Which London do you prefer?

Within the space of one week, London has shown two very different faces.

First was of the royal wedding: spectacular pageantry, beautiful bride and handsome groom, even more beautiful bridesmaid, swooning Anglophiles. I won't bother to link a video, since there cannot be a single person who doesn't know what I'm talking about.

Then a week later came the angry pro-Osama Bin Laden protests, including a mock funeral staged in front of the U.S. embassy.

But maybe I'm being unfair: the situation in Germany is even worse. There a judge in Hamburg filed a criminal complaint against Chancellor Angela Merkel for saying she was glad Bin Laden had been killed. The charge? Endorsing a crime - but of course!

I can't take it any more!

OK, so I'm not really suicidal - just frustrated! On today's Fox Sunday show, commentator Mara Liasson said the threat from Al Qaeda was now past, given all the people protesting in favor of freedom and democracy as part of the Arab Spring.

Huh? Just what does one thing have to do with the other? What bothers me the most is her assumption that the threat to the West comes only from 'violent' Islamism, when nothing could be further from the truth. 'Non-violent' Islamists have made great strides in Turkey, Lebanon and Gaza in recent years, not to mention in many European countries. Why shouldn't they do the same elsewhere?

I certainly agree that there are obviously people in Syria, Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere who want greater freedom, an end to corruption, economic opportunity and so forth. The important question, though, is whether they will achieve those goals, or whether Islamists or other thugs will win out and run the show.

So why am I so bothered to hear Mara Liasson say such things? Because she's close to the Obama Administration, that's why. What she's saying may be what they're thinking. And if that's the case, we're in deep trouble.

More on innovation

Yesterday's entry described Israeli innovations in armor defense technology; today's is about the lack of EU innovation, as bemoaned by EU council chairman Herman Van Rompuy.

Van Rompuy blamed the lack of innovation on "societal problems" and said people "live in a climate of despair and are depressed." Which is interesting, if you think about it: if Europeans were beset by existential enemies on all sides, would they be more likely to innovate? (Just for the record, the latest Gallup poll reports that Israel is the seventh highest country on the happiness index. Ahead of it are several European countries, rather undercutting Van Rompuy's argument. )

The solution, according to Van Rompuy: political leaders must be upbeat and work hard to get people to invent new things. No suggestion, of course, that the massive weight of governmental taxation and regulation could be a cause of the problem or that the EU, itself a mighty bureaucratic machine, might be least able to fix the problem. Earlier this week, Ernst & Young released a report decrying the wastefulness and complexity of competing EU programs intended to foster innovation.

In fact, Van Rompuy's remarks sound a lot like what used to emanate from Soviet and Warsaw Pact leaders. I'm sure that's just a coincidence...

Porcupine Dart

Porcupine Dart is the name of a new Israeli armor defense system that, in a test at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland, successfully hit an incoming tank round and destroyed it. This is apparently the first time that a tank round was intercepted and destroyed in mid-flight.

Another new Israeli tank defense system, the radar-based Windbreaker, fires small metal slugs at an incoming projectile, detonating its warhead a distance from the vehicle. It has already been used successfully against rocket-propelled grenades fired against tanks patrolling the Gaza border. (Thanks to Daily Alert.)

Israel will need all the new defense technology it can develop, probably sooner rather than later. Especially as Fatah has now, under Egypt's leadership, agreed to form a Palestinian national unity government with Hamas. Hamas continues to demand the destruction of Israel and large numbers of Egyptians want to tear up the peace treaty with Israel, so I absolutely cannot understand why anyone thinks the Hamas-Fatah accord will promote peace.

Is the threat over?

Mideast analyst Barry Rubin disputes the claim that the threat from radical Islam is gone now that Osama Bin Laden is dead. He offers a long list of countries where Islamist movements either control the state or are advancing politically, noting that the threat is not confined to traditional Muslim countries.

As he puts it: "Serious Islamist movements have gained political hegemony over growing Muslim communities all over the West. While many Muslims are indifferent to the movement and a few courageous dissidents combat it, Western governments and elites often blindly favor the Islamists ... In fact, the degree that Western governments, elites, and societies are blind to the actual threat defies belief."

This is what happens when you don't define your problem correctly: when you worry only about 'violent extremism,' not 'extremism:' the act of terror but not the ideology that underlies and justifies it. We don't have unlimited time to 'wake up and smell the coffee.'

A Freudian slip?

A headline announcing that the European Commission had apologized caught my eye, since apologizing is not something the Commission normally does. Turns out that this year's annual EU calendar lists Sikh, Hindu, Muslim and Chinese holidays, plus Europe Day. The Christian holidays were left out, according to the press report. (No mention of Jewish holidays, so perhaps they have simply slipped away.)

So was this a Freudian slip, the acting out of an EU multiculturalist desire to erase Europe's Judeo-Christian baggage? Who knows? Unfortunately for the EU there are still priests in Ireland, one of whom lodged a formal complaint; hence the apology.

Bye bye OBL

Since everyone else and his brother (not to mention sister) has expressed a view on the death of Osama Bin Laden, I've decided to sound off well.

First, I'm glad. Very glad.

Second, I'm very proud of our military for pulling off such a mission.

Third, the White House or Defense Department should publish a picture of Bin Laden's corpse as soon as possible. No one who wants to believe he's still alive will be persuaded by a reference to DNA testing.

Fourth, it's unfortunate that some people think that Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden are the only Islamist terrorists around. Killing him was an excellent move, but it doesn't 'solve' the problem.

Fifth, what did Pakistani authorities know? Someone on high must have known about Bin Laden's presence and protected him. Only questions are, how many were there and who are they?

Sixth, we've got NATO bombing the house where Colonel Qaddafi was sleeping at almost the same time the Navy Seals were attacking Bin Laden's house. Anyone care to articulate our Democratic president's policy regarding assassination as a tool of foreign policy?

Comments, anyone?