From Jules Crittenden:
The war with extremist Islam has just entered a new phase. Times of London: Al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan and Iraq have issued orders for British cells to conduct a “low-tech†campaign of abductions and beheadings.
Islamic terror cells in Britain have been instructed to carry out a series of kidnappings and beheadings of the kind allegedly planned by the nine terrorist suspects arrested in Birmingham last week.
The “strategic†assassination instruction was issued by Al-Qaeda’s leaders in Pakistan and Iraq to dozens of their followers in this country. It was uncovered by MI5 last autumn, senior security sources say.
… The revelation explains the recent deployment of a permanent SAS unit to London. The unit has been placed on 24-hour standby to respond to a terrorist attack in the capital. It would aim to carry out a hostage rescue mission within minutes of being alerted.
… One well placed source said: “Cells in the UK have been alerted to carry out this type of attack as opposed to the more sophisticated type of bombing in which you place a large number of volunteers at risk. All you need for a beheading is a bit of courage and a sharp knife.â€Â
In the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, I was puzzled by the lack of follow-on. I asked the terrorism and security experts I was talking to at that time why al-Qaeda didn’t do the logical thing. Activate the domestic cells for a series of synchronized low-intensity suicidal attacks with guns or bombs. A dozen people killed by Islamic gunmen in each of a dozen US cities at the exactly same time on a Tuesday morning rush hour, or in the malls on a Saturday afternoon, would bring the United States to a screeching halt. (And no, I’m not giving them ideas. This kind of thing is (A) obvious and (B) has been discussed quite a bit.) We knew the cells existed. Two al-Qaeda operatives picked up in Jordan had been Boston cabbies just a couple of years earlier.
The experts pointed out that no … quite rightly to date … al-Qaeda was fixated on dramatic large-scale attacks. Planes falling out of the sky. International landmarks exploding. They don’t like the pennyante nature of small-scale attacks of a sort considered part of the normal fabric of life in their own neighborhoods. Because the audience wasn’t us. The audience was the Islamic world.
Now, the audience is Europe’s Muslims, hence the plan to abduct and behead British Muslims. Europe has been teetering on the brink of open ethnic warfare for some time, with brief outbursts in France. The al-Qaeda leadership isolated in their Waziri caves and dodging Hellfire missiles in Anbar apparently have just figured out that they can influence this situation. They’ve also figured out this blowing up planes thing isn’t working out for them.
I think Crittenden is absolutely correct—just as I was convinced by Bernard Lewis before him—that many countries in Europe are on the verge of internal “wars” with Islamic radicals (though many will probably fight them with law enforcement and special anti-terror units rather than predominantly military force). And in fact, I have been long-arguing (most recently, here) that the multiculturalist social philosophy in much of Europe (Britain, Denmark, Germany many other EU countries)—with the hypernationalism (and anti-assimilationist snobbery) of countries like France acting as philosophical outliers—has been laying the groundwork for war from within by Islamists on their host countries.
Ironically, and perhaps to their subsequent benefit, multiculturalist countries, while in the past they have tended to be the most willing to circumscribe equality to accomodate an almost suicidal program of social engineering that replaces equality before the law with a culture of “tolerance” that “levels the playing field,” are also given to radical pendulum swings with respect to public policy (which accounts for the promotion of the multiculturalist project in the first place). And because much of European political philosophy suffers from a, shall we say, more relaxed adherence to both free-speech protections and civil liberties when compared with its western liberal counterpart in the US, the severity of the response to attacks on the sovereignty of individual countries from within are likely to be marked and swift, once a country believes it has reached a point of conflagration.
And with Al Qaeda essentially now declaring war specifically and locally against the internal security of sovereign nations, with enemy soldiers firmly encamped and radicalized within the battlezone (as an aside, I’m guessing many smug Brits, in their more private, soul-searching moments, are beginning to question the wisdom of their gun laws), I suspect that we’ll begin to see a vocal howling by the population of such countries for draconian governmental measures once that first throat is slit, or that first school is shot up.
What will be soon evident, I think, is a stunning philosophical inversion come spectacularly to light: as Europeans who once denounced the US for forcefully prosecuting the war against Islamists begin to recognize that their social liberalism and western guilt won’t protect them from encroaching fascism gilded and reinforced with religious pretense, and so as a result begin calling on their governments to fight back in ways that the US Constitution would likely forbid, the US, for its part, always the continental wannabe, is only now coming around to that original European position—helped out by endless partisan criticisms against the campaign, by a cultural weariness toward war, by an academic establishment steeped in transnational leftism with a desire to see the US “humbled”, and by media opportunism (or bias, take your pick) that has, by force of will, almost completely sapped us of our willingness to fight Islamism proactively.
I posted before on a controversial measure in Germany to “indict” the Koran—a type of neo-denazification measure based on certain quite reasonable, I think, reactions to the pronouncement of “moderate” Muslim leaders inside the country (the posts provoked some interesting debate). Still, from a pragmatic standpoint, I think the measure would lead to a net loss in the calculus of war, should local wars indeed erupt—thanks in large part to the tensions created between ethnic / religious identity and fealty to one’s country that have become practically institutionalized as a result of the multiculturalist project. Which doesn’t mean that, should a war against Islamists be fought and won, something along the lines of a denazification will not then be in order. (Note the precedent, in fact)1
Clearly, no country can stand by and watch itself increasingly held hostage from within —the goal of the enemy being, ultimately, to wring out concessions and prepare the grounds for the next stage of a renewal of the new Caliphate.
And so such countries have two choices: either beat back their previous missteps with brutal and uncompromising measures; or else kick the can down the road and hope that concessions satisfy, rather than embolden, Islamists.
The US, thankfully, is not yet fully compromised by the multiculturalist project—nor has it abandoned its adherence to the Second Amendment. And so I don’t believe a campaign by al Qaeda to wage low-tech terrorism here would cause the kind of clash of civilizations it is clearly meant to try to stoke in Europe.
Which doesn’t mean that should such a campaign begin here, the US government would shy away from taking drastic measures (or else risk vigilantism and the rise of internal militias, under worst-case scenarios) to combat it—just that I think the vast majority of the US Muslim population, having been encouraged to assimilate moreso than their European counterparts, will be both cooperative and patriotic, eschewing tribal and religious loyalties for national ones.
And were this to happen, al Qaeda would lose a huge battle for the soul of both the religion and pan-Arab nationalism.
Which is why, while I share his concern, I disagree with Crittenden here:
Reporting on the developments in the UK suggests the focus is on Muslims who collaborate with the hated Crusaders … Muslims who are British soldiers and cops. It is only a matter of time before they turn their attention to the United States and “low-tech†operations here. And it is only a matter of time before they expand their list of beheading candidates to other sectors of the population. The Times article also discusses plans for vehicle-borne fertilizer bombs. If you’ve grown numb to the horrific death toll in Baghdad marketplaces … 130 killed by a pickup truck bomb here, 65 killed by a car bomb there … think about one of those things coming through the glass doors of your local supermarket or mall.
In an open society such as ours, we are indeed susceptible to such attacks.
But they will only occur here with any kind of coordination and sanctioning if al Qaeda completely misreads our culture and confuses the US with a European country governed by soft Western social liberalism. And that would be a serious miscalculation. Because, unlike many European countries, the US has the capability to strike back at more than merely the local pawns—as we have done in both Afghanistan and Iraq. And should we begin seeing attacks on malls or schools here in the US, it is only a matter of time before our politicians are forced to heed to public outcry for relief, which will involve, in addition to such things as immigration reform and a further relaxation of civil liberties protections, calls to stop the attacks by projecting force internationally.
And it will be at that point that our ROEs will have changed, and there won’t be a damn thing Andrew Sullivan will be able to do about it. In short, such attacks here would significantly hasten the defeat of the Islamist project.
Crittenden concludes:
All of which is another reason why it is important to keep al-Qaeda busy and to keep killing terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq … and to step up operations in Waziristan, local sensitivities notwithstanding.
Not to mention, it is still the right thing to do.
Of course, this post necessarily posits much in the way of hypotheticals, so I welcome your discussion and feedback.
****
Hot Air has more here. See also, Captain Ed.
****
update: Charles at LFG emails a link to this disturbing story of calls by the leader of a UC-Irvine Muslim Student Group for the destruction of Israel.
Most disturbing about this is that we see, quite clearly, anti-Israel / anti-US Muslim activists actively admitting that it is part of their strategy to deflate morale here in the US and, by doing so, to weaken support for the “monied” Jews manipulating the government—at least for the time being—while the jihadi campaign of “persuasion” overseas is taking on a different (and apparently legitimate, to the way of thinking of the organizer and those shouting along with him) set of tactics.
And it looks like they already have the Wes Clark / Pat Buchanan folks won over.
Still, when confronted with such clear examples of an orchestrated strategy to undermine the war or terror by deflating morale and destroying resolve, many in the anti-war camp will continue to insist that such are merely fringe elements holding fringe demonstrations that don’t have any kind of appreciable impact on our ability to wage war or support a particular foreign policy.
Whereas, say, Tony Blair releasing a terror warning around the time of Ned Lamont’s Democratic primary victory? A clear case of ruthless neocons manipulating the narrative.
The cognitive dissonance is stunning.
Anywya, I’ll post the transcript here, but please do go watch the video:
This whole [Daniel Pipes talk at UC-Irvine] was to boost [Jewish / pro-Israel / pro-WoT] morale, make them feel as if Israel is there to stay. And that they’re gonna … he’s trying to garner support for the state of Israel.
And by having a university campus, a bunch of students all walk out, this is trash, this is garbage … it really defeats … it deflates the morale of everyone in that room. So right now they’re all pretty depressed in there. [Laughter.]
And they’re gonna go out there and they’re gonna think, they’re gonna try to make people think they’re powerful for a minute. But when they go home, they’re gonna be like, crap. We’re in the middle of America, we’re in Irvine, a public [inaudible] … and this whole campus hates our guts. [Laughter.]
They have no future. And it’s just a matter of time before the state of Israel will be wiped off the face of the earth.
[Crowd: Takfir! Allahu akbar!]Justice will be restored then. Those people who are there legitimately … the people there will, will rule. There will be no injustice any more there.
So just keep on doing what we’re doing. Our weapon, our jihad, our way of struggling in this country is with our tongue. We speak out, and we deflate their morale, and this is the best we can do right now. And our brothers and sisters on the other side of the world, they’re handling business in their own way. May Allah give them strength … [inaudible]
[Crowd: Takfir! Allahu akbar!]
****
1As I wrote at the time, “Naturally, the implications here are staggering, should this indictment gain tractionâ€â€and I need to give the claims and counterclaims some more thoughtâ€â€but theocratic documents that claim to override the social contract of the state, insofar as they agitate for the overthrow of existing government order and foundational principles of statehood, could, I suppose, come to be seen as documents that promote sedition and are therefore worthy of censure (the Bible, by way of constrast, has Jesus counseling his followers to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’sâ€â€a mandate to draw a distinction between government and religion, though it is not a distinction, as some would hold, that would keep religious people from agitating for change within the constructs of the political system).
“As a borderline free-speech absolutist myself, I have obvious [really really really really really really really grave] misgivings about such an attempt to block the dissemination of Islam by banning the text (two things spring immediately to mind: Fahrenheit 451 and Jeff Goldblum’s soundbite chaos theory in Jurassic Park: “nature finds a way”)â€â€not the least of which is that such attempts to suppress the book will only give it more power among true believers.
“At the same time, thoughâ€â€and being honest hereâ€â€it is unlikely that, in the hands of those who are gaining control of the official Islamic narrative (see, for instance, the Danish cartoon controversy and visible Muslim reaction), the book couldn’t have any more power than it already wields. Furthermore, it is less a text as it is a physical manifestation of the word of God. Which is to say, the ban wouldn’t be on speech (in the form of text) so much as it would be on a peculiar form of ontology that approaches the condition of talisman. […]”
So saith John Bolton’s tough-talking mustache, Wilford Brimley.
Wouldn’t the DC sniper thing be a good measure of this? And I’ve already forgotten their names … one of them reminded me of the mean kid in Harry Potter. But our susceptibility could be mitigated next time around – the media would be wise to review whatever “lessons learned” they have noted in past such incidents. So they can be, you know, responsible and stuff. Sigh.
We keep electing politicians on the basis of their desire to pull us out of conflict with the jihadis, and they’ll make that conclusion.
Translation: France will go fucking insane, guillotine a bunch of Muslim plot leaders, and then stick the heads on pikes in front of the Louvre to serve as a warning.
Half of Manhattan and at least one person in Provincetown will be gob-smacked by the violence of the French reaction.
Objective correlatives rock!
Somewhere in Jeff’s post, and in my own little happyfeet heart, I swear I’m hearing a stifled yet determined cry of “Bring it on.” But is it directed at the jihadists or at:
For myself, I’m not sure, and I tire quickly of introspection.
Ting is, France and the UK have already been watching this happen. The question is: Is it too late for them?
x
I think it is worthwhile to note that Sweden is the European nation that is actually in the direst (most dire?) of straits.
Sweden is still promoting a huge and as yet undiminished immigration of Muslims from the Middle East, an unequivocal non-assimilationist policy towards those immigrants and finally a nearly total national crackdown on any discussion of the two prior topics.
It is also interesting to note that Sweden’s Nordic brethren in Denmark are probably their most complete opposite in all three areas mentioned above.
The next big issue in Denmark is going to be how to deal with the traditionally liberal intra-Nordic immigration policies in light of the Swedish intransigence to tighten their extra-Nordic policies.
And just for the sake of completion, the Norwegians are tracking the Swedes.
traneous
There’s a new one. A driveby kiss.
Very good post. Banning books is not the way to go. I get nothing from the Koran (to be honest) though I usually get something from most religious texts (and commentaries on them.) But banning that text wouldn’t accomplish anything.
In general, the ability of texts (in the large sense) to change people’s minds (the masses, not the intelligentsia) is way overrated. The civil rights movement did not succeed because of “To Kill a Mockingbird”, nor was slavery abolished because of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”, nor were Nazism or Communism (which killed tens of millions) keyed to any single text which goaded millions to imprison, enslave, or murder their neighbors (the political leadership might have been otherwise influenced).
It’s simple what will happen here. Is Muslim cells become violent, then either assimilated or partially assimilated members of those communities will drop dimes on the malefactors, or, if the violence is still not stopped, governments will assume a great police state posture, and if it still isn’t stopped, states will start locking up Muslims. The first place something like this will happen is France or Germany. The last place would be the UK (because there are many assimilated Muslims there) or the US (because of our free speech ideology, pace 24.)
Well, as I mention in the post, I think France is an outlier: their problems stem from treating their Muslim populations as inauthentically French, and not allowing for assimilartion—rather than actively promoting a “celebrate the differences” multiculturalist approach. In short, they value their “own” culture too much to allow it to be mongrelized—whereas many in Europe in thrall to the multiculturalist project have valued their own culture too little to defend it.
As I also note in the post, however, I think we are seeing a sea change. When Daniel Pipes goes to London and gets the Brits on his side in a debate against Mayor Red Ken, the beginnings of a grassroots uprising are in the making.
The unreconstructed press may have tried to hold this back from the public, but the information leaked out through the internet. Which is moot, anyway, as I believe an eruption has been on the horizon since the Tube bombings—and with every subsequent report of a cell broken up or plot foiled, the Brits are just going to get more anxious, knowing that the odds of one succeeding would seem to increase each time one is foiled.
Objective correlatives rock!
~ lights Bic and holds it aloft ~
–
1. The “drive-by kiss” isn’t new; it subscribes cleo to the comments.
2. Some Euro countries may crack down in the face of attacks, but it may be much longer before they officially recognize that the US had it right. The anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism thriving there will prevent any overt admission of error by the locals. Some govts may become more likely to back US efforts like sanctions on Iran, but so long as Russia and China block UN action, the benefit may be marginal.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but the LAT reported on 9/18/08 (“Moderates Raise Voices To Influence The Young”) that Sweden’s Muslim population of 350,000 (3.9%) derived primarily from Yugoslavia and its subsequent states.
COUNTRY / MUSLIM POP /
Karl, allowing for some wiggle room, Euro nations will never acknowledge that the US had it right. That would be to kiss good-bye to just too many votes.
“it will be at that point that our ROEs will have changed”
Yes,
They don’t realize that they are just a few malls, a few schoolhouses, from having their mosques burnt to the ground, the deportation camps opened up; their religion declared a cult and outlawed and the welcome mat pulled in.
Just ask the Japanese what happens next.
What’s amazing to me is that they remain so doggedly ignorant of history that they think we are incapable of such rules of engagement.
Imagine, if you will a wave of 20 school bombings in 20 cities in 20 days. Hundreds of dead first graders with their Winnie The Pooh backpacks soaked in blood.
Now imagine Howard Dean on CNN. What do you think he would say, when faced with the prospect of millions of voting, grieving parents who have to send their kids to school on the 11th day?
Do you think he would say we need to be tolerant of different cultures? That the only way to prevent the next bombing is to give up our guns and accept multiculturalism?
Or do you think he would say the only reason that America’s schoolchildren continue to die day after day after day is that Bush has allowed these extremists to preach hate and terror from within their mosques right here in the United States?
I agree, Karl, that official recognition is unlikely anytime soon—though you may seen one or two brave souls admit to miscalculating.
But I do believe that those with less to lose by changing posture—namely, besieged citizens—will likely change their tune more rapidly (though I don’t doubt we’ll first see this “escalation” blamed on everything from Bush’s policies and Blair being a poodle, to “crushing poverty,” Kyoto, AIDS in Africa, and the Crusades; such is the nature of both the contemporary western press and its intellectual “elite”).
Nor I you, but something is going on. I spend a lot of time reading Snaphanen (a Danish-Swedish blog) which addresses these issues (most of the articles are in Danish or Swedish however). The situation is more dire than the LAT cares or want to admit.
Prescient of them
We don’t need to ban the koran. We need to ban Islam. It is nothing but a death cult that will, if it is allowed to continue to exist, eventually get its hands on enough nuclear weapons to ensure the end of human civilization. This vile parody of a religion is a travesty that has been allowed to go on for several hundered years too long already….
“Blame Bush and the neo-cons!”
No doubt trying to mine the comments for contextless fodder.
I think there are billions of Muslims—and billions more non Muslims—who might find that characterization a bit too broad, TMTM.
jdm – ack – it was 05 – they were citing State Dept figures… I definitely feel you with respect to the Times’ credibility… I tried to include their nifty chart but it got cut off or something – I’ll try to cut it back to countries w 200K+ muslim pop.:
COUNTRY / MUSLIM POP / % OF TOTAL POP / ETHNICITY, ORIGIN
France / 5,000,000 / 8.3 / Algeria
Germany / 4,000,000 / 4.9 / Turkey
Britain / 1,600,000 / 2.7 / Pakistan
Spain / 1,000,000 / 2.4 / Morocco
Italy / 1,000,000 / 1.8 / Morocco
Netherlands / 886,000 / 5.5 / Turkey
Greece / 450,000 / 4.1 / Turkey
Belgium / 364,000 / 3.5 / Morocco
Sweden / 350,000 / 3.9 / Yugoslavia
Austria / 339,000 / 4.2 / Turkey
Cyprus / 200,000 / 26.0 / Turkey
No doubt there were many good Japanese in 1939-1945 as well. Still, it turned out to be necessary to drop a couple of nuclear bombs. Sooner or later we’re going to have to do likewise here, and sticking our head in the sand (remember that hilarious South Park episode?) chanting the Mantra that “most of them are good people” is not going to do anything to postpone the day of reckoning. Also, note that as fanatical the Japanse facists were (the original suicide bombers, if you will) it ultimately did NOT prove to be necessary to kill all of them–just enough to get it through their heads that we were serious.
I don’t know that this is ever possible, but it certainly isn’t if we’re not going to brook even criticism of Islam, and much of Europe is either there or beyond. See Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
By the way, back in the day, when terrorism was mostly an exclusively Middle Eastern thing, a frequent target over there was movie theaters, which no one seems to mention much when the “battlefield moves west.” If I’m not mistaken, the largest fatality count associated with a single event prior to 9/11 was a movie theater in Iran.
Jeff, I think you may be surprised at how many folks share the opinion of TMTM that “Islam” is nothing more than a bloody death cult global disease that needs to be eradicated from the host it’s determined to destroy.
True enough. And we did essentially put an end to Shinto.
Still, I think it far more likely that the Iraq Constitution could be used for a model in countries where Islamism is defeated. And I agree that it won’t be defeated unless and until we show a willingness to fight the war like a war and not like we’re trying to perform cosmetic surgery with attack helicopters and Marine battalions.
Jeff,
Never underestimate the power of the media to ignore things that don’t fit their world view. They always got some Global crisis ready for headlines ( Global warming, bird flu , State wide smoking bans , Can breathing air cause cancer , CEO pay ). These low impact attacks (low except for the guy whose head gets cut off) are kind of things that can bury with ease. They can use the lines “details of the victims death held back at the behest of the police”, “ men of unknown ethnic background “ ( Tim Blair has many examples of these stories ) . When that dam of information is broken ( because of Tapes shown on You tube) they will go to “its Bush fault”
Whatever. You should just know that our muslims are a definite cut above them European ones. Not big Bush fans mostly, but good people.
Oops—should have been “you don’t” not “you.” Maybe I should have started drinking a little earlier….
Don’t see many Druids these days either.
happyfeet, while you’re right in a lot of instances, given that many of our muslims are here because they were fleeing hardcore places, the broad brush you’re using misses quite a few spots too. CAIR comes immediately to mind, and the LGF archives have more examples than you can shake a stick at.
As always, it isn’t all, but neither is it none.
I think “put an end” to Shinto overstates just a little – I think we made them get a constitution that separated it from the state, and maybe some stuff changed, but Shinto was not wiped out. I just watched My Neighbor Totoro for the first time and the Shinto thing came up when I went to read about it.
Pablo – you and I know that – but we don’t want to send a nuanced message like that to the “bloody death cult global disease” people. Trust me on this.
Islam delenda est.
I’d take a close look at all the really unpleasant concomitants of German guilt before… Oh never mind – ok Macker: Your mission, if you choose to accept it, DESTROY ISLAM. Report back here when you have news.
TMTM is being overbroad. That being said, I am a devout enough Catholic to believe the Devil is working hard on us humans and I am convinced that sects within Islam are actually Satan-worshipping, such as that 12th Imam bullshit coming out of Iran.
I find it hard to believe that the U.S. population would ever demand a “further relaxation of civil liberties protections,” which I take to mean a call for a suspension of our constitutional rights, or even a police state lite. Maybe I misinterpreted that phrase, but I can’t imagine that we would demand that our own government subjugate us.
You find that hard to believe, cynn? Okay. Well, I’ll pass word along to my wife’s bachan, who spent time in the camps during WWII.
But I suspect if bombs were going off in malls and elementary schools—or if US citizens were being grabbed out of their homes and having their heads sawed off for videotaped propaganda—you can be damn sure anti-“profiling” measures would be among the first things to go.
For example.
There are numerous examples of what Robert Spencer has termed “spontaneous jihad” that have been quickly buried. Even with the Beltway Shooters, once their identity and motive were found, the volume of coverage dropped.
The irony, Cynn, is that the very things that have prevented such a grassroots uprising (which I’m CERTAIN would take place should we begin seeing the kinds of attacks I describe)—the PATRIOT Act, NSA “warrantless surveillance,” monitoring / infiltration of radical mosques—are the very things that are now being decried as the “shredding of the Constitution.”
My point is, if you think that’s bad, you ain’t seen nothing until you see what happens when an armed populace is forced to watch its children slaughtered in malls or schools while the government mouths pieties about Islam being a religion of peace.
Everyone knows that the vast majority of Muslims in this country have not been sent here to set up cells and try to fight us from within. But that ain’t gonna make a damn bit of difference to those who will insist on greater scrutiny of Muslim-Americans, or those here on student visas, etc.
After 911, anti-Muslim sentiment wasn’t particularly high. The US is, after all, a pluralistic country, and—the hyperventilating of victim advocacy groups notwithstanding—random violence against Muslims was statistically negligible.
Part of that has to do with the method of attack, and the fact that follow-on attacks didn’t arrive the way some predicted.
And perhaps I’m giving al Qaeda too much credit, but I believe that they realize that we will not stand for jihad waged on a daily basis in our schools or on our streets without some kind of drastic pushback.
Roosevelt and Lincoln had the “moral authority” to get away with suspending a few Constitutional rights.
No-bid contracts for cronies and made-up intelligence does not engender trust.
It makes most people think you’re just trying to pull a fast one.
Buzz off, alphie. Adults are talking here.
Or, If you want to join in, do it this way: pretend al Qaeda waits until Bush is out of office to call for low-tech attacks here, confident that a Democratic Congress and (God forfend) an anti-war Democratic president would not fight back.
Ready? Go.
Cynn – here’s from the NYT editorial they did on “Legal Abuses In The Sniper Case” on Oct 21 2003:
and from WaPo, “Sniper As Terrorist,” Oct 20 2003:
So whatever happens – these guys should definitely have your back.
It’s not like this hasn’t been discussed before, Jeff. It’s straight out of the playbook of any revolutionary group:
1. Launch attacks
2. Government responds
3. Point out the heavy-handed tactics of the government
It only works if you’re trying to overthrow a government, though.
What would be the point, otherwise?
alphie.
Hard Vacuum.
Hard.
Vacuum.
You know, Jeff, while you’ve got that banning stick out…
I’m just saying, is all.
This is largely a semantic distinction as continental law enforcement is allowed a wider degree of ‘latitude’ in the performance of their duties, legal niceties and protections of the accused notwithstanding.
Yes the American public certainly would fear a loss of civil liberties. The right to life being formemost in their minds. Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, would no doubt become less valued in the face of such existential threats. In the absence of concrete action on the part of lawful authority the public would no doubt fill the void as they see fit.
No justice no peace, and all that.
Alphie,
See. There’s kiddie/fun stuff like what happened in Boston.
What’s telling is that the chucklehead defenders of the act think that terrorists wouldn’t put bombs in boxes decorated with Aqua Teen Hunger Force stickers and/or lights.
–
Put some terrorists in a school – whichever group those terrorists happen represent (Muslims, Anabaptists, Tupperware Distributors, whatever) – is going to have Hell brought down upon them.
.
Jeff, I am personally intrigued by the alphie’s implied acceptance of a Republican and his policies if 140 years has gone by (I am uncertain if it is at least 140 years, or some other largish number like 120 or 100).
Because the fact of the matter is, the Democrats were not quite so accepting 140 year ago. Check out this mandate that Lincoln had in 1864. Sure, those (fraudulent) electoral make it look like Lincoln ran over McClellan, but look at those popular vote totals. A somewhat closer election and one contested on that war that was so poorly run by Lincoln (not anymore) and involving serious constitutional violations (nowadays morally authorized).
The Democrats always end up on the right side as long as you forget what they were saying at the time.
With this country’s child fetish, if the Islamists pull a Beslan here, there’s gonna be dead muslims everywhere.
That pesky second amendment thing again. When the government fails in its Constitutionally mandated duty to protect the citizens from attack, the citizens will protect themselves. Unfortunately for any non-Jihadi muslims in the US, the average citizen isn’t about to do a background check before they pull the trigger on their Glock.
Which dovetails nicely with an argument I’ve made before. We’re trying to reform the middle-east to stop the Islamists from forcing us to do far, far worse.
Even worse, any non-Jihadi looks-like-a muslim in the US. That’s the part that really grates: because we have been prevented by PC from taking this whole issue seriously, when and if the overreaction comes, it will affect far more than just “asian” muslims.
The good brown people will know to put a flag on their car and a button on their lapel, and they will be spared. We developed a pretty good system last time round, so have a little faith.
Sounds like alphie agrees with Malkin’s take on the Japanese internment.
The historical lesson that you are missing, is that the original “Nazification” of Germany involved the SA acting in a manner which would easily be called “terrorism” today.
Konrad Heiden noted in his 1944 work “Der Fuehrer” that one of the most important and yet least understood factors in Hitler’s rise to power was the degree to which the government was becoming “nazified” even as it tried to suppress his SA—because they used methods consistent with *his* ideology (i.e. “relaxation” of civil liberties”), not that ostensibly of the liberal Weimar Republic.
As Heiden put it (paraphrasing, I don’t have my copy hand), the German government ended up acquiring the traits that it sought to combat in Hitler… no doubt a convenience for the soon-to-be Chancellor; less housework for him to do once he moves in.
If Europe did move as you describe, from wussy to brutal repression by “relaxation” of their civil liberties, there would be no consequent “denazification”—the very process of fighting off the Islamic threat will effectively complete the re-nazification of Europe. The evidence is everywhere you care to look—the underlying cultural and philosophical characteristics that made the German soil so fertile for Hitler, now exist across Europe.
Given this, this claim:
In short, such attacks here would significantly hasten the defeat of the Islamist project.
… is hardly saying much, as the remnants of freedom in Europe are likely finished either way.
The same goes for here; if America ended up going the way of Europe and turning into an Empire, it won’t matter who will have “won”; freedom will have lost.
Not really, Rob.
Just pointing out that Bush has provided us with a textbook example of how not to take America to war.
Funny, isn’t it, how the Left is so heartily chipping in on step #3. They’re so anxious to help they make shit up.
There is much wisdom in the words of this Seerak.
Really? The way I see it, the Left has given us a textbook example of how not to support America during a war. Immediately after 9/11, the refrain we heard from the Left was “it’ll be another Vietnam”—first about Afghanistan, then about Iraq. What they meant wasn’t how the fight would proceed, but how they would proceed. And they have, to the point of spitting on veterans (wounded vets!) and calling them “mercenaries”.
I have long said that the first people to turn vicious once we have a horrific event here in the US will be the leftist liberal elite. Nobody seems to believe me. But I think I am right. If you doubt me, notice how quickly and easily they are willing to turn against what they claim to be their core beliefs such as women’s rights, etc., when it is in their own political or self interest to do so.
There are two types of liberal elites. Those who hate America so fully they will happily cut off their noses to spite their faces and see America fail and there are the majority of them, who just parrot the words djour that allows them to feel superior to the common, ordinary, SUV driving Joe.
I don’t know about the former, but the latter will be the first demanding that Mommy and Daddy must do so something – anything and everything – to make them safe. They will turn on a dime. I feel sure of it.
It will be those of us who have been urging common sense measures all along who will continue to urge common sense measures.
True moderate Muslims need to speak up NOW and work to help rid the radicals in their midst or when the pendulum swings, which it will, they will find themselves in a very hostile environment.
A stitch in time… as my mother used to say.
Jeff, I hope you are right about the Euros waking up and cracking down on the Islamists but I am, unfortunately, pessimistic.
This is not the dark ages or even the early 20th Century. There are too many moral constraints that are becoming hardwired into western societies to allow the kind of brutal crackback necessary to root out the problem.
The steady admission of a 5th column of Islamic radicals into Europe has created a cancer in those countries. Like a cancer, the Islamists are embedded in their host, and the host cannot use its typical defenses against them because it is now having trouble distinguishing the cancer from itself.
Now after the host dies, and we have some kind of nuclear winter, Mad Max scenario, all bets are off…
alphie supports killing Americans because his daddy, and Jesus, were mean to him and indians and people of color and stuff.
He’s too much of a coward to do it himself, so he just urges on his Mussulman proxies.
It’s impossible to reach a middle-ground with the leftists on terrorism because they tacitly believe a certain number of Americans deserve to die.
I suppose it’s a chicken or the egg type thing, Rob.
Letting Osama escape
The phony intelligence used to get us into Iraq
Abu Ghraib
etc.
It all takes its toll.
Despite some dubious legal reasoning from Yoo & Co., America is still a democracy. If you want extraordinary powers, you have to at least tell the truth and you have to appear to know what you’re doing.
I’ve always believed that. I think you are right. Heck, we have proof of it!
Sorry, Seerak —
Happyfeet may buy that kind of relativism, but I don’t think it obtains here. Because the object here of the pushback would not be some scapegoated minority—but rather a vocal and brash enclave within the countries of Europe that doesn’t believe the laws of host countries pertain to them if and when those laws are in conflict with Koranic law.
In short, just as Sherman’s march didn’t destroy the moral soul of the Union, I don’t think any kind of forceful pushback in the EU would lead, inexorably, to a re-nazification of Europe.
In fact, I think some of the problems we’re seeing are the result of looking around for scapegoats rather than addressing the demonstrable problem.
alphie writes:
…BECAUSE OF THE IRONY!!!
I agree, but I believe that with any kind of forceful pushback in the EU, the International Left will immediately claim it is a re-nazification of Europe.
In fact, no matter what they do, the International Left will claim a re-nazification of Europe and move to get the center-right parties banned. Heck, they are already doing it….
Look at the US: anything short of us just rolling over and dying is opposed by the Left.
No its not, and it never has been.
I guess I missed that part of the Constitution, where is that exactly, alphie?
Dunno about that. Didn’t happen after 9/11, and I shudder to think what could be more horrific.
I think it also depends on the target. Beslan-style attack on a tony private school on the west coast or in the Bos-Wash corridor? Yeah. Against a rural school in a red state? Dunno about that. An inner-city school? Probably not—they’d be more interested in pinning it on Republicans.
Bombs planted in a Saks? Yeah. Bombs in a WalMart? Nah—they’d spend a couple of weeks trying to figure out which left-wing group did it.
We’re talking about a political wing in which “Bush knew” is given the time of day by their party leaders. I think they’d be more interested in using any more domestic attacks against their political opponents.
And then it may not be true but it will certainly be “truthy”, which is even better than true, depending on your worldview.
Rob,
Canny analysis. What about Filene’s basement?
Who did that? Are you babbling about Tora Bora? I keep forgetting what a great general you are. How would you have handled it? More troops? How would they have gotten there? How would you have kept them supplied? Would you have gone into Pakistan to chase down bin Laden?
The same intelligence Clinton cited for operation Desert Fox. The same intelligence cited by Democrats who voted for the AUMF before Iraq. It wasn’t “phony”; it was incorrect. Saddam wanted everyone to believe he had gasses because he thought it made them less likely to attack him; even the anti-war movement was screaming about all the dead we’d see when Saddam unleashed his WMD.
Which was investigated and the process of punishment started before you even heard of the place. The “scandal” was born out of the desire of a pathetic has-been “reporter” trying to make himself feel relevant and the defense attorneys trying to turn their clients into victims.
You’ve taken all the propaganda to heart, alphie. It’s rather sad, really.
The left in the U.S. won’t turn violent against Islamists until not doing so would affect their hold on power. If Hillary, Edwards, Obama or some other Democrat were to win the White House in 2008, and come 2011 or so terrorists staged a major attack on Americans either inside the U.S. or overseas, you’d see the violent streak come out if they thought that to remain passive would lead to the loss of the White House and/or Congress in 2012. There would still be an effort to shove some of the blame for any attack off on the policies of the previous administration, but other than the absolutist civil libertarian left, the others would see no problem with going on the attack overseas and clamping down on domestic civil liberties if it meant the difference between re-election and being cast into the political wilderness.
(It’s also why Al Gore, had he been elected in 2000, would have had to have done the same thing that Bush did in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. For a President Gore to have spouted off post-9/11 with some of the same rhetoric Citizen Gore has mouthed over the past five years would have invited the most crushing political defeat of a party since the Republicans’ debacle during the depression years.)
No, they won’t. As far as they’re concerned, fascism only ever descends on the US.
I had to look them up.
Columbus, Cleveland, or Atlanta stores—probably not. The states are too red, and the attack would be blamed on the local’s support for Bush, despite both cities being blue enclaves. New York or Boston—maybe.
I think the decision by al’Qaeda to attack the Pentagon and WTC were nearly note-perfect for keeping the Left against the war. The center of the American military and the core of the international financial markets? Damn. I remember Instapundit linking to some lefty asking “which one of us did it?”
And, yeah, I am being a little flip with this. Not as much as I wish I could be; a bit of gallows humor, I guess.
Did she mean ‘vicious’ against the Muslims or against us?
I believe they will turn ‘vicious’ against us! They’ll lick the boots of our new Muslim Overlords.
Rob,
Agree with you again. Let’s keep in mind that this is the same gang that’s so exercised about Scooter Libby, despite the fact that the prosecutor has known since 2003 that Armitage was the initial leaker.
So, the issue is who exposed the demure, retiring CIA agent Valerie? Well, apparently all those people who were so concerned about her double-secret status and the harm it might harm to have it exposed aren’t aware of this, or they’d be screaming for Armitage’s head, right?
Jesus I had forgotten about Filene’s basement (I’ve lived in CA all my life except for three years spent in the Boston area about ten years ago). Just reading that term made me feel cold and gave me an urge to go look for my snow-shovel….And with apologies to Cato and an earlier commentator: “and besides, I think Islam should be destroyed.”
That’s pretty sweeping, but after this weekend’s fun with Global Warming and Chirac’s spearheading the “new human right to a happy environment,” or whatever, I’m pretty ready to buy in on this. Brussels could easily be the new Moscow a decade from now.
Nah. The Muslims don’t have the money to fund any wars or adventures in healthcare.
Everytime the Euro-peon Monarchies (I include Hitler here) ran broke they had a pogrom against the Jews to get solvent again.
The Mussulmen don’t have that kind of sheckels….
There’s a better chance the Euro-Leftist elites with Mussulman footsoldiers would have another pogrom against the jews….
Gray, I’m not tracking you here. Are you implying that the “Muslims” are some monolithic force that would exploit the chaotic situation in Europe by partnering with Leftists to persecute Jews? I’m just not convinced they’re that cohesive and well-organized.
I completely agree with those here who say that if in fact these terrorist cells start attacking European civilians, there would be a backlash. How that would look, I don’t know. But I firmly believe that if Muslim terrorists perpetrated any kind of vicious attack in this country, they would have much more to fear from the civilian population than any governmental response. The moderate Muslims had better be on the front lines to put a quick end to any violence on U.S. soil, if they value their own hides.
Imagine the movie ‘Falling Down’ being remade today with the lead from ‘The Mummy’ playing the Michael Douglas role.
Not Brendan Frasier, the Mummy guy.
The Arab Street would go into a tizzy,
a popcorn buying tizzy
Suh-weet.
Kind of self-centered to think that the “Arab Street” cares what happens in America, isn’t it BS?
The fight is over in the Middle East, not here in the peanut gallery.
Sorry–I meant ‘disenfranchised youth of Asian and African descent.’
I’m talking about the car-burners and kuffar rapists.
It’s not much of a prediction. It’s already happening….
They were dancing in the Arab Street on 9/11, alphie, because of events here in the US. And, as I understand his comment, BumperStickerist was pointing out that the Arab Street would absolutely love a movie about a shotgun-wielding vigilante—so long as he’s an Arab.
Birmingham is in the Middle East?
Are we talking reality here, Gray?
Or The Fantasy Clash of Civilizations League?
It’s apparent that history for Alphie begain somewhere in the vicinity of 1983.
Otherwise he’d know that we’d been under attack by militant Islam since the late 1700s.
But the fight’s not over here, you see.
alphie – come back when you’ve studied a little history.
How about you just slip me some of the drugs that allows the right to see Europe in flames and Iraq on the way to a stable democracy, Brian?
I don’t think they sell those puppies in my part of the country, even with a prescription.
I see the disenfranchised youth causing unbeleivable calamity in Europe; all because they have been given go-ahead by a weak and impotent government. It won’t happen here.
Ummm, yeah – we’ve never been to Detroit or attended a CAIR conference, have we, alphie?
Imagine the movie ‘Falling Down’ but with an American-Muslim protaganist, and then gauge the outrage.
Did you even bother to read the article posted? Or did you just go to the comments and start talking crap?
It will if we cave to their demands for Shari’a and not printing Mohammed cartoons and retreating from the Middle East.
It will if we give them lawyers and aid and comfort.
It will if people like Lynn Stewart and the other International leftists succeed….
Yeah, I read them, though the link to Rupert Murdoch’s London tabloid that printed the gossip this chain started with seems to be broken.
Do you think Europe or Iraq is currently more stable, Gray?
In fact, I think some of the problems we’re seeing are the result of looking around for scapegoats rather than addressing the demonstrable problem.
I think that is ultimately correct and the crux of the problem. One of the reasons I believe that the left will turn vicious when they truly begin to feel unsafe is because ultimately that is what the left is about – finding scapegoats. That’s what they have in common with Islam. Blame. Victimhood. Hate
And whoever said that the left didn’t change after 911 is not correct. I have many hard core lefties in my family. They were at one with America until they realized that event had passed and they were once again safe. It didn’t last long, for sure.
When the LLL no longer feel personally safe from the Islamic threat I believe they will be the first light the torches and grab the pitchforks.
Heck. It only took them about four years to become rabid anti-semites and turn their back completely on women and gays in the Arab world. What on earth makes you think they won’t do the same to the Muslims when it is in their personal survival interests to do so?
New link to replace the old Times link.
By the way, how much do you think Murdoch had to pay MI5 and senior security forces to invent this gossip?
Keep in mind he had to have the SAS deployed to make it look good.
So what, 10, 15 quid?