I don't say that often, but I have to applaud Senator Hillary Clinton on her stance regarding Israel's war of self-defense and survival.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said yesterday that she supported “whatever steps are necessary” to defend Israel against Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Syria in the military conflict in the Middle East.

Addressing a crowd of several thousand in Midtown at an impassioned rally for Israel, she said America must show “solidarity and support” for Israel in the face of the “unwarranted, unprovoked” seizure of three Israeli soldiers by members of Hamas and Hezbollah, which she described as among “the new totalitarians of the 21st century.”

“We will stand with Israel because Israel is standing for American values as well as Israeli ones,” said Mrs. Clinton, who joined two dozen political and religious leaders on a stage a few blocks from the United Nations headquarters on the East Side.

(Would that the last sentence read "a few blocks from the former headquarters of the defunct United Nations.")

American values -- like a support for (small d) democratic values and freedom, as well as opposition to terrorism. American values not shared by those who are calling for Israel to stand down and (implicitly) wait to be destroyed by a hoard of seventh-century barbarians.

And she has more to say.

Bringing the threat home, she compared Israel’s military response, which has included heavy bombardment of Lebanon, to a theoretical response by the United States if it faced attacks from neighboring countries. “I want us here in New York to imagine, if extremist terrorists were launching rocket attacks across the Mexican or Canadian border, would we stand by or would we defend America against these attacks from extremists?” she said to roars of approval.

Damn straight, Senator. Keep this rhetoric up and I could almost develop a neutral attitude towards you and your husband.

I'm curious -- does this signal support for taking on the criminals flowing across our border daily, trafficking in human beings and narcotics? Does it signal a support for the American lawmen who face violence at the hands of the criminals?

Not, mind you, that the New York Times can let a news story make it into print without an editorial comment thrown in.

Mrs. Clinton and the other speakers focused almost exclusively on Israel’s right to act militarily and unilaterally, and the speeches were fiery and resolute, with little mention of civilians in Lebanon and Gaza who have been injured in the fighting.

What the editors of the Times don't realize is that if you support terrorists and harbor terrorists you risk dying with the terrorists -- and your blood is on your own hands. (Perhaps they shoudlc onsider that before tehy publish teh next national security secret on the front page.)

Well said, Madam Senator.