The Threat We Face...and the Path Ahead

As late as this January three would be terrorists were arrested in Italy after vowing to launch an attack in the U.S. that would dwarf 9/11. Curiously, with the exception of the Philadelphia Inquirer, this story was conspicuously ignored by the U.S. press corps.

Through conversations that were wiretapped, Italian officials heard Algerian terrorists plan to kill tens of thousands of Americans.

Recognizing the anger and capability of the enemy, President Bush told graduates at the U.S. Air Force Academy, "We must keep in mind the nature of the enemy. No act of America explains terrorist violence, and no concession of America could appease it."

In order to counter other potential attacks intelligence is critical. We must be able to watch, listen and anticipate the evil deed over the horizon. We must realize that in the radical desire to sacrifice human life in order to serve a vision, every belief we value is in jeopardy.

The Patriot Act may be a small price to pay for bolstering intelligence operations that could forestall attack. It should be pointed out to libertarians who superordinate liberty that before liberty can be entertained, survival must be assured.

[Article] As Osama bin Laden noted in 1998, Muslims have an obligation to kill Americans, albeit most Muslims do not accept his argument. "The ruling to kill all Americans and their allies -- civilian and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it." In addition, there is the belief among radical Islamists that the infidels, namely Christians and Jews, must be forced to submit to Islam or die. "Our struggle is not about land or water," the late Ayatollah Khomeini said in 1980, "it is about bringing by force if necessary, the whole of mankind onto the right path."

I have a problem with arguments that give any countenance to the Islamofascists at all, or any statements such as "(all) Islam is violent, anti-Christian, a religion of rapists," et cetera -- and with comments about Mohammed. We don't need commentary like that -- it's like the barber shop rule, just don't start any religious arguments if you can avoid them.

Rather than conceding, as the quoted passage above seems to do, that Osama and his fellow Wahhabists represent some "true face of Islam," which actually corroborates Bin Laden's propaganda, it should be a punctilious observance for every person engaging Islamofascism to point out that Wahhabists are a tiny minority, and that their inerrantist, literalist interpretations of the Koran are no more authoritative than those of any other Moslem -- that is one of the fundamental precepts of Islam, that there is no priesthood and no person endowed with the right to say what is canon and what is heresy. For a final authority, there is only the Koran (enlarged by some sideworks and commentaries), and its guidance is various. Indonesia was proselytized by Moslems through personal example and personal contact; it was carried forward by Moslem merchants, not warriors, and it was a moderate a peaceful strain of Islam that was propagated through the hitherto mostly Buddhist Indies.

The example of the various Moslem slayers who waged holy war incessantly on the Hindus is by no means incontestably "orthodox" Islam, and we shouldn't be encouraging people to think that it was, or that the Bin Ladens and Abu Aymans, who slaughter men and women, including Moslems, indiscriminately, are somehow the "true heirs" of Mohammed. They aren't, and there are a lot, just a hell of a lot, of Moslems who, if we'd shut up a minute, might be willing to stand up and say so.

Remember that the Mahdi was killed after Omdurman by his own troops, who decided, after that great defeat, that the Mahdi was a false prophet, and shown to be one by the successes of the British against him and them; and that, as a false prophet, he was guilty of shirk, the greatest haraam (wrong, sin) in all of Islam.

What interesting to note is the Democrats have not changed their tune. They were dragged kicking and screaming into the WOT. If you review the reaction by Democrats and their Junk Media allies, they were TRYING to use 9-11 for political ends at first. It was only after the overwhelming rage of the American people because clear in the days following 9-11, that Democrats changed their tune. Even then they were screaming "We have to understand why they hate us" and "We aren't going to give the President a blank check".

The Democrats have finally come out of the closet and are doing NOW, what they wanted to do all along. Due to the screaming of their lunatic fringe, they REALLY think this country has forgotten 9-11-01.

We shall see in Nov if they are correct.

The Democrats have finally come out of the closet and are doing NOW, what they wanted to do all along.

Even when their message was more muffled, more garbled, I still got these flashes of very odd illumination of their mindset. In their showcase Hollywood production West Wing, there was an episode in which some Marines were caught under fire by the bad guys, and the height of leaderly heroism was portrayed as a cabinet officer or other ranker bellowing into a speakerphone, "We're going to get you out of there!" I thought, there they go again -- their first impulse is to bail out of a tough situation. Where the hell are the reinforcements? Where is the arclight raid? Here are responsible officers of the Republic, holding the hammers of God in their hands and all manner of variations and gradations of force at their disposal, and their response to a situation in which American troops are being menaced, is to yell "withdraw" into a speakerphone!

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.