National Review writer Andrew C. McCarthy says the Response to This Weekend’s Terror Attacks Showed Willful Blindness in Real Time.
In the all too familiar pattern, things are going boom, Americans are under attack, and the American political class is already busy playing the “See No Jihad” minuet.
…The notion, oft-repeated by President Obama and Hillary Clinton, that Islam is part of the fabric of American life, as native in our history as apple pie and Judeo-Christian culture [is fiction].
Islam, of course, is an alien belief system. Nothing is more alien and hostile to our society than Islamic supremacism — which, at its core, is sharia supremacism. Its adherents resist assimilation and seek to impose a totalitarian system that suppresses liberty and is systematically discriminatory against non-Muslims, women, apostates from Islam, homosexuals, and other groups.
Because we are trapped in a politically correct fantasy world in which terrorism has nothing to do with Islam and Islam is innately American, the political class can never admit that obvious jihadist attacks — such as those that just occurred in New York, New Jersey, and Minnesota — are international terrorism. Indeed, we are in a state of such self-parody that, this weekend, it somehow became “intemperate” and “un-presidential” to conclude that attempts (some successful) to detonate IEDs — as in, improvised explosive devices, a.k.a. bombs — were in fact bombings.
The playbook has become so tired. Nothing can be considered terrorism, even a mass-casualty attack with the objective of intimidating a civilian population or government (the legal definition of terrorism) unless and until there is convincing evidence connecting it to a known terrorist organization — usually ISIS or al-Qaeda. It is acceptable, you see, to label as “terrorism” an attack connected to these organizations because the political class has pronounced them as non-Islamic (even anti-Islamic), since they do not adhere to the imaginary, relentlessly benign Islam that the political class has dreamt up and designated as the one and only “true” Islam.
Here is reality: The enemy that unifies the terrorist siege against the U.S., Israel, and the West is Islamic supremacist ideology, which aims to bring the world under sharia dominion. This ideology is far more important than ISIS and al-Qaeda because it is what created ISIS and al-Qaeda. It was the catalyst before those jihadist organizations existed, and it will be around when they are gone — for as long as we fail to take it on without apology and discredit it in the light of day.
Pro-American Muslims need us to help them discredit the fundamentalists. We cannot do this without openly acknowledging — as, for example, Egyptian president Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has courageously done — that the roots of jihadist aggression are Muslim scriptures.
This must not be obscured by political correctness. The scriptures in question must be acknowledged and reinterpreted in a manner that confines them to their historic context and nullifies a literal interpretation of them in modern life.
Hillary’s warmongering, drone policy, and political correctness are far more threatening and far more likely to stir up terrorism than anything Trump has said.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
This is so cearly biased it does not even warrant debate.
This is so clearly biased it does not even warrant debate as the tone is prima facie.
And Timothy McVey was a “Muslim terrorist”? Extremists come in all types; and WASP’s have no less extremism. E.g. Trump telling Hillary to disarm protection. Sure, like that would be a viable option for ANYONE!
Have you read anything in the last fifteen years? Please tell us how many terror attacks were perpetrated by Muslims as compared to EVERY OTHER RELIGION, NATIONALITY OR GROUP COMBINED. I am sick and tired of this continual relativism where we attempt to pretend that everyone and everything is the same…except evil Trump of course.
In the UK, Muslims are 180 times – yes – one hundred and eighty times – as likely to be convicted of terrorist offences as Buddhists, Catholics, Athiests, etc.
How about the Newtown school shooting or the CO movie theatre shooting? The Unabomber? The cult that used serin gas on Japan’s subways.
All,separate one off events from marginal groups which, even if combined as one group, make a miniscule percentage of the terrorism of Islamists, conducted under the banner of religion.
No one is saying that we can’t have crazies of all complexions, only that by a far stretch, Muslims lead the pack.
Not really consider http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/deadly-attacks.html
Post 9/11 Jihadist caused deaths in the US 98. ‘Far right wing’ deaths 48. Missing though would be ‘black lives matter’ inspired deaths and the ‘batshit crazy person’ caused deaths such as the Newtown school shooting (28 deaths) or the CO movie theater shooting (12 deaths). No doubt other less dramatic ones can be added.
Fascinating – you refer to “WASP’s” and “extremism”. SO, show me the tenets of Christian Scripture that refer to violence against others. SHOW ME the teachings of Christ that refer to violence against others in support of Him. It is easy to find such teachings in the Muslim religion, thus giving support to questioning its “religion of peace” moniker, but you will NOT find any in the teachings of Christ. He reserves His retribution for the Final Judgement.
Christians waged crusades.
A thousand years ago.
Protestants invaded Irak for no reason ?
This is an insane discussion. Of course there are terrorists that are not Muslim. So? They are bad as well. Yes, if a Black Lives Matter person shoots a policeman, we should call it racist terrorism. Yes, if a right wing rancher shoots a park services employee, we should call it right wing terrorism. So? If we can do that, why can’t we call Islamic terrorism exactly what it is? It takes a special kind of fool to disregard history. Yes, in America we deliberately chose to omit the period from 650-850 AD from our history books in the hopes that they would be forgotten. The result is that we fail to recognize the lessons of the history of that time period, but that doesn’t mean that they never happened. It only means that we are ill-prepared to recognize the full extent of the evil that faces us today.
Re: This is so clearly biased . . .
I think we should stop talking about immigration and start talking about integration. Muslims generally don’t integrate well into western societies because their beliefs are fundamentally different than virtually everyone else on the planet. That’s why they are attacking innocent people in almost every country.
And who was that non-Muslim terrorist? Timothy McFly? Wasn’t that last century?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html?_r=0
“Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.”
I know you don’t believe the NY Times but whatever.
That’s because whites make up a far larger proportion of the population than Muslims!!! Doh!
I think your article is a little old. Omar Mateen took out 49 people in Orlando alone in June of 2016. San Bernardino, December, 2015, 14 dead. That’s 63 dead right there in two attacks.
..and once again the author is comparing ONE group, radical Islam, against every other group with 100 times the population, and he is wrong to boot, and NO, you cannot exclude 911, and furthermore he is ignoring Islamic terrorism globally.
We are seeing selective statistics. Evidently the NYTs is not counting 911, but even so, if taken WORLDWIDE, Muslims are killing us. Muslims are still a very small part of American population and where they exist, tend to be on relatively concentrated areas, but the whole damned point is that many here are wanting to bring that concentration up in America to more closely match what the rest of the world is enduring. This simply madness, especially given what we see in Europe right now. What SANE person would want that…unless they have been fully consumed by suicidal progressive thought.
The problem is that the NYT did NOT INCLUDE 9/11:
FACT CHECK: Islamic Terrorists Have Killed More in Domestic Attacks Since 9/11 Than the ‘Right Wing’
In fact, the number of those killed at the Orlando Pulse nightclub by Omar Mateen (49) was more than all the deaths from “right-wing” terrorism since 9/11 COMBINED (48).
PS: McVeigh was a white American but denounced Christianity and was reported to have had an Arab/Muslim accomplice(s)
“The Third Terrorist, outlines details of sworn affidavits from very credible witnesses who link the convicted bombers, McVeigh and Nichols, to former Iraqi soldiers who had managed to settle in the U.S. ”
Now, how does that change the attacks by Muslims on Americans this weekend?
Bias is incorrect. It’s a term, much like bigot, racist, islamophobe, etc., used to attempt to shame discussions of reality into silence.
Mish is incorrect, though, in his use of the term “willful blindness”
This implies that democrats and the establishment know the truth and reality regarding Islam (All Muslims Are Like That), and choose not to act on it.
This is not the case. Those that follow the democrat, SJW, or establishment line fight very hard not to know the truth. Their entire emotional process, their id, their very self identification lies in not acknowledging reality. To think otherwise would topple the central premise in their existence, which is that their wish makes reality.
This is the basis of all non-freedom philosophies; every individual thinks they will be the Commissar.
Democrats, SJW’s, progressives, etc. only attack or fight those they see as weak, and submit to the strong. They identify Islam as strength, and desperately, deep down, desire to be the same.
The mass of contradictions within a progressive or SJW is amazing to behold. Indeed, all one need do to defeat them is take away their power by:
1. Do not apologize. Ever.
2. Their weapons are worn out words and guilt. Bigot, sexist, racist, islamophobe, etc. These have lost any of their meaning. Agree & amplify to defeat.
(Islamophobe? Islam tosses gays off of buildings, right? Why do you hate gay people?)
3. Remember the Three Laws of the SJW: SJW’s always lie, SJW’s always double down, SJW’s always project.
Go back to Hell.
You have to be blind to your own destructive actions to be able to continue with them….unless you have no conscience or the destruction IS your agenda. This is no accident and it is not ignorance, it is deliberate and compounded in its effect through the use of useful idiots.
How is it biased?
Because it is truthful.
They don’t like TRUTH.
It messes with their illusions.
It’s not biased. It’s much weirder than that.
The Republicans were terrified of insulting the Christian Right and the Evangelicals so they went to extreme stupid to accommodate them. It now seems the Evangelicals are growing brains and are joining the mainstream and distancing themselves from the cults of the deniers, at least a little. The Republicans in the form of Donald Trump are picking up their votes. Perhaps … possibly … this trend will continue and the morons in the Republican party will step up and act edumacated as time passes. Perhaps not.
Today, Hillary and the Democrats are militantly pandering to the idiots on the liberal side. They are angrily supporting the ‘safe places’ set. If you insult the babies you could get your career ended or your place removed from the table. Apparently, their research came up with the idea that this group is the ultimate voter swing group.
The Dems are doing the EXACT same thing as the republicans, only they’re pandering to a different subculture.
Or, to put it another way, it’s Evangelicals and the Christian Right vs the Safe Places Set. Or, you might say The Angry Elderly vs The Stupid Kids.
As I said, weird.
In fact, if common sense were introduced into the discussion, t would be ignored and/or treated as suspicious. Nobody is used to it and it scares people. If it were to ever take hold, some sharpie would find an angle and we would end up with another Us vs Them situation. Yesterday we pandered to Evangelicals. Today it’s the Stupidly Correct. Tomorrow …?? Just be certain someone new back on the conservative side will push the Stupidly Correct back to the sidelines in the future. The Stupidly Correct will come out swinging after that.
“Stupidly Correct” … I invented the phrase, per a very quick google search. I hereby gift it to the world. Just remember you read it here first.
Hillary Clinton – Stupidly Correct
Someone tell Trump he’s got a slogan to work with.
This is so clearly true that debate is welcome.
yes…how is this remotely biased. The Muslim faith whether we want to admit it or not is not compatible with our Constitution. Everyone should read the writings of their founder.
Excellent article, oh what powerful words, ‘America is under attack !” other than the article forgets to mention that Muslims are justifiably seeking revenge for USA having, without cause destroyed Iraq, Libya & Syria and relentlessly supporting the destruction of Palestine, evidently those where all justifiable attacks to the author !
Bullshit! This is not about revenge and NEVER has been. Sure, there is war in their home countries but their fellow Muslims are killing each other at a far faster rate than westerners ever could. Further most of the terror acts have been done by people who have had NO exposure to this war. Most are citizens of western societies….places they went voluntarily and with growing malice…NOT due to war, but due to their desire to establish a caliphate.
Further, when you look at the vast majority of Muslim Immigrants in Europe, they are not from Libya, Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan…they are from African countries…..countries America has been spending untold amounts of money to HELP.
This is a religious war and while we have done much to exacerbate it, but we have to understand the root causes….ISLAM.
Of course it’s blowback, Doolie. But so what? That knowledge hopefully prevents us from doing similar things in the future (I can dream, right?) but in the meantime it is willful ignorance to think that the blowback isn’t motivated by and organized under islamic fundamentalism. Even a bully has the right to defend himself against the actions of his victims.
Instead of the fruitless name calling back and forth I would like to see some discussion of practical solutions. How are the terrorist training schools so effective at their brainwashing. What can be done to dry up their funding and shut them down. How can the schools’ graduates be identified, isolated and monitored. Can a competing system of schools be established to properly indoctrinate these people into normal human beings.
I think all these things can be done at a tiny fraction of the cost of our current policies of blowing things up and arming our enemies. We have tried the “better to fight them over there than over here” approach and it has failed. Time for something that actually has a chance of success.
Islam is an illness only requiring the proper environment to present its “symptoms”. Centuries of inbreeding, cultural isolation and continued hostility to “other” religions has created a culture, possibly even a race of people who have predisposed tendencies towards violence and radicalism. This is not to suggest that every Muslim will become violent, or even a large percentage of them, but it seems obvious to me, given theor almost exclusive Terrorist Status, that there is something special about them, be them from Africa, Indonesia, the ME, or even Russian territories…the same thing persists. We aided Afghanistan in their war against Russian invaders, yet it was THEY who attacked us. We defended the Bosnian Muslims in that war of genocide, yet THEY still hate us.
Do we really think we can buy these people’s love. Do we really think we can simply reeducate them or isolate them from Islamic extremist influences and end this. WE are seeing American born Islamists who have very limited access to radical influences KILL innocent Americans.
NO.
KEEP THEM OUT. PERIOD.
Cultural diversity is to be embraced WHEN those cultures have a preexisting commonality in their values, especially OUR values, American values.
How is it that we seem to believe that it is our responsibility to import people we KNOW do not appreciate, much less treasure our constitution? Religion is one thing, but to import people who believe that sharia law SHOULD displace our constitution is heresy.
How is it? Through continual indoctrination. By electing people like Obama who believe in “fundamentally transforming America” or as he said recently to paraphrase, “allow America to become the country so many have always hoped it would become”. Who are those doing this hoping and what EXACTLY is it that they are hoping for?
Understood – keep them out – but it’s too late. Bush let in the Boston bombers. After 9-11 we discovered an easy visa program was available for Saudi citizens. And many other programs letting in Muslims. This easy acceptance has continued for decades and multiple administrations. They are already here.
These terrorists seem to be human beings going through our schools, working jobs and otherwise functioning in society. Then in a matter of weeks they become unrecognisable monsters after attending a Saudi run terrorist school. Even if all migration was stopped we still need to work out this problem for those already here in the US.
Are you saying a Japanese style internment camp for Muslims is out of the question?
They seem to want their own Muslim nation, so why can’t we fence off part of Nevada or New Mexico and move them there….Call it Muslimia.
Kidding, but really, this is going to become potentially a really big problem….but regardless, there is no reason to not stop the bleeding and stop any additional immigration. And while we should not deny Muslim Americans of their constitutional rights, we should not go out of our way to make them feel welcome as long as they visually or in any other way demonstrate fundamental Islamic tendencies. They can thank their brothers and sisters for that if they wish. Political correctness MUST END.
They do have a preexisting commonality in their values with OUR American values. i.e. a belief that their culture is superior to anyone elses, that everyone should aspire to be like them that they can invade an impose their values anywhere they like. Sounds typically American to me
We’re in a world today where some gaggle of morons pee themselves because Trump said a bomb caused an explosion.
Truth is their greatest threat. It will be attacked mercilessly.
“You want the Truth? You can’t handle the Truth”. We all love to believe in the lies spun by TPTB.
“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
I understand this guy just returned from a ‘vacation’ in Afghanistan. I am sure he picked up some bomb making skills over there. How is this still not international terrorism? Why was he not on any watch list?
Exactly – monitoring travel to and from terrorist enemy nations should be routine along with full followup when they return. Why is not this being done. I am sure it would be more productive than TSA 95% ineffective screening at the airport. These problems can be attacked but no one is getting it done.
Or just make it really really hard to get back into the country. Profile, profile, profile. We should act like we are actually evolved and intelligent humans that inherently know how to assess risk….without a special note from Obama. When the feelings of the exception are more important than the welfare of the typical, we know we are in trouble….especially if we are the typical.
He was on the watch list. However the FBI apparently makes little use of such lists. They only look for intent. OTOH, if there IS intent they can’t see that either.
so pretty much useless.
It’s all for votes! The Dems will do anything for votes. They’ll sell out country, family, and ideals just to keep the left-wing parasite class in power.
Having lived in an Islamic theocracy ruled country, I get it! I understand why the left-wing feels so fondly for a religious beurarcacy that has one hand in your pocket and a knee on the small of your back. It’s ultimately the left-wing’s utopia, and it’s almost feels like that is their goal at this point.
If you were to ask me 10 years ago if the left-wing portion of the Democratic Party was trying to instill Islam in this country I would have laughed in your face. But now, I’d almost agree with you because it certainly starting to feel like this is really happening.
We are in a very perilous era of American history. Ordinary people are going to start to be persecuted for simply pointing out the truth. They will claim we still have free speech but will rationalize imposed ‘restrictions’ on speech by claiming they’re trying to protect America’s best interests from sensationalism which is causing irreversible damage to the core fiber of the country.
Wait for it.
Its already happening in Europe, and progressives believe if it’s good enough for Germany, it’s a necessity for us.
White male gunmen kill more people than the supposed american islamic terrorists. Isn’t that so? Let’s settle down and get some perspective here. And how many have we killed in the Mid-East? And how many millions have have had their cities destroyed so that they have no recourse except to emigrate.
Leonard Butters, Spokane, WA, USA
________________________________
I guess you consider the military “white male gunmen”.
Radicals were mostly confined to the Middle East, until bankers confiscated the poor’s food. Now radicals are slipping in with the millions of hungry poor searching for food.
“Rahami came to the US in 1995, at the age of seven, when his family sought REFUGE from the civil war raging in Afghanistan between rival US-BACKED ISLAMIST MILITIAS, one of which, the TALIBAN, took power a year later.”
Selected quote from “Massive police-military mobilization after New York City bombing”
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/09/20/bomb-s20.html
Imperialism & Perpetual War working hand in hand.
C’mon. All they want is a worldwide Caliphate governed by Sharia law.
An age of total excess and decadence always precedes an age of totality, brutality and austerity. Rome, France…..America. Grow up people read your history and at least be honest about where we are headed.
OK reality check:
1. Ideology? Where? We’ve seen a shift in Islamic terrorism from ideological centered to, essentially, anti-social centered. Consider Osama Bin Laden. Here you had someone who was deeply religious for most of his adult life who cultivated theological arguments supporting terrorism, its justifications and strategies and ultimate goals. Granted the followers who actually executed the tactics generally had a less comprehensive history of religious devotion, but it was nonetheless relatively top down leader driven.
2. As far as terrorism in the West is concerned, there’s been a shift IMO. ISIS has advocated ‘lone wolf’ terrorists. These are generally losers who suddenly strike out in an improvised and homemade terrorist attack. Sometimes they do so as part of a small group (the French newspaper attack) but more often they seem to act alone and spontaneously (the French truck driver who just started running over people).
The shift from #1 to #2 happened because we have been very successful. The degree of surveillance we conduct is underestimated. The type of attack that Al Qaeda pulled off in 9/11 requires coordinated terrorist cells and direction that is no longer possible in a world where leaders have to put their memos on zip drives because even turning on a cell phone for a minute will cause a drone to blow up their hut. The self-directed decentralized attack works because you just have to reach out to the population, there will always be a few disaffected people who will hear the call.
The downside of #2, though, is you lose control. Al Qaeda could decide to target the UK but avoid Spain because Spain pulled out of the Iraq War while the UK was dedicated to it. If you’re reaching out to losers, they will do their attack wherever they happen to be. The attacks will also lack a lot of ‘quality’. Since they are improvised they will harm fewer people in general, be less newsworthy and are just as likely to end up accomplishing nothing. On the other hand since they aren’t targeting trophy buildings its harder to predict where they will be. Rather than trying to bring down the Empire State Building, they will blow up a few people at a beach instead.
The whole ‘let’s go after the ideology’ idea, though, falters on the problem that they are cultivating losers. The bomber this time looks a lot like the others. Not remarkably religious, often rather unreligious until the very recent past (for example, he got his HS girlfriend pregnant). Many of the French terrorists were not those with great devotion, in fact until recently they were more likely to be petty drug dealers, ‘party boys’ and other types who you wouldn’t expect to suddenly be killing for Islam.
The terrorism then smacks as overcompensation. Like someone who isn’t very Christian who suddenly ‘sees the light’ and bombs an abortion clinic. Trying to ‘engage ideology’ by trying to convince clerics to have fewer anti-abortion sermons is not likely to impact such people. Those that do such things aren’t sitting through that many sermons to begin with and to the degree that the ‘mainstream’ faith isn’t keen on bombing doesn’t do anything to deter them. They have the fire of either the newly converted or the person who has ‘re-discovered’ his faith. That he acts more extreme than his fellow religious is part of his way of trying to ‘compensate’ for his lack of faith until recently.
You totally miss the point. What worries many commenters here is the existence of millions of (faster-breeding) people all over the world who hate freedom, despise common law, kill christians and homosexuals, repress women and purposely benefit from the tolerance and political correctness of Western civilization. What you should ask yourself is ‘Does that worry me? If it doesn’t, you really need help, man.
In that case where’s the terrorism? There’s a lot of Muslims that already live in the US and have for years. If only a tiny fraction of them opted for terrorism we’d have pressure cooker bombs every day….even if they opted for much lesser terrorism (say breaking the windows of a gay bar or a store selling women’s clothing that’s too suggestive for their tastes it would be huge, yet it never happens. Why are the few terrorists who do crop up essentially the loners and losers of the community?
Or if it’s just about oppressing women, Christians, gays etc etc. where’s the political action? If a super majority (say 90%+) of Muslims refused to vote Democratic and left to become solid Republican voters on the issue of same-sex marriage, the way evangelicals have on abortion, it would have made a wave. Maybe not a wave that would have changed policy but it would have been noticeable. Yet nothing like that happened.
So what exactly is the grander ideological battle Obama is supposed to be fighting but isn’t? I’m all for Islam being engaged with and challenged to be more tolerant of women, gays, Christians and so on. As far as the behavior of Muslims in the US, there doesn’t seem to be any issue. As far as violence globally, well look probably one of the fastest turnover positions you can take these days is upper leadership in ISIS since the drones keep opening up job vacancies there. Beyond that what do you propose? Going to villages in rural Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan and try to convince them to adopt Western mores to people who’ve been living that way for the last 5,000 years? Good luck with that.
Alex S. raises excellent questions earlier. We need to control the rhetoric and vitriol on both sides and instead have common debates about possible solutions to this problem.
I think part of the problem is the rhetoric itself – fostered by the media which does so to sell advertising and political parties to garner votes. If you think about it, most Muslims are like most Hindus and most Christians – they want to live daily lives in peace and happiness. This is the “Muslim picture” the left media and political class (most of the msm) gravitates to and won’t let go of. However, unlike many other faiths, there is a small minority of Muslims who are radicalized, hell-bent on ripping down the framework of current societies they disagree with. This is the “Muslim picture” that conservative media and political class gravitate to. It seems there is no middle ground solution, but I will propose one.
There are tens of thousands of Muslims in this country already. I do think that ‘community’ if it can be called as much, has an obligation to monitor its own. To the degree that our culture can support and encourage that community in its pursuit of both controlling and keeping an eye on its cousins, brothers, children, etc. we should do so. I don’t see this happening right now. We should insist that there is no better ‘organization’ to help identify would-be radicalized Islamists (radical Muslims) than ‘mainstream’ Muslims who see them, talk to them, are close to them day to day. One suggestion, yes, and perhaps this is beyond hope, but I hope not.
Yes – identifying and communicating / converting radical Muslims is very important. There will be an unlimited supply of marginal people destined to be terrorists without access to some kind of guidance. The guidance is now being done by the Saudi funded terrorist training schools to create the problems we have now.
We need various opposing institutions to intercept these troubled people and turn them around even if we don’t think it’s our job. Fraternal organizations, YMCA, traditional Muslim service organizations, Softball teams, evangelists – I don’t know what will be attractive, in order to refocus the energies in a productive activity. It should be possible to research the issue and come up with a number of things which will improve our security greatly.
I think that the families of those troubled people would welcome help to turn their children around. I would welcome not being another target for the next terrorist.
How about changing names? Just try replacing ‘islamist’ with ‘nazi’ and find out how you would *feel* about it.
I’m not saying they are the same. My point is: what’s the difference between a religion and an ideology? Would a nazi be acceptable if nazism were a religion? Is the word ‘religion’ a shield against criticism and the advocacy of freedom?
It would be strange to have nearly a billion Nazis worldwide, several million in the US and yet all that they do is one or two pipe bombers per year.
Brian – there’s been more than one or two pipe bombers per year. We should be using the word “yet”, as in there hasn’t been too much damage “yet”. Give it time. Once numbers get up, things change. Of course, once you get to the “change” part, it’s too late. The genie is out of the bottle, and there’s no putting it back in.
This is what people don’t realize. You never see the damage until you’re standing in it.
http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/deadly-attacks.html about 12 or 13 maybe since 9/11. That’s about one attack per year which is pretty small given how many Muslims are in the US.
Brian – you can do anything with statistics, but you must admit the incidences have been increasing in the last few years.
Aside from the attacks and bombings, does the U.S. need more trouble? Seriously, does it need another religion/ethnicity to add to the mix? Doesn’t it already have enough problems with what it’s got?
If you’re going to add more people, why add “potential” trouble?
No you can’t do anything with statistics. People who say that sort of thing don’t understand statistics.
“Aside from the attacks and bombings, does the U.S. need more trouble? Seriously, does it need another religion/ethnicity to add to the mix? Doesn’t it already have enough problems with what it’s got?”
There’s 3.3 million Muslims in the US. A distinct minority but more than enough for us to have dozens of attacks every single day if your depictions of them were even halfway accurate.
Brian – numbers are increasing, and attacks are increasing. Why were Muslims brought in at all? Just to add more chaos to an already chaotic and divided country? What stupid idiots thought that this would be a good idea? Perhaps they were looking for more chaos? More division?
I mean, it’s much easier – really – if you have a whole bunch of disparate groups who never get together on anything, who are always fighting against each other for position, who do not vote as one block against an oppressive government. These disparate groups end up only seeing the trees, don’t they, and because of their jockeying and fighting, never get a really good glimpse of the forest (inequality, their jobs being offshored, etc.) Divide and conquer.
Who brought this all about? Because I’d sure like to know. Are we so desperate to get more bodies to pay more taxes/consume more that we need to bring in groups who, in their home countries, are fighting and killing each other on a daily basis? Got to get the numbers up, get more growth? For what? So a select few can profit?
Come on, the U.S. doesn’t need to bring in more problems. Is this an experiment in how to ruin a country? Stupid is as stupid does.
Non-Islamic related mass shootings by mentally ill white guys has also been increasing in the past decade plus. Perhaps we should replace both US Muslims and US white guys with, I don’t know, Hindus and Muslims from India who rarely seem involved in any major trouble in the US?
Mental illness affects everyone, not just white guys. Check it out. Perhaps we should bring in Hindus and Muslims from India, you say? Yeah, because they get along so well in India, right? Not. How about some nice Sikhs, as in the Air India fame?
What’s your point? You want Mr. and Mrs. Anyone to be able to come on in for what, just to fill up the country? Where are you going with this? Do you want to fill up the States until it’s overflowing like India, Bangladesh? Anyone will do? Who cares that you end up with a hyphenated country (Pakistani-American, Brazilian-American, etc.) where everyone just exists, but there is no glue that binds?
Please answer me back. I’d be curious about your views on immigration. How much is enough for you? Why do we need more people?
Reblogged this on John Barleycorn and commented:
Nailed it.