Watching Juan Williams on Chris Wallace this morning I wanted to scream at the television. Not something I do. Don’t get me wrong, as libs go, Juan is bearable. But listening to him prattling on about how the problem isn’t terrorism, per se, it’s anti-American sentiment . . . . Now, we’ve always known that libs think that al Queda and other Muslim jihadist groups are driven by their hatred of America, which in its turn is rooted in our strong-arming the world and in our (former) economic advantages (i.e. we go around the world giving all these billions in aid and stepping in when crazies try to roll over other countries–think Iran invading Kuwait in 1990.). We know that libs think that all terrorists live in poverty, are uneducated, and are uncivilized (are barely even people, really). Not a threat, nothing to take seriously. And we all know that libs think it’s mere coincidence that all Muslim jihadists are . . . .well, Muslim. But to hear someone like Juan Williams (again, I think he’s a bit more level-headed than most libs, but maybe he got an extra glass of koolaid this morning) go on about how our image in the world is what needs to change made me see red.
In the year that BO’s been bowing and scraping and erm’ing and d’ohing around the world, the terrorist threat has not subsided. Not one iota. If anything, he’s giving them momentum (and something to laugh at). The “world” (and don’t libs really mean western Europe when they say that?) may have a better view of him than we do here at home, but how has that translated to an end to jihad? Or even a wee break to bask in the BO love? Like Juan, BO is somehow convinced that if only these radical extremists knew that he’s a good guy, they’d just . . . stop. Uh-huh.
Now, I’m not sure what is at the root of this naive and ignorant viewpoint, but I suspect that it’s a combination of the PC culture that doesn’t want to admit that radical Muslims are the problem and the liberal’s own deep-seated, if historically rather recent, hatred of America (when’d it start? Vietnam?). There is no doubt in any thinking person’s mind that al Queda is a Muslim extremist group. They are Muslims. There, I said it. Their’s is a religious war, a war rooted in their extreme interpretation of their religion and their religious law. Their religion, twisted by a guy called Sayyid Qutb, tells them that they are obligated to kill anyone (including other Muslims) who does not follow their extremist views about pure Muslim states and the enforcement of Sharia law (i.e. no democracy, no socialism, no communism, no form of government that is not religious, not Sharia). Notice that this does not pinpoint Americans, or even westerners. This is a religious war, with the rabid extremists seeking to wipe out any and all people who are not like-minded (that this would leave few people on this planet, and about one hundred percent of them male, does not seem to have occurred to them. Or if it has, I’m sure Sharia Law has some way around that for propagation; women, after all, aren’t really people under Sharia Law.).
So it started out as a way to take back their land, as they saw it, to make it pure Muslim, as they defined it. Then, one day, someone had a lightbulb moment and decided that was not enough (not that the goal was achieved, mind, just that it wasn’t broad enough), so global jihad was born. That was sometime in the 1980s or 1990s (most of this info can be found on wikipedia, so it’s not like it’s top secret stuff that libs don’t have access to). And that’s when America began to feel it (rather than stupidly fund it as they had against the Soviets, live and learn). After they blew up a couple of hotels (in Yemen, no less) in 1992, they turned their sights on America. The World Trade Center was bombed in 1993, but only 6 people died, Clinton was in the White House, and it just wasn’t a big deal. Terrorist, schmerorist. I’ve said before and will say again that if the Clinton administration had responded more intelligently, treating it like the terror attack it was, then 9/11 may not have happened. But he didn’t. It did. Luckily for us, President Bush was in the White House then, and he did take it seriously (though to be fair, I’m sure Clinton would have been forced to do so if the 1993 attack had managed to kill more people. It’s all in the numbers, right?).
There were other attacks before 9/11, of course, the U. S. S. Cole we all remember well, and the embassy bombings, but they all happened . . . well, away. So until 9/11, the American people didn’t really know much about al Queda, about jihad, or about Islam really. And then we did. What happened after that, though, is where things started to go wrong in this country’s approach to and response to terrorism, to the jihad that had begun in the Muslim world against other Muslims and that had “gone global.” President Bush became the bad guy, his policies the target of vitriol, and eventually, in many libs’ minds, he, personally, was responsible not only for 9/11 but also for the jihad being waged against us (and the rest of the non-radical-Muslim world, including, remember, other Muslims who don’t follow that extremist ideology). But that’s just wrong. It’s not historically accurate, and it’s not ideologically accurate.
Blaming Bush, and by extension America, is an infantile response. It says, this is beyond my cultural and / or ideological comprehension–it does not fit my limited (anti-American) worldview; therefore, it does not compute. It’s funny how the libs are saying it’s anti-American when that’s actually a better descriptive for them. Rather than accepting the reality that we are under siege by religious fanatics who hate us not because we are American but because we are not Muslims who share their exact view about governing one Muslim world under Sharia law. That’s the problem they have with us. I’ve said before and will doubtless say again, that denying that this is about and only about religion is like saying that the Crusades were not about spreading Christianity. Or what? We think only Christians wage holy wars? Have we really become that poisoned by political correctness? (Bashing religion is supposed to be un-PC, but we all know that does not apply to Christianity.)
According to Juan Williams and millions of other liberals, the problem is that anti-American sentiment is driving people to jihad. Why, then, did the Fort Hood terrorist not simply kill himself? He’s an American. Why did he shout “Allah Akbar” and not “I hate America” or some such nonsense? Why are Korans always found in these terrorist hideouts (well, if you can call an apartment rented by five, young, single Arab men a “hideout”)? Why do the “terror manuals” all go on and on about how great these martyrs will be in the eyes of Allah? How they are doing the work of Allah? How they are warriors of Allah? Seems a silly thing to include in a book that should be documenting all the horrors and problems with America, to reinforce hatred of America, right? They hate America, all right, but the only way we can “fix” that is to become a Muslim nation, to become Muslim extremists ourselves, that follows strictly Sharia law. That is their goal. And it’s non-negotiable.