Posted on 09/14/2013 9:05:50 AM PDT by Kaslin
Back in 2004, when a NYFD chief reminded the 9/11 Commission that it was never in "anyone's consciousness" that the Twin Towers would fall, he underscored a terrible truth. After 9/11, we entered the Age of the Unthinkable. Seared into our collective consciousness is that the Twin Towers could and did fall. So could the U.S. Capitol, the Golden Gate Bridge and the Superdome. Our children know that which we as children never before imagined -- passenger planes may become guided missiles, and skyscrapers may turn into smoking, twisted rubble. This age of Islamic jihad against the West has indeed expanded our consciousness.
Or has it? Did these previously unthinkable acts of violence and mass murder sharpen our thinking, make us vigilant and more protective of our constitutional liberties under attack?
There was a time when I actually thought this was so. Re-reading my first column written after 9/11 today, one dozen 9/11s later, I find that it forecasts a new era of black and white, good and evil -- a new relationship with countries that were "with us or against us." I guess I have always been a lousy prognosticator. Still, that was the message coming out of the Bush White House early on.
My old column continues: "When an honest-to-goodness battle is joined, there can be no more middle ground. We simply have to know where our friends are -- as well as our enemies. Not that their whereabouts are secret. Long before the smoke had thinned to reveal the scope of the carnage in the United States, there was revelry in the Middle East, from Beirut to East Jerusalem, from Cairo to Baghdad."
I was, of course, talking about the Islamic world - the font of jihad to spread sharia to create a global caliphate. That simple catechism I would learn in the months ahead. Two weeks later, however, while I was still working my way through a copy of the Koran and, luckily found, a copy of Ibn Warraq's "Why I Am Not a Muslim," both of which I bought on 9/12/01, it was clear the mood in Washington was already different. The American flags that had instantly spread, flew and bristled in those early days were still everywhere, but "with us or against us" was gone. What was taking shape was something more like: "Who is 'us'?" Whatever that means.
In another column, one written on 9/28/01, I still pondered the need to impose mental order on the recent, unthinkable events, and the need to brace for another.
"As weeks pass, we may yet have to steel ourselves against another kind of blow to the collective brain: this one, only theoretical to date, but no less surreal for being self-inflicted. What Americans may have to come to grips with is the logic-defying notion of fighting terrorism with -- not against -- what might well be called terrorist-friendly nations."
It was happening already -- the blurring of lines that meant the blurring of identity. Our own leaders didn't prize the liberty-based civilization of the West as different from -- and better for liberty lovers than -- the world based in and dictated by Islam. On such denial an "international coalition" would arise. To our leaders, this coalition was always more important than our liberty.
This coalition, I wrote, "identifies the enemy as generic 'terrorists' who commit generic 'terrorism.' By opening the doors of alliance to an array of Arab nations whose embrace of such 'terrorists' ranges from tight, to secret, to (at best) arm's-length, the United States could very well create a broad-based coalition -- but one marked by a grievous moral vacuum that would surely undermine any American-led war effort to save the civilized world from the forces of violence, fear and instability."
A dozen years later, with the Middle East in near-chaos and Europe increasingly under sharia, it seems fair to say it has. Just as FDR pretended 80 years ago that Communism posed no ideological threat to our liberties, so, too, did George W. Bush pretend the same thing about Islam. Similarly, "Islam has nothing to do with Islamic jihad" -- a point of ideological purity enforced inside both the Bush and the Obama administrations.
Which leaves us where? With another grim anniversary behind us, the second president of the post-9/11 era, Barack Obama, has the nation supporting al-Qaida in Syria and contemplating military action on al-Qaida's behalf.
The unthinkable enters our consciousness again. But this time, few seem to notice.
?
You can tell what post I’m replying to and trace back the entire conversation by looking in between “private reply” and “view replies”.
Their Allah doesn’t exist and never did. Mohammed and those who continue to propagate his “religion” (which he invented to seize power) are the demons.
Well some folks may want to tease out ironies. I don’t have a lot of time for this.
Anyhow you do seem to be coming from a women’s-rights point of view. Don’t forget that NOBODY has rights unless a genuine God has these rights first, and if you are battering down strawpersons, try to discern between the will of clergy (fallible) and the will of God (infallible).
No... I take Eph 6 quite literally because it is true. Willing people can be PROXIES for demons. But demons are demons. They are actual supernatural entities. Just because people have dealt foolishly towards demons in the past (e.g. Salem witch trials) does not obviate the truth that the demons exist.
I think you and I exist in parallel but separate dimensions, maybe that’s why I have no idea what you are going on about.
Well I exist in the bible-is-true dimension; I dunno about you.
I’m from the “stay on topic and avoid non-sequiturs” dimension.
Rush assured us that making Birth control an issue in last years election would be a big winner.
And that the theme that wimmin who use birth control are sluts would be a big winning theme too.
And that Romney would win 2012 in a landslide.
Lets all follow Rush the compass that always points anywhere other than North: (Rush tops on right The Pittsburgh Tribune ^ | September 14, 2013 | Staff )
Also known as, from the “evade the most important thing in the universe” dimension!
This is fun. Have a nice night. ;)
And you too are falling for liberal lies about Rush. Weak, weak, weak!
Truth might temporarily lose followers but it will garner strength in the long term.
If you refer to Rush’s specific jab at Sandra Fluke, it was taken completely upside down from what Rush meant, and even Rush let the rush of public opinion rush him over. Rush meant to kid that if Sandra needed the volume of contraceptive medicine she claimed she did, she’d have to be a s-word in order to require it. The obvious implication being that she was NOT a slut, but a liar with her pantsuit on fire!
Hey, the Lion of Judah is purring in your ear. He’s asking why you hate him so.
Rush play acting as if he was the moral authority by throwing the first stones is a guaranteed disaster, And it was last year.
And look at his seer like prediction capabilities
“The enthusiasm that got people out in 2010, I'm seeing at every Mitt Romney rally. Romney's drawing crowds of 20,000, 25,000, 30,000, 15,000. “The enthusiasm that we all saw in 2010 is there. The same issues that existed in 2010 exist today. There hasn't been anything that's gotten better.”
Rush: Everything But Polls Say Romney Landslide (Newsmax Monday, 05 Nov 2012)
I almost forgot this one :
We Could See a McCain Landslide (Rushlimbaugh.com, August 12, 2008)
‘Don't Doubt me’ LOL
Well, Rush saw momentum. It was your guys’ fault if you thought you could just ride instead of pushing until the end.
You are so focused on the negative yourselves you can’t see the positive.
HAHA, Romney was a loser who motivated no-one, so now its my fault that Rush is so wrong so often???? HAHA.
You forgot that not only did Rush predict that Romney would won but he predicted that McCain would predict Obama
He is the compass that always points away from North.
But as long as he has sucker drones who will blame his being wrong on those who are critical of him he will, be successful $$$.
“ You not only forgot that Rush predicted that Romney would beat Obama, but that he also predicted that McCain would beat Obama”
Better
WTF ??
So now in your brain Rushbo is the new apostle? No wonder we are heading to hell,
Romney motivated enough people even under the current circumstances to decrease the margin by which Obama would win, the second time around. And Romney was the result you got after you shot yourselves in the foot with pity parties about what, half a dozen better candidates?
Quit with the pity party and start looking at how you are torpedoing momentum. It is quite obvious looking at your piteous screed....
All-or-nothing thinking about the fallible sphere will leave you with the nothing. Every. Single. Stinking. Time.
That is just an ironclad law, Jack, and people have to learn it over and over in every generation.
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.