"Open Doors and Open Windows. Silence About War With Islam"

September 11th, 2002, came to the United States without another major catastrophe to lay at the feet of Al-Qaeda. The only near catastrophes were some of the memorials that flooded the country with confused sentiment and sometimes even vulgar displays. One cannot help but look with dismay at the glut of dead birds from a New Jersey ceremony and wonder what people were thinking when they decided to release these birds as a fitting memorial to the dead. The only ceremony I saw that had taste and dignity was in Britain. Flower petals falling from a chapel dome was as dignified as it was memorable. Americans seem doomed now to suffer a type of national repetition-compulsion every time September 11th comes around. Because we suffered a national trauma with the fall of the twin towers and have not yet figured out what it means, we will repeat the trauma again and again until meaning dulls it from our national unconscious.

Now, the debate about going to war with Iraq consumes the attention of the nations leaders and political commentators. The same lack of meaning about the events of September 11th, 2001 hover around this debate like a flock of vultures. The Democrats want to continue the war against the terrorists by going after Al-Qaeda and the Republicans want to invade Iraq with a preemptive strike. Both parties act like squabbling members of a dysfunctional family that have different points of view because they refuse to say what ought to be said. No one wants to admit that father is an irredeemable drunkard, so they argue over how best to pay his bounced checks. Instead of saying the truth we pretend another position and offer a solution to that. Just as the country refuses to say the truth about the events of September 11th, so now the political parties refuse to say the truth about the next step in our foreign policy. What is that truth our country and its politicians refuse to say? It is a very simple truth that most working class Americans already know. The truth is we are at war with Islam.

Once we see that the coming war with Islam is the defining moment of our age, then much that seems to exist in a fog comes into the light of day. The United States of America was attacked on September 11th, 2001 by the advanced forces of an Islamic army that is international in scope, global in its reach and representative of the Islamic world as a whole. We are not fighting a war on terror, but we are fighting, to the chagrin and dismay of Democrats and Republicans alike, a religious war against many nations. No one in high public office wants to admit this because their vested interest make it necessary to be silent. The Democrats do not want to face a religious war because the ideology of the party prevents it from being stated. Liberalism refuses to recognize that it has come up against practical limits. The political enterprise that began with the Enlightenment and the American and French Revolutions, the ideology that is at the core of the Democratic party, cannot imagine that a religious war will be the defining moment of the 21st century. Nor can the Republican party admit that we are at war with Islam. If the Democrats are made mute by their ideology, the Republicans are dumfounded by their economic interests. How can they admit a war with Islam when the fortunes of many in the party are tied to Islamic countries and their oil reserves? To declare war on Islam or to invade Saudi Arabia, would be to end the fortunes of many who fund the Republican party and have their fingers on foreign policy. Neither party speaks the truth for the country as a whole. They both hope their silence can buy a few more years of office and power. No one wants to take the drastic steps that a war with Islam requires. The very meaning of America and the integrity of our nation remains in the balance.

So, we have the two parties attempting to set a foreign policy that will never solve the problem. Unlike Columbus who believed the world to be round, our politicians after September 11th refuse to give up their beliefs in a foreign policy that is flat and meaningless. Our nation will never benefit from the truth not being spoken. The two political parties will protect, however, their constituency by not sailing off the edge of the earth. The Democrats will not abandon their minority interest groups and the Republicans will not abandon their wealthy businessmen, so we are to go into the future with a captain that neither tells us where we are sailing nor speaks the orders the sailors need to set the sails. Some say go after Al-Qaeda, other say invade Iraq. None say the future will be a war with Islam. The house of our country is wide open and all the politicians can do is to say that maybe if we close the window no one will notice they are coming through the door.

Anyone who undergoes military training knows that in war there is a difference between tactics and strategy. Tactics are the small steps we take on a longer, strategic journey. One platoon occupies a hill, another destroys an enemy ammunition dump by using fire and maneuver tactics. All of these small steps are part of a larger strategy that brings about the defeat of a nation’s army over the course of a protracted campaign. Sometimes, those who are involved in small unit tactics are unaware of the army’s larger strategy.

Up until now, both the Republicans and Democrats have been proposing tactics. Neither party has been forthcoming about a larger strategy to deal with the consequences of September 11th and a war with Islam. The Bush Administration's plans to invade Iraq is the closest thing we have to a tactic that is part of a larger, unspoken strategy. It is possible that some in the Bush Administration have concluded that indeed we are at war with Islam, and even though we cannot say that, we can plan a strategy for it. The events of September 11th, 2001 can be seen as an attack equal to the Japanese attack of Pearl Harbor. The only reason we have a “war on terrorists” is because the politicians are reluctant to say the truth about the matter. Attacking Iraq may be the first utterance of a truth that has up until now stuck in our political throat. We already have troops on the ground in Afghanistan and are building up troops and supplies elsewhere in the middle east. Defeating Iraq and disarming Sadam Hussein will send a message to the rest of the Islamic world and will divide that world geographically in half. It will then be possible to pick off one at a time other Islamic governments. Over the long run, this could be a strategy that will defeat Islam without such a defeat being outspoken. Eventually, Saudi Arabia will fall to American power if this strategy is going to succeed.

The defeat or transformation of a world religion is no easy task. Our ultimate strategy may have to be geographical containment and national limitations imposed upon the number of Muslims living in the United States. I suppose this is an unconscious fear many European politicians have as well. In some countries like France, Muslims make up a significant part of the population. Thus, many Europeans prefer to do nothing. Yet doing nothing will not avail because the Muslim world is on the move and they will act out their resentment and dislike of the West no matter what we do. “Why can't we all get along?” will seem a naive question when the first terrorist A-bomb explodes in some western city. We can't get along because under present historical conditions some ways of life are mutually exclusive. This is why there are nations and why mighty nations have well guarded borders.

By defining our national crisis as a war with Islam we go a long way to assessing our foreign and domestic policies. Furthermore, we will have to deal with nagging problems like our porous borders, the crisis in American education and corporations, and the decay of our national culture. Needless to say, these problems will engender a debate about just what it means to be an American. This is something the patriotic working class has been expecting for a long time. Many in the American working class have strong religious values, and have watched with dismay the abuses of Affirmative Action and greedy corporate executives. The working class is patriotic to a fault and is disappointed that the American dream has been stretched thin abroad and abused at home. Their unrecognized sacrifice and patriotism makes one wonder if the “new America,” with its class of wealthy transnationals, Affirmative Action bureaucrats, self-serving politicians, incestuous corporate boards, illegal immigrants and alienated youth can survive the conflict to come. When a country’s values become as porous as its borders, who can stop the storm of true believers from invading. A screen may stop the flies, but not the wind.

Only a foreign and domestic policy that recognizes the coming war with Islam can make a difference in our national security and prosperity. “Yet how can this be?” many politicians ask. Have we not succeed in excluding religion from our debates and have we not created a multicultural world where religion is marginal at best? Must we open again the can or worms that is religious strife? Look what happened in Europe during the hundred years wars. These questions, are all important, but they miss the point. The point is that Islam has a history of conflict with the West for over a thousand years and the actions of Al-Qaeda are nothing more than a continuing unfolding of what has been going on for a long time. Modernism and globalization has done nothing more than lengthen the arm and the reason by which militant Islam can strike out against the West. The United states was sooner or later going to come up against this problem with Islam. Because we have projected our culture around the world, it is little wonder that our way of life has come up against an alternative way of life that cannot be swayed by our materialism. This is why the Democrat’s policy of only going after Al-Qaeda will not work. Al-Qaeda is not one of those rootless ferns that grows on air, but the flower of a plant that has both branch and root in a wide and international Islamic culture. Unless we go to the root of the problem, we will suffer the bloom of numberless blossoms of terror. Today it is Al-Qaeda but tomorrow it will be another group born from the soil of Islam. The very nature of Islam has to change before we are free from this struggle. If that change is culturally impossible, then we have to draw our borders clearly, define our national objectives, and secure an understanding of American citizenship. Seeing even farther ahead, we must be prepared as a nation to confront the growing Confusian-Islamic alliance about which Samuel P. Huntington warns us. If not, then will a new Sennacherib come down like a wolf upon the fold. __________

ROBERT KLEIN ENGLER lives in Chicago. He was a department chairman and labor union leader for many years at R.J. Daley College until he was ethnically cleansed and banned by the Chancellor in 1997. His book, A WINTER OF WORDS, is available from amazon.com.

But Islam is not our enemy even though most of our enemies (at least the threatening ones) are Islamic.

Most Muslims, like most Mormons, have better character than their deity. Islam is the enemy of humanity, muslim and Christian alike.

When a worldview suffers catastrophic humiliation, however, the epistemological pain in incredible. The tribal shaman no longer has the dreams that guide his people, for example. A Central American tribe learned that pharmaceuticals come from warehouses, rather than Jesus -- and now are that nation's prime source of prostitutes. In 1992, I had serious conversations with thoughtful, devastated Ukrainians who'd seen their whole raison d'etre demolished, the myth that they and the Russians were slavic brothers building a scientific utopia for the benefit of grateful descendents. The opening of the archives was a psychological Chernobyl.

Can we be ready for the opportunities just around the corner, when disillusioned millions wonder what to live for?

Not my concern at all, I'm more concerned about the people that you are trying to influence with your lies and distortions.

Please name what you believe to be a lie or distortion in anything I wrote and I will be glad to either document my assertion or apologize.

By the way, I do not intend or care to influence anyone. I am providing information for those who choose to investigate it. Unfortunately, I am convinced, most will blindly go along, believing there is no danger in Islam just as many poor Jews went along believing there was no danger in Germany from the Nazis.

Most will refuse to see the danger until they are actually thrown to the ground and the knife put to their throats for their beheading, like those going on in Pakistan right now. You can watch an example of this lovely Muslim practice right here. (Be warned, very graphic, but its what Muslims do.)

My method is patience, answering questions, and a clear presentation of the truth. I cannot "bring" anyone to the truth, but I can present the truth for any who are truly seeking it.

How many have you brought to The Truth with your tactics?

I don't know what you think my intention is, but it is not deceive anyone. Listen, Islam intends to dominate the world, and it has a program to do just that, one community, and one country at a time. Wherever they have taken over they institute shari'a law. Ultimately their intentnion is that everyone is a Muslim, or if not, obeys Muslim law, or is dead. There are no other alternative in Isalm.

This is a very real danger. If current events in this country have not convinced you of that danger, than at least take a look at what is going on around the world. Please examine some of the links I have provided. How can it hurt just to check? If I'm wrong, you will have new information to combat my "distortions," but, if I'm right, don't you think you ought to know it?

I do not know how my "tactics" are working, but I hope they will at least attract the attention of some, even like you, to examine the facts that are available.

Hank

Choosing to hate all muslims is very wrong also

I do not hate all moslems. Truth be told I probably don't hate any of them. They are mislead and ignorant fools who have been sold a lie and are dying and going to hell because of it. (kind of like most democrats)

I will however support eradicating islam to prevent these mislead ones from taking others to hell with them.

Just as all democrats are responsible for clinton (and abortion and the advance of homosexual behavior and all the rest of the democrat agenda) all moslems are responsible for terrorism. They do nothing to prevent it and they celebrate it's victories. Typical moslem thought: "I may not agree with brother mohammad flying a plane into the WTC but it's so good to see a moslem make an impact on the world (trade center)"

Until the moslems hunt down the terrorists and deprive them and their followers/supportors of life they are equally guilty of the terrorism.

I don't normally agree with most of what Pat Buchanan says, but I agree with this quote. Personally, I do not care for the religion of Islam. It does not care for me either since I am an infidel and thus ripe for looting from, deceiving, extorting, raping, enslaving and killing should my people declare war upon it. Osama knows this and wants the West to publically declare war on Islam. Osama believes that is the only way in which he and his Whabbists can gain control over all Muslims and then eventually the entire world via violent jihad which will lead to Sharia--a series of Islamic laws that are barbaric and subject to the whims and interpretations of intolerant Imams.

Through my studies, I have found Islam to be in serious need of a Reformation. I believe that the majority of Muslims need to reject the violent and dishonest admonitions against the infidels that come from the Koran, Hadith and are encouraged and interpreted by leaders like Osama, the Whabbists and even Saddamn, if it suits Saddamn's purpose. Fanatical Islam must also be stopped from pursuing its end game of desiring the earth's inhabitants subjected to Sharia if it wants to be respected by the civilized world. If the West publically declares war on all of Islam, instead of the terrorist fanatics or Islamofacists like Osama and Saddamn, the West risks getting more of the sitting-on-the-fence Islams (which may or may not be a silent majority) to join forces with their more fanatical brethren.

Where I totally disagree with Buchanan is on his ideas that the West must stop supporting Israel and not directly take on the Islamofacists in a war situation because it might get the entire Muslim world mad and they might do mean things to us. Many Muslims already do mean things to us and are ripe for leaders who are successful against the West to rally them to do more. (Or at least give them another excuse to ghoulisly celebrate or dance in the streets whenever the West is hurt.)

My study of the Islamic cultures has taught me that Muslims admire or respect strength, not weakness and capitulation. What President Bush and PM Blair are trying to accomplish is the only way to combat the current situation. It will be costly in terms of lives and financial/diplomatic resources. But if the West kow tows to Islam in its current trend, Osama and his kind will only grow more powerful and popular because the weakling West got conned and are ripe for jihad. Combating Islamofacisim is the risk that the West must take. Not Islam, which may or may not grow up and join the modern world.

None will say it because it is not true. The author suffers from the very thing he is complaining about, the need for a clear enemy. To declare war on Islam would be much simpler and make separating the good from the bad a moot point. But Islam is not our enemy even though most of our enemies (at least the threatening ones) are Islamic. RACIST ALERT. If a redneck white boy from the South thinks the author a racist, he most likely is.

Muslims in general are not necessarily our enemy, but Islam is indeed our enemy. The distinction is crucial

Islam is not a race, it is an ideology. It is a set of beliefs about the world and how human society should be structured. Communism is another example of such an ideology.

Looking objectively at Communism, you can see that it is an objectively evil system: it brings misery and death wherever it is in control of the State. Similarly, Islam is an objectively evil system: it has the killing or enslavement of non-Muslims as the DUTY of Muslims, whenever an opportunity arises. Muslims are explicitly OBLIGATED by the Qu'ran to spread Islam by the sword. Looking at Islamicly-dominated countries, you see despotism and poverty (except where you have unearned oil wealth to temporarily hold off the inevitable).

You can have a person calling himself a Muslim who believes in freedom of religion, and tolerating other ideas. The problem is that HE IS NOT REALLY A MUSLIM according to the doctrines of Islam as laid out in the Qu'ran and Hadith

This is for Flurry....do a simple search using key words...global, caliphate, singapore, putin...or just the first two. You will find beaucoup evidence of a decades long effort by islam to create a single, muslim ruled global government or caliphate. The take a look at the koran to see what options non-muslims (kafirs) would have in that world.

To say that every muslim is pushing for this is incorrect, only a few million of them are actively doing so. And, they are doing so in over twenty five countries around the world, including some like Egypt and Algiers that are already muslim run. You may not want to believe that we are not at war with islam, you would be naive to believe that they do not think that they are at war with us.

Flurry you are obviously a fool who just doesn't comprehend that Islam must be destroyed at all cost. Go back to the left wing liberal commie rock you crawled out from under and don't come out. There is a Muslim waiting to get you bubba. All Muslims are evil you nut case wacko Susan Saradon fan.

Flurry, why are you replying TO YOURSELF?

Did you inadventently forget which persona your browser was logged in as?

I think you're busted, here

There are close to ten million American Muslims. There have been Muslims in America since 1790. How have they managed NOT to wage war on the US?

When you are weak, take advantage of the protections of the society you live in, and work on growing more powerful

When you are stronger, start demanding to be accomodated by those around you. Demand they cease doing things that "offend" you, and create trouble for those that criticise you

When you are in control, liquidate those who oppose you, and terrorise the rest

American Muslims were in stage I, are now in stage II, and dream of stage III.

There are close to ten million American Muslims.

The numbers can be disputed, but they're close enough. Most of the Muslims in this country are not Arabs, by the way, and most of the Arabs in this country are not Muslims.

There have been Muslims in America since 1790.
How have they managed NOT to wage war on the US?

Let's see, 10 million versus 280 million is approximately 3.6%. The Muslim push does not really begin until they are at about 15% to 20% of the population. That is why you are beginning to see it in Europe, where they are the fastest growing portions of many country's populations.

Even with these small numbers, it is already beginning here, and the Mullahs, often sent from Saudi Arabia to speak in the Mosques, are becoming more strident and militant every day, just as they are in England. It's coming. Just watch the population numbers, and for more and more demands from the Muslim population.

Hank

"When you are weak, take advantage of the protections of the society you live in, and work on growing more powerful."

If that statement holds true, then the hijackers would have been still waiting to strike the towers.

"When you are stronger, start demanding to be accomodated by those around you. Demand they cease doing things that "offend" you, and create trouble for those that criticise you."

So, are they weak and hiding, or strong and demanding?

They can't be both.

"When you are in control, liquidate those who oppose you, and terrorise the rest."

I can post CIA info sheets on many countries in the world with predominantly Muslim populations where Christians and other religions stll exist.

"American Muslims were in stage I, are now in stage II, and dream of stage III."

What do you have to substantiate any part of that statement? Keep in mind, we are talking about American Muslims here.

"The numbers can be disputed, but they're close enough. Most of the Muslims in this country are not Arabs, by the way, and most of the Arabs in this country are not Muslims."

Which holds true for the world as well. Eighty percent of all Muslims are not Arabs, and not all Arabs are Muslims.

Declare war on Islam, and most of the fighting will be done in Indonesia and India. I don't think we would bother with sub-Saharan Africa.

"Let's see, 10 million versus 280 million is approximately 3.6%. The Muslim push does not really begin until they are at about 15% to 20% of the population."

I must have missed that memo.

BTW, you and Sauron need to sharpen up your pencils, he seems to think that they are in stage two, and you say that they are still in stage one.

What do you have to substantiate any part of that statement? Keep in mind, we are talking about American Muslims here.

We are talking about two distinct groups. The hijackers were NOT American Muslims. Different dynamics apply to them. The American Muslim community might have preferred to stay less visible a bit longer. Osama's group wanted to stir the pot a bit. They wanted to force the issue so that Muslims would be forced to choose which side they were on (and be labeled apostates if they failed to choose Osama)

"When you are in control, liquidate those who oppose you, and terrorise the rest." I can post CIA info sheets on many countries in the world with predominantly Muslim populations where Christians and other religions stll exist.

Read my statement again, paying attention to the key word "oppose".

In which Muslim country can a Christian safely stand on a street corner and preach that Mohammod was a false prophet, and that the only salvation comes through Jesus Christ?

Yes, there are Muslim countries where a Christian can survive, as long as he keeps his faith to himself, and stays inconspicuous.

BTW, you and Sauron need to sharpen up your pencils, he seems to think that they are in stage two, and you say that they are still in stage one.

Stage II is a wide stage. They are currently demanding to be accommodated in many ways, like getting a place to do their 5x prayers, demanding Muslim-proper food in prisons, protesting media airing of material that is critical of Islam. They are not (yet) planting bombs in radio stations that dare to criticize Islam.

When they are 10-15% of the population, you can expect to see more dramatic responses to being "disrespected".

I really wish I hadn't watched that video.

I'm sincerely sorry, and know exactly what you mean. I tried to make the warning clear and say exactly what it was going to be.

Every time I hear about another beheading in any of the Muslim countries, such as the almost weekly reports from our Pakistan, I am reminded of that horrible image. It is worse, at least for me, when I know the beheaded were women. As disturbing as it is, it makes me aware of what those glib news strories really mean, and how calloused we have become that these kinds of horrors can be reported so often, as though they were nothing more than a little misunderstandings.

I appologize again. It does go away, but maybe it shouldn't until these atrocities cease.

Hank

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.