Friedman Logic

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/13/opinion/13friedman.html?hp

Tom Friedman of The New York Times never ceases to entertain --
Today's syllogism is interesting:

a. The Jihadists have been busy with us in Iraq and that's a big part why we haven't been attacked here at home. (Basic regurgitation of the flypaper theory)
b. The US forces are slowly but surely gaining the upper hand in Iraq
c. The Jihadists, being thwarted on Plan A -- defeating the US on their home turf -- will revert to Plan B -- blowing something up here.
------------------
Therefore, we can expect an attack soon here at home and the Friedman (and Rove) approved hermeneutic posits a narrative which the headline is "US Victory Close at Hand in Iraq Obvious say Pentagon Sources, as Terrorists Revert to Bombing the Fuck Out of More Vulnerable Homeland."

The old Texas coin toss: Heads I win, tails I win; l use your fucking $20 goldpiece and palm it.

Demonstrating a curious pathology, Friedman perfectly channels and then projects the neoconservative worldview onto the mind of his hypothetical Jihadists. (To make it easier to follow, I have translated Friedman's unspoken projections in parentheses following the key points in the neocon fantasy.)

"If the Jihadists (American neocons) defeat us (the anti-American Muslims) in the heart of their world, and force us (them) from Iraq (Iraq) , it will have a huge impact on the Arab street (American penis) and shake every pro-American Arab regime (make the fundies believe that the Rapture is imminent) . The Jihadists (Neocons) have always understood that Iraq (Iraq) is the ballgame. Iraq (Iraq) is the big one. Winning there is what really advances their (our Wilsonian) agendas."