Friday, August 11, 2006

Liberal Anti-terrorism feels good


So it has begun. Liberals are foaming that Dubya's lumping together all the terrorists using the label "Islamic fascists". This is type of talk could "inflame anti-Muslim tensions" and this label is "unhelpful under the circumstances".

Puulease! Hey Democrats...this kind of politically correct peacenik attitude will get us killed. The DailyKos (Kos himself helped Lamont win over Lieberman in the CT primary) and most of the sites regular followers have an issue with you calling these wack jobs anything other than just terrorists I guess.

At the police department in DailyKosville all of their wanted posters just describe each suspect as the "terrorist". No physical description for fear of associated an innocent with the guilty. If the ideology of the bad guy is known, it's not disclosed for fear that this would be "unhelpful" or "inflame" bad feelings.

Lot's of FEELING stuff going on in the world run by liberals! If we just change our foreign policy, if we just remove Bush from office these poor confused YOUNG MUSLIM ISLAMIC FASCIST MEN, oops..I mean terrorist. will have their years of brainwashing hatred of westeners vanish....oh, why didn't conservatives think of that. We just need to make these young men with no common physical appearance or common ideology who are terrorists feel good and they will be good.


Update: Read Glock26's comment...great stuff! Plus the WSJ editorial board (whom liberals call a Whitehouse puppets) sums up my sentiments with 'Mass Murder' Foiled A terror plot is exposed by the policies many American liberals oppose. Similar to the point Glock26 makes, the WSJ points out that in the wake of news of the thwarted terror plot:

"Ted Kennedy chimed in that "it is clear that our misguided policies are making America more hated in the world and making the war on terrorism harder to win." Mr. Kennedy somehow overlooked that the foiled plan was nearly identical to the "Bojinka" plot led by Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to blow up airliners over the Pacific Ocean in 1995. Did the Clinton Administration's "misguided policies" invite that plot? And if the Iraq war is a diversion and provocation, just what policies would Senators Reid and Kennedy have us "focus" on?"

Update: 40 more arrested in Italy now....their connection to those in the UK is unclear at the moment but I love how it is reported where the 40 were arrested: "Islamic gathering places". Also from todays' SF Chronicle...I love it.

3 comments:

Glock 26 said...

I just read a review in today's Wall Street Journal of a new book called "The Looming Tower", a deeply researched history of al Qaeda. In it, the author explains that one of the key individuals who spawned what would later become al Qaeda, an Egyptian by the name of Sayyid Qutb, wrote a manifesto called "Milestones" which would "become the primer for jihadist movements around the Muslim world".

A major premise of his book was that Qutb insisted that jihad be conducted offensively against the enemies of Islam. "What was revolutionary was his insistence that Islam's enemies included Muslim governments that did not implement true sharia law." In other words, any secular Middle Eastern government would be excommunicated from the Muslim community. The process of declaring other Muslims to be apostates is known as takfir and would become a key al Qaeda doctrine.

The review goes on to say: The doctrine of takfir would take organizational shape in al Qaeda, which bin Laden and a group of Egyptian militants founded in 1988 to install Taliban-style theocracies around the Muslim world. In the unipolar world of the 1990s, al Qaeda's leaders believed that they had only one force standing in their way -- "the far enemy," the United States.

Early 1990s? How can that be? The only reason terrorists are targeting the USA is because of George Bush! If he wasn't in office, and instead someone like John Kerry was there, we would have no issues with terrorists because we would all be sitting around a big campfire singing kumbyyah.....

The whole problem with the liberal point of view... their inability to understand and comprehend that al Qaeda and terrorist orgainizations like them, don't care one bit who is in the White House. Until the entire world is under the control of Muslims and sharia law has been implemented, they will continue to target the infidels.....

Anonymous said...

That's a reasonable analysis. For more information on Qutb, this is pretty accurate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb

Note that he was against the decadence of America in 1950! Part of this was anti-racism, but he felt the culture was too "open" and "flirtatious". Sockhops! Oh no!

So, yes... the leadership in these organizations are truly batshit crazy. Any person of a liberal or other mindset proposing that we can deal with them is delusional. Qutb's vision of the world requires the end of ours... not to mention Canada's, India's, Israel's, Japan's... nearly every country but about 20. (And even there, the "vision" is proposed by a minority.)

BUT: it's worth noting that this is an ideology, not something inherent in people. I think of it like Communism. You can't give up on Russians and you can't give up on Arabs. So, the question is how best to alienate Arabs from this destructive ideology? Although the WSJ makes valid points, some things (particularly losing the propaganda war as we are) seem to indicate we're unintentionally sending otherwise secular and biddable Muslims running for the Qutbs.

Splash Two said...

So, if we fight them they hate us and want to kill us and if we don't fight them they hate us and want to kill us.

Well, that's seems totally reasonable to me. Plus, it has the additional benefit of giving us only one choice; unless, of course, we elect a democrat as president.