaseifi,
I must lessifi heh heh

I'm so full of myself sometimes. Sorry.

10/07/2009 06:58:00 AM  
Blogger Dougman said...

–"adjective 1. tending or serving to vindicate.
2. punitive; retributive: vindicatory killings."

Then the death penalty would be lawful in the cases of innocent blood, right?

I think so.

10/07/2009 07:08:00 AM  
Blogger Anna said...

Dougman,

Awesome! That was great. Now I am thinking of the word 'victory'. Incidentally, not incidentally... I'd have to think about it. Any connection there? Interesting anyway, at any rate.

10/07/2009 10:02:00 AM  
Blogger Dougman said...

victory: the ancient Roman goddess Victoria, often represented in statues or on coins as the personification of victory....the triumph of a righteous cause; the triumph of justice.

wv=turnspon
Who's p?
Petey?

10/07/2009 11:15:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home