Posted on 10/30/2003 4:06:40 PM PST by Lazamataz
At the present time, California authorities believe that at least half of the fires threatening the southern part of that State were deliberately set. In at least one case, witnesses report seeing a man drive a van into the brush, drop something which started a fire, and speeding away. The general conclusion would seem to be, based upon the vast scale of the fires and the large number caused by deliberate arson, that these fires are something more than the usual: that there’s something else at work in this.
I’m going to go out on a limb here: I believe that the present California wildfires were, at least in part, started by either al-Qaeda or individuals somehow affiliated with terrorism, either directly or indirectly. What is going on in California is not merely an ‘act of God’, but rather a deliberate act of war against America. My second belief is this: if the fires were started by terrorists, unless Osama Bin Laden (or whoever is playing him) admits it in a message, no one in the mainstream press will have the courage to step forward and call it ‘terrorism.’ Rather, we will be blandly assured that those who deliberately set many of these fires were ‘acting alone’ out of motives that are theirs alone. Right. And the DC sniper was a white man driving a white van and the Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman was merely a harmless religious leader.
Based upon information gathered from Terror War detainees, the FBI sent out a warning in June that al-Qaeda was planning something just like this. I point this out not with the purpose in mind of setting off a round of recriminations against the FBI: they did their job, they warned the public. Nor do I blame California authorities: what were they to do, station groups of people to guard every single inch of Californian forest? Nor was there any politically plausible measure that could have then been taken by the Federal Government to prevent this. For that matter, if this was done by terrorists, it was probably done by terrorists who have been previously unknown to the Federal Government. But that does not mean that this was unstoppable.
One of the perpetrators of the great drama of last fall, the DC Sniper attacks, is on trial right now. He is a Moslem- one who expressed great admiration for Osama Bin Laden and went so far as to mark the time on the registration forms of the vehicle he purchased for the attacks at 8:47AM on September 11th, 2002- exactly one year to the minute after the first plane hit the first tower. His crimes were committed, if not at the direction of the Islamist terror masters, then in concert with them. For the most part the Islamist conspiracy doesn’t have a formal induction process; neither does it issue ranks or serial numbers. Agents of Islamism can operate within a formal structure or outside of it, it matters little. There is only one war. There is only one enemy fighting in a highly decentralized fashion. Those who take up arms in support of the enemy are soldiers of the enemy and deserve to be treated as such and labelled as such.
The biggest problem is not, I think, active cells of al-Qaeda terrorists who were trained overseas. Certainly, there are still some in the country, but the dearth of major terrorist events in the twenty-five months since September 11th, combined with critical captures overseas and the seeming focus of al-Qaeda high command upon the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia seems to suggest that most major al-Qaeda sleeper cells within the United States, those with known terrorist links, have been rolled up.
Rather, the problem is the freelancers: people like John Allen Muhammad, who are operating in affiliation with al-Qaeda’s goals but are not members of the organization. There is a vast network of al-Qaeda sympathizers within the United States who, as of this moment, have committed no overt criminal acts. Rather, they are operating in hiding, in secret, plotting attacks that only they can know of. These people are the most dangerous because their plots are almost impossible to detect, except by pure luck. These people might be in contact with overseas (or domestic) controllers, but they offer none of the tell-tale signs of being terrorists. They have not been to Pakistan or Afghanistan for special training, nor have they engaged in other criminal activities which would obviously bring them to the attention of the authorities. Many of them are probably American-born coverts to the Moslem religion, such as John Walker Lindh. They, thankfully, have two characteristics which will make them easier to uncover: they tend to attend more radical Mosques and they tend to be outspoken.
This is a war and it is time that we treat it as such. Those Mosques which preach Jihad against America (or Israel) and raise money for terrorist-related causes need to be closed down and the Clerics who run them interned for the duration of the war. A democracy does not cease to be democratic simply because it refuses to let its enemy operate freely within its borders during wartime. The Constitution is not a suicide pact and, in any case, does not inhibit the free operations of the national defense during a war.
Those who openly support al-Qaeda should not be walking the streets free. This is a dangerous hour and those who support the enemy, or sympathize with it, become the enemy themselves. Allowing those who support terrorists to walk free isn’t an exercise in liberty, but rather one in moral cowardice. Known supporters of terrorism, of Osama Bin Laden, of al-Qaeda, of Hamas, of Hezbollah, and of any other Islamist group need to be interned for the duration of the war.
I know that this will bring shouts and scoffs. How dare I, a person of Japanese descent, suggest an internment? Those who laugh have missed the point of why the Japanese internment was wrong altogether. The internment of the Japanese was wrong, not because it is wrong to intern anyone, but because the American and Canadian governments interned everyone. During World War Two, some Germans and Italians were interned as well: but only those suspected of supporting Hitler and Mussolini. Had only those Japanese believed to be sympathetic towards the government of Japan been interned, there would have been nothing wrong with what happened.
I do not propose the internment of all Moslems, far from it. Within American society, the average Moslem has been Westernized and Americanized and less in common with Osama Bin Laden than the average liberal Democrat. Rather, I propose the internment of that minority of Moslems which sympathizers with the aims of Radical Islam, those who would join with the enemies of America in the destruction of America.
We have no way to determine which lover of Osama will start building bombs and which will confine himself to writing screeds in his support and posting them on the internet. It doesn’t really matter: they are both equally guilty.
We need not fear al-Qaeda and its friends if only we can find the will to combat them with sufficient force.
LOL! Actually, seriously, if any of them expressed solidarity with an Indian terrorist group, or openly planned to start fires, that might be reason to detain them....
It was individual citizens who identifed (and thwarted, in some cases) 9-11 terrorists by using their cell phones. The government didn't have a clue.
To have the government attempt to "make us safe" will not work, and will destroy freedom in America.
I would suggest a slightly different solution wrt those living in the US who abet Islamic terrorism. Give them a choice between deportation or serving long prison sentences without parole.
Al-Qaeda.
Al Queda is spanish for "The Cheese".
Oh, no, wait, that's "El Queso".
Maybe, but in times of war, the gov't has done a little better. Interring Italian-Americans and German-Americans who expressed solidarity with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany actually worked pretty well.
Wise. I'm curious, freepmail. It won't go farther than I.
And you know DARPA already got them from some Outer Limits scriptwriter by now.
The environmentalists are not scapegoats, but real culprits. Where the logging industry was involved with the forests that have burned, there were traditionally few fires. When there was a fire, they were spotted and dealt with quickly because there were logging personal always in the forests. The leftist, Sierra Club, just couldn't stand the idea that someone could make a buck off of the "publics trees". With the Democrats help, they have literally banned all logging in California. Lumber mill towns in Northern California are now ghost towns. The people that worked in these forests are gone. If they stayed, they are on welfare.
In short, the Sierra Club, in order to save California's forest, had to destroy them.
Wise. I'm curious, freepmail. It won't go farther than I.
And you know DARPA already got them from some Outer Limits scriptwriter by now.
Mods: Please leave this thread intact.
I know. I searched. :o)
It's not the free lancers that are the problem. It's the failure to recognize that we are at war. That burning and wildfires have been recognized as a threat for several years and that nobody is doing anything about it.
I don't buy that there was nothing they could do. They could create fire breaks for just this eventuality. They better figure it out or it's just going to keep recurring.
I say shoot one up his
But I've seen nuttier tinfoil theories...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.