The War We Are Likely To Lose If We Don't Wake Up

Take this one-question quiz so you’ll understand you’re being misled and ripped off if you pay to read the mainstream media, including such publications as The New York Times and The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Question: Which of the following two publications is most likely to give you the truth about the threat of radical Islam:

A. The expensive New York Times, with a Sunday edition costing more than the value of one share of its stock.

B. The Good News: A Magazine of Understanding, a free publication of the United Church of God.

C. The Philadelphia Inquirer, the financially and journalistically bankrupt newspaper, which is also expensive and more so in relation to its value. It is not by accident that “In Philadelphia, nearly everyone hates the Inquirer.”

D. Imprimis, a free monthly that reprints speeches, published by Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Mich.

Yes, the answer is “B” and “D.” I find the two free publications do a better job of covering the threat of radical Islam and the war on terror than the two expensive daily newspapers mentioned. That’s surprising on two counts: First, the mainstream media takes the Democratic Party line that the threat of terrorism is overestimated and the threat should be downplayed or ignored.

Second, the two excellent freebies are not committed to the multiple biases of the mainstream media. (If you’re wondering how to get these two free publications, I’ll give you the answer before the end of this column.) I find it astounding these two free publications, in the sense indicated, are doing a better job than The New York Times, once considered the best paper in America but now considered little more than a journalistic joke, and The Philadelphia Inquirer, which can be viewed from a journalistic perspectives as a little brother of The Times.

This reality hit me when I received the latest issue of The Good News (March/April 2009) with an article titled, “When Will the West Wake Up? Islamic extremism is back — not that it ever went away.” Following the terrorist attacks on Mumbai and the continuing threats from Iranian proxy terrorists, the question must be asked, “When will the West wake up?”

Based on how it has largely ignored the picture of an onrushing threat of radical Islam and the stealth jihad, you might think if it hasn’t faced reality by now, it may never do so, and may wait for another 9/11 or worse. Maybe it will take a nuke going off in a major American city, something that becomes more likely each day as we let Iran march unimpeded to nuclear weapons of mass destruction. They aim missiles and nukes at us; we aim nouns and adjectives at them. That’s what I call the Barack Obama talking disease.

The author of the article, Melvin Rhodes, a senior writer of The Good News, starts by noting that Bernard Lewis, the nation’s foremost authority on Islam, first used the term “clash of civilizations” in 1990. Then another scholar who raised the alarm was Samuel Huntington, a Harvard University professor of political science, in his book, The Coming Clash of Civilizations.

He warned of an inevitable clash between Islam and the West. I would add that if you read the history is Islam from the beginning and study its doctrines, the threat of Islamic radicalism (or whatever you want to call it) should have been apparent long ago, certainly before Messrs. Lewis and Huntington started referring to the “clash of civilizations.”

You would think after 9/11, everyone would be awake to the threat of radical Islam. But it didn’t work that way. The predominant view of the media and those employed in academia is to ignore the danger and try to explain it away. One professor who is an expert on the subject, put the media/academia view of the 9/11 and other attacks as follows: “The attacks were a misguided, if not wholly inexplicable, response to America’s arrogant and self-serving foreign policy by a fringe extremist group, whose violent interpretation of Islam has little to do with the actual spirit and teachings of the religion.”

This strikes me as the deepest form of denial and the standard ploy of the liberal left: to blame the victims rather than the terrorists and try to justify and rationalize mass murder and genocide. Daniel Pipes, a foremost authority on radical Islam, observes: “But for the real target of Islamist terror, the world at large, the experience has become numbed, with apologetics and justification muting repulsion and shock … Indeed, as one reflects on the most publicized episodes of Islamist terror against Westerners since 9/11 — the attack on Australians in Bali, on Spaniards in Madrid, on Russians in Beslan, on Britons in London — a twofold pattern emerges, Muslim exultation and Western denial. The same tragedy replays itself, with only names changed.”

Another standard ploy to sidestep the whole issue is to blame it all on poverty. Then the leftists can be diverted to ending the poverty rather than fighting the terrorism. Sadly, this was the thinking of Mr. Obama right after 9/11. But 9/11 shows that explanation doesn’t go. All of those terrorists came from affluent backgrounds and had every advantage of those backgrounds.

There are other ways to stay in denial and leave the blinders on. Many of the attacks occur in far away lands, and can be viewed as distant local problems. But Mumbai should disabuse everyone of that misconception. It was not just a local concern or an offshoot of the Indian dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir. The terrorists singled out for special attention and atrocities, Americans, Britons and Jews. The target was the West, and that’s what the target will continue to be.

The author quotes Mark Steyn, the columnist and The Bulletin contributor, who is one of the few observers who understand the nature of the threat of radical Islam. He wrote the terrorists methods were definitely not randomly directed:

“Yes, the terrorists targeted locally owned hotels. But they singled out Britons and Americans as hostages. Yes, they attacked prestige city landmarks like the Victoria Terminus, one of the most splendid and historic railway stations in the world. But they also attacked an obscure Jewish community center. The Islamic imperialist project is a totalitarian ideology: It is at war with Hindus, Jews, Americans, Britons, everything that is other. [He should have added Christians in that enumeration.]

“In the 10 months before this atrocity, Muslim terrorists killed more than 200 people in India, and no one paid much attention. Just business as usual, alas. In Mumbai the perpetrators were cannier. They launched a multiple indiscriminate assault on soft targets, and then in the confusion before singling out A-list prey: Not just wealthy Western tourists, but local orthodox Jews, and municipal law enforcement.

“They drew prominent officials to selected sites, and then gunned down the head of the anti-terrorism squad and two of his most senior lieutenants. They attacked a hospital, the place you’re supposed to take the victims to, thereby destabilizing the city’s emergency-response system.”

Mr. Steyn and others who actually pay attention to the subject know that Mumbai can happen anywhere, including any city in the U.S., including Philadelphia.

Unfortunately, the mainstream media do not pay attention to the people who actually know about the threat of radical Islam. These experts should be on the front-page all the time, but rarely appear anywhere in the paper. I’m talking about people like Steve Emerson, head of the investigative Project on Terrorism; the author of Stealth Jihad, Robert Spencer; Daniel Pipes and Mark Steyn, already mentioned, and Melanie Phillips, author of Londonistan, and a British columnist.

Ms. Phillips described the situation perfectly in a London Daily Mail column. She writes this terrorism “is both global and local. It is not ‘our’ fault; it has nothing to do with Muslim poverty, oppression or discrimination … No less important was the wish to destroy the ever more vital strategic alliance between India and the West in common defense against the Islamist onslaught.

“This is why British and American visitors in those two grand hotels were singled out. And that was why Mumbai itself was chosen — as the symbol of India’s burgeoning commerce and prosperity and its links to the West.”

Ms. Phillips, who has been right on target, predicts attacks like Mumbai in the months and years ahead. She observes the West sleeps on: “The Government and security establishment [of Britain] refuse to acknowledge that what we are facing is a religious war. Instead, they think that Islamist terrorism is driven by grievances which are basically the fault of the West. But you have only to look around the world or at the history of the past four decades and more to see the absurdity and ignorance of this view.” She says Britain is still in a trance of denial and the U.S. is not that much more alert.

She says to look at Thailand, now convulsed by Islamist terrorism in the south, with bombings, beheadings and the murder of Buddhists. She says look at the persecution of Christians in Nigeria. Look at the Islamist terrorism in the Philippines. She says look at the attacks upon New York, Bali, Istanbul, Jakarta, Sharm el-Sheikh, Casablanca, Madrid, London and India.

The evidence piles to the sky and beyond and the West still sleeps. It’s time to wake up and act. One of America’s premier columnists, Cal Thomas, recognizes the problem and has some solutions. He writes: “What is needed in Britain — and America — is a change in the thinking that naïvely believes that simply exposing foreign nationals to our way of life means they will ‘catch’ it as they might the flu. Allowing immigrants from nations in which the dominant religion mandates the forced subordination of every other faith (or no faith) and their subjugation through state power under Shariah law, increases the likelihood of more attacks.

“At the very least, all non-Western immigrants to Britain and America should be told prior to their arrival that our intention is to westernize them. They must learn English, study and embrace the history of their host nation and, if they are Muslim, they will be allowed to worship only in existing mosques.

“No new ones should be built. Existing mosques must be monitored to make sure that hate is not taught and aggressive behavior toward their host countries is not promoted. If such behavior and speech are detected, the mosques should be closed and the imams arrested or deported.”

The same moral, political and military blindness pervades the media view of the conflict in Gaza. The author writes he was watching American television on Jan. 4, when four well-known journalists were discussing the events in Gaza. The moderator put on the screen a quote from the leader of Hamas, making it clear the terrorist organization would not negotiate with Israel and would not stop until it was wiped off the face of the earth.

Then when the panel of journalists started talking about Gaza, they stressed the need for peace talks. The author said they just don’t get it. How do you make peace with a terrorist organization that won’t negotiate with you and is sworn to wipe you off the face of the earth?

As Bret Stephens wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “Hamas, to its perverse credit, does not lie, at least not on fundamental issues … It is sworn to Israel’s destruction. Its charter is nakedly and aggressively anti-Semitic, no fig leaf of ‘anti-Zionism’ there.…’ Anyone who thinks Hamas will change is wrong,’ said supreme leader Khaled Mashal in 2006. Could he be any clearer?”

He could not be clearer, but apparently he is not clear enough for the mainstream media and the loony left in academia.

The bottom line is that religious conflict is not something just from the middle Ages. But the author concludes,

“The last few years have shown the fallacy of this reasoning. But even now few see the growing threat of Islamic terrorism and the increasing possibility of a major clash of civilization.”

Whether we like it or not, we’re at war with Islamic radicalism and we better wake up, recognize that reality, and start fighting to win that war. Otherwise, we are on the road to the end of America.

I said I’d tell you how to get these two valuable free publications:

• For The Good News, go to its Web site at www.gnmagazine.org or write The Good News, The United Church of God, P.O. Box 541027, Cincinnati, Ohio, 45254. That’s the address of the U.S. office. The church has offices all over the world.

• For Imprimis, go to the Web site of Hillsdale College at www.hillsdale.edu or write Hillsdale College, External Affairs, 33 East College Street, Hillsdale, MI 49242.

Herb Denenberg is a former Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commissioner, and professor at the Wharton School. He is a longtime Philadelphia journalist and consumer advocate. He is also a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of the Sciences. His column appears daily in The Bulletin. You can reach him at advocate@thebulletin.us

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.