Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Is It 9/10 Again?

Daniel Pipes worries that we are going back to our pre-9/11 way of thinking as we re-establish the regulations, policies, and attitudes that blinded us to the attack on that fateful day. The acts of Congress that weaken our security only mirror the atmosphere in the media and the complacency among our fellow citizens. We once again view jihadist terrorism as a criminal act. There’s no mention of the ideology that drives the enemy or the extensive support in Islamic culture for jihadist ideals.

Pipes is right, but not completely. A careful examination suggests that the left has severed cognitive contact with reality just the right is becoming aware of the painful fact that a religious political ideology, Islam, is central to the motivation of the enemy. Over the past few weeks, I’ve written about several surprising changes among conservatives that appear to be a turning point in their thinking about the Islamic threat.

On the right, Human Events regularly publishes Robert Spencer and National Review has welcomed the debate to its e-pages with critical articles on Islam. Front Page Magazine has always welcomed the debate by publishing extensive criticism of the jihadist ideology (along with a Sufi convert who claims he represents the real Islam!) Even the President stated that an ideology is at the core of the problem but he still sees this ideology as an illegitimate version of Islam. Still, conservatives are debating the issue.

But what has happened to the left? Its traditional hostility towards religion has faded in the face of relativistic multi-culturalism. Blanket condemnations, common against Christianity, are replaced with a nuanced cautiousness when it comes to Islam; and this quickly evolves into a gushing approval that holds that Islam is far better than “our religion.” Why isn't the left arguing that Islam has all the faults of a religion but ten fold? Given their historical antipathy towards religion, this should have fit right into their style.

The left claims that Bush has fabricated a religious war against Islam—“those poor noble primitives who harm no one.” Thus, any criticism of Islam is seen as “playing into the hands of the administration.” Terms like Islamophobia are meant to intimidate anyone who wants to talk about Islam. Comparisons to the Cold War are employed to insinuate that those who warn about Islam are generating unwarranted fear—despite the fact that the murder of 150 million people by communism was indeed a horrific reality. The left is adopting the posture of anti-anti-Islam in a similar manner to their stance of anti-anti-Communism. Unable to sustain a defense of communism, they damned those who fought it as they now damn those that fight the Islamic threat.

The Bush administration, unable to properly define the Islamic threat, caves in to criticism. It compromises and often adopts the opposition’s position. Pipes documents the administration’s limitations in his article. Bush's compromises represent the past and a remnant of his initial non-partisan approach under the banner of "United We Stand." (Remember that?)

Going forward there is a gulf forming between conservatives and the left. Outside of the mainstream media, conservatives are waking up just as the left becomes willfully blind. It’s a glacier-like formation but ultimately the continents will separate. What we need on the right is informed and articulate intellectual and political leaders that will step into the vacuum created by the left and the current crop of appeasement Republicans.


Blogger beakerkin said...

Pipes is right and we will get hit again. No doubt the left will respond with more stupidity and conspiracy theories.

Lets look for terrorists in

A Country Western Bars
B Old age homes
C College Campuses
D The everglades swamp

The government should look at the most likely suspects leftists and Jihadist.

On a previous thread remember Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard loons call themselves Anarcholibertarians. These are not to be cofused with the more rational familiar types of libertarians.

12/20/05, 10:10 PM  
Blogger (((Thought Criminal))) said...

I'm not sure if the Communist Chinese government is planning on making further secret political contributions to the Democratic Party, so Jamie Gorelick's Wall between foreign and domestic investigative services might not need to be erected again.

12/21/05, 4:21 AM  
Blogger beakerkin said...

Mr Beamish

Let me explain how absurd governmental policy is. We ask a series of questions but do not follow up on the iformation.

A perons testimony mentions he was an active participant in a well established Communist group . The person fills out a questionaire saying they have never been afiliated with a communist group.
Once that information has been accepted there is zero we can do about it.

A larger question should be have you participated or advocated Jihad. Have you donated money to groups that promote Jihad. Do you believe that the United States should be governed by Shariah. There is a doctrine about lying to such questions but they will never be asked.

12/21/05, 7:04 AM  
Blogger unaha-closp said...

The Bush administration, unable to properly define the Islamic threat, caves in to criticism.

If I was creaming millions from Saudi oil business I would be unable to define fundamentalist Islam as a threat.

12/21/05, 4:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Heck, I'm so old i can even remember Congress standing together and singing "God Bless America" in front of the Capital building. That day is long gone, and so is our resolve. I'm not sure that even another 9/11 will bring us into focus. Does anyone remember the DC shootings, Anthrax attacks, the LAX shootings, the 1st attack on the WTC. Hell no, just Abu-Gribe, WMD's and Haliburton. Forget Islam and Jihad,
it's all about 2008.

12/21/05, 4:53 PM  
Blogger Always On Watch said...

I recall everything Kevmoible said. And because I live in the D.C. area, I lived through the terrorism of 9/11 and the anthrax attacks and the D.C. snipers.

I am constantly astounded when people voice the opinion of "9/11 is over. Move on."

But the problems underlying 9/11 are still with us.

Beak's comment about government efficiency just adds to the madness.

A non-blogging friend and I frequently discuss the apathy and ignorance on the Right (We've given up on the Left). Some words from my friend, and these words are exact: At some point our collective heads will come up out of the sand, probably by the force of an explosion; and we'll stand, mouths agape like so many fish out of water, trying to comprehend a situation we've done our best to ignore.

Is Congress going to let the Patriot Act expire? Are we going to return to 9/10/01?
God help us! All the politicking craziness I'm hearing on the news right now is damn depressing.

I'm going to post a long article here, with apologies to Jason in advance...

A June, 2002 article @
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/424 :

For three decades, left-wing extremists have dominated American academics, spouting odd but seemingly harmless theories about "deconstruction," "post-modernism," "race, gender and class," while venting against the United States, its government and its allies.

Only these ideas are not so harmless. The radical notions espoused in the classrooms and in campus demonstrations have recently had dangerous consequences. These are especially visible with regard to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Consider some of the steps American professors took during 2002:

* Columbia University: Hamid Dabashi, a specialist on Iran, compared Israel's military maneuvers in Jenin (to prevent future suicide bombings) with the Nazi Holocaust. When one student protested his canceling class to attend a rabidly anti-Israel sit-in, he sneeringly replied, "I apologize if canceling our class in solidarity with [Palestinian] victims of a genocide . . . inconvenienced you."

Joseph Massad, a Jordan specialist at Columbia, spoke at that same anti-Israel rally, calling Israel "a Jewish supremacist and racist state" that, he proclaimed, "should be threatened." This is in addition to a talk with the inflammatory title "On Zionism and Jewish Supremacy" and a course that (students report) served as a soapbox for anti-Israeli polemics.

* SUNY-Binghamton: Robert Ostergard of the political-science department converted his course into an anti-Zionist platform. One guest speaker, Ali Mazrui, presented a lecture that a student called "a 45-minute diatribe against Israel" equating Zionism with fascism, Israel with apartheid South Africa and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with Hitler.

* Kent State University, Ohio: Julio César Pino of the history department published an ode to a Palestinian suicide bomber, lauding her courage and calling on Allah to "elevate your place in paradise."

* University of Oregon: In a course entitled "Social Inequality," the sociology department's Douglas Card reportedly called Israel "a terrorist state" and Israelis "baby-killers" and insisted that students agree with his view that Israel "stole land" on the final exam. One student said Card bashed Israel and Jews "at every opportunity."

* UC-Berkeley: The English department's Snehal Shingavi, a leader of "Students for Justice in Palestine," announced a course on "The Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance" with the now-infamous "warning" to conservatives "to seek other sections."

In brief, instructors routinely tout wild-eyed politics and openly wield their authority to indoctrinate students. At times, they even admit this, as in the case of Andrew Ross, the then-Princeton English professor who boasted in 1990 that he was using his position to radicalize "the children of the ruling class."

Not surprisingly, some interpret all this as implicit permission to harass Jewish and pro-Israel students. The result: a wave of verbal and physical attacks.

* At San Francisco State University, anti-Israel students physically threatened students marching for Israel while shouting phrases like, "Die, you racist pigs," and "Hitler should have finished the job," prompting the school's president to admit that he was never "as deeply distressed and angered by something that happened on this campus" in his 14 years there.

Even after this incident, pro-Palestinian students continued to use an SFSU-owned Web page to engage in Holocaust denial and accuse Jews of ritual murder.

* At Berkeley, anti-Israel students occupied a classroom building, leading to the arrest of 79 of them, including one charged with a felony for biting a police officer.

* At the University of Colorado at Boulder, students desecrated an Israeli flag and chalked anti-Semitic slogans on the main campus walkway.

* At the University of Illinois, they assaulted with rocks a home flying an Israeli flag, shattering the front window.

Although professors teaching Middle East-related courses are the most responsible for this degeneration on campus, others, too, are complicit. By indulging the Middle East specialists' radicalism and efforts at indoctrination, alumni, administrators, parents, other faculty, Education Department officials and state legislators effectively condone those activities.

The time has come for all these stakeholders to take back the universities as institutions of civilized discourse. This can be done only by ending the now-regnant atmosphere of extremism and intimidation. The place to start is by condemning and curbing the leftist activism that too often passes for Middle East scholarship.

And recently we've heard about Saudi's huge donations to Harvard and to Georgetown Universities.

12/21/05, 7:19 PM  
Blogger (((Thought Criminal))) said...


Nothing has turned my stomach more in the wake of 9/11 than seeing Democrats on the Capitol steps singing "God Bless America" for the TV cameras.

12/22/05, 4:49 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home