Finally, Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists could not make their regularly scheduled Western media propaganda appointments. It was left to CNN’s Larry King to show up, live – on Sunday, July 23, to relay the devastating news.

So without missing a beat, the American media went straight to Iran to get word from the “representative” of Hezbollah, as if going to an embassy for messages from the home country. Rising to the bait, spokesman Hussein Safiadeen “defiantly” told them there is “no place safe for Israel.”

The particular phrase had an odd ring of familiarity. U. S. domestic terrorist, Moslem sniper John Allen Mohammed, with his child-assistant Lee Boyd Malvo, issued the original alert almost four years ago during their three week Beltway (D.C./Maryland/Virginia) killing spree: “Your children are not safe anytime, anywhere.”

The U.S. news agency, the AP (Associated Press), carrying the report, chose to remind us that the present conflict started about two weeks ago in a “cross-border raid that captured two Israeli soldiers.” The AP chose not to remind us of eight Israeli soldiers killed in that raid.

Another U.S. news agency, widely used in Canadian newspapers, Reuters, seems to have been making a point of including the eight killed soldiers in its reports, as a direct result of which, apparently, Reuters feels the need to “balance” out those reports with standard Bush-bashing in terms of American “refusals” to pressure Israel for a cease-fire.

What’s worse, I can’t get supposedly “fair and balanced,” supposedly, not anti-conservative, if not exactly conservative-friendly, Fox News, to stop perpetrating that hideous left-lib lie, namely that the U.S. “opposes” a cease-fire, a so-called immediate cease-fire.

An immediate cease-fire in which terrorist Hezbollah is immediately disarmed is immediately acceptable to all concerned, America included. A cease-fire, immediate or otherwise, in which terrorist Hezbollah lives to raid another day is a homicidal fraud.

But then I can’t get Fox News to talk of the twin-liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq. They continue to reference “the occupation,” “the American occupation,” timidly following the lead of left-lib loons who hesitate to label Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorists.

Left-loons who just love that Uniquely Useless United Nations. Yet U.N. resolution 1559, adopted almost two years ago, calls for disarming Hezbollah. No “states within a state.” Therefore, Hezbollah are not “militants,” which is the most the left-lib will concede. Militants may be legitimate or illegitimate. Criminals with military weapons are terrorists, plain and simple.

Ex-President Carter’s National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, lamented the U.S. “forcing” Syria out of Lebanon (again with 1559) for clearly Hezbollah would now be a Syrian responsibility, which would thereby have “reined in” the loose cannon.

Such is the calibre of fantasy analysis with which we are assaulted. (I’ll take the damn Katyusha rockets, please!) In any case, if any nation can truly “rein in” Hezbollah, wouldn’t that be Israel? So why not support a full-scale Israeli “invasion” and re-“occupation”?

CNN Cairo Bureau Chief, Ben Wedeman reported, July 23, that “Hezbollah is nowhere to be found in this mess” in Lebanon. He then quickly moved on to bait civilians to blame Israel for the bombings. And, again, that really is what is going on here – “baiting.”

Again and again, the Lebanese are confronted by the Western media: “Whom do you blame for all this? Do you blame Israel? Do you blame America?” The questions come fast and furious and only relent once Bush’s name comes up. (Right answer!)

Our CBC, the Communist Broadcast of Canada, has been too distracted with its own baiting, the baiting of Canadians in Lebanon (otherwise known as Lebanese-Canadians when actually in Canada) to turn against their government for “Katrina-size” (race code alert!) evacuation foul-ups.

So distracted has been our CBC that one of their cable Newsworld reporters, Peter Armstrong, has just (July 25, about 4pm ET) referred to Ramallah, West Bank, Palestinian protests of U.S. Secretary of State Dr. Rice’s visit in terms of what he labelled “U.S. government attack on Lebanon.”

Why aren’t Western reporters forced to pursue – aggressively pursue – these questions: 

1. “How do you feel about the Hezbollah not being right here right now to suffer like you?”

2. “Do you blame Hezbollah for deserting you after causing this whole mess?”

3. “Where is Hezbollah right now?”

4. “Has Hezbollah deserted you?”

5. “Is Sheik Nasrallah (Hezbollah leader) staying safe while you are in the eye of the storm?”

6. “Are you in fact afraid to criticize Hezbollah? Do you think Hezbollah is, as it calls itself, the “Party of God”?

7. “How scared are you to blame Hezbollah?”

8. “Do you think that if you criticize Hezbollah, you will live to see another day?”

Why aren’t Western reporters forcefully – at every turn – distinguishing Hezbollah military from Hezbollah civilian? They are in fact two very different wings, so much so, that some experts are saying that the civilian Hezbollah would be the single greatest beneficiary of Israel’s degrading, perhaps even wiping out, of the military-terrorist wing of Hezbollah. For then, the civilian wing, already in Parliament in Lebanon, indeed even in cabinet, would have a perfect cover for eschewing violence altogether and intensifying its political participation.

Instead, it is the terrorists – cold-blooded cowards who strike and hide – who get cover from the very institution, the media, that has the duty to expose them for what they are.

Interviewed on CNN, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called the Hezbollah kidnappings “unnecessary.” As if to say that there is some legitimate goal to terrorism, but which simply need not stretch this far? Annan did not mention the killing of eight soldiers.

And now, even the Israeli spokeswoman, the otherwise magnificent Miri Eisin, herself a former (retired) military intelligence colonel, has made back-to-back appearances discussing Hezbollah’s unprovoked attack that started all this, the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, but without one word about the killing of eight Israeli soldiers in that cross-border raid.

What we have here is a failure to articulate.

Thus, the Western media get the biggest boost in perpetrating that diabolical equivalence of “two scorpions in a bottle.” Mighty terrorist Israeli military. Mini-terrorist Hezbollah.

“Two wrongs don’t make a right,” it is said of the Israeli “offensive.” But, first, it is an Israeli “defensive” not “offensive,” launched in response to attacks, not initiating an attack. And “two wrongs don’t make a right” is not supposed to be a shield for monsters who are bomb-packing professionals of first wrongs. Otherwise, the very paradigm of wrong-doing, striking first, would become untouchable.

It isn’t as if this were the first such murderous Hezbollah attack on Israel since Israel pulled out of Lebanon. Barely months after that pull-out in 2000, Hezbollah even held hostage the corpses of Israeli soldiers it killed during the operation or shortly thereafter.

Now terrorist apologists want to talk another great power down to defeat. It’s called Vietnaming (as in Vietnam). To be named for, thereby being undermined at every turn, until in fact, the nation is brought to defeat. I’ve been at great pains here to flesh out its alphabet.

It is time for the Jewish State to show the world the real Party of God.