Blind fools

As soon as I wrote my reaction to the World Trade Center movie, a foolish kneejerker admonished me:

as a nation we are succeeding in getting past 9-11 but that has been accomplished with positivity and not the skulking anger you seem to advocate.

Only hours later, news of the foiled terrorist plot in the UK was announced. I hope this fool realizes that “positivity” will not protect us. But no. We have nothing to fear but his lack of fear. That will lull us into letting our guard down and letting these Islamic fascists to attack us.

Reuters reports that Muslims are “bristling” at the term Islamic fascists. Well, tough shit. I am bristling at the refusal of the Islamic world to condemn the murder and mayhem being rained down around the world by the extremist fascists among them. Rather than attacking the language in press releases, why not hold a press conference attacking the attackers?

: Tonight on CNN, Paula Zahn promises to tell us just “what exactly goes into a liquid bomb.” Thank goodness, they are as deceptive in their teases as ever; they didn’t say exactly what does into it. But they did say a water bottle would be enough. Now that’s public service. Let’s tell the next Richard Reid how to build a Dr. Pepper bomb. Idiots.

: Luckily, when you search on liquid bomb, this is what you get. Don’t forget the peach schnapps. Bottoms up.

: Thank God for the Pakistani authorities who did display the moral fortitude to thwart this plot.

: The Guardian — using larger numbers than other sources — says the plot targeted 12 jets over five U.S. cities.

When the jets were in midair over American cities, they planned to combine the explosives and detonate them using an electric charge from an iPod, the security services believe. BA flights were among the targets. US officials said the bombers had been seeking to hit New York, Washington, San Francisco, Boston and Los Angeles. Other airlines targeted were thought to be United, American and Continental.

Loss of life might have surpassed the 2,700 killed in the attack on the twin towers in New York five years ago. “This was our 9/11,” a British security source said. . . .

It was claimed in the US that the plotters had planned to blow up three planes an hour for three hours, and that up to 50 people had been involved; this could not be corroborated in the UK.

The Times of London says:

Instead of setting off the bombs simultaneously, Cobra was told, the terrorists planned to detonate them in a staggered pattern, to sow maximum panic while inflicting the greatest loss of life.

: To continue the grisly mathematics of terror: The Guardian says up to 12 planes would have been involved. At maximum, that could be 372 to 416 people per plane — that is, 4,464 to 4,992 passengers in addition to God knows how many people on the ground in those five cities.

: There is nothing to do on a transatlantic flight out of London except meditate, it seems. No laptops. No iPods (which were the planned detonators). As near as I can tell, no books, even. The travel advisory from the Eos site:

Passengers may take through the airport security search point, in a single (ideally transparent) plastic carrier bag, only the following items. Nothing may be carried in pockets:

* pocket size wallets and pocket size purses plus contents (e.g. money, credit cards, identity cards etc (not handbags)
* travel documents essential for the journey (e.g. passports and travel tickets);
* prescription medicines and medical items sufficient and essential for the flight (eg diabetic kit), except in liquid form unless verified as authentic.
* spectacles and sunglasses, without cases.
* contact lens holders, without bottles of solution.
* for those traveling with an infant: baby food, milk (the contents of each bottle must be tasted by the accompanying passenger) and sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight (nappies, wipes, creams and nappy disposal bags).
* female sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight, if unboxed (eg tampons, pads, towels and wipes).
* tissues (unboxed) and/or handkerchiefs
* keys (but no electrical key fobs)

Back in December 2001, I suggested that we all fly naked.

  • T.

    Amen, brother. Amen. That person reminds me of the type that calls any mention of terrorism the “politics of fear,” yet gets irate if you aren’t shaking in your boots over something like global warming.

    I always like to remind people: even if you do your best not to think about terrorism, terrorists never stop thinking about you, as evidenced by these busts.

  • Well said, Jeff. I’m done with ninnies afraid to confront murderers, and I’m quite done with the absence of Muslim rage. We will do what we have to do, and I hope that we do it without worry of proportionality.

  • james

    “A similar plot, hatched by Ramsey Usef, to take down airplanes over the Pacific Ocean with liquid explosives was thwarted ten years ago. Our aviation system was attacked by al Qaeda five years ago on September 11. The 9/11 Commission recommended improving security screening to detect explosives at the checkpoint four years ago. And knowing of al Qadea’s affinity for repeating patterns like this, we have had ample reason to screen for these threats. It’s time for a new direction in homeland security which includes next generation technologies at our airport screening checkpoints that detect liquid explosives and plastic explosives.

    “It’s also time to assess how much progress we’ve made in the war on terrorism. With resources diverted to an ongoing civil war in Iraq, Osama bin Laden still at large, a nuclear arms race in Iran and North Korea, the Taliban regaining strength in Afghanistan and escalating violence in the Middle East, are we safer than we were five years ago?”

  • Let me guess, a one ounce tube of Chapstick aint gonna do the job. Nice to know Homeland Security is protecting us from people who want to blow off their fingers.

  • penny

    Reuters reports that Muslims are “bristling” at the term Islamic fascists. Well, tough shit. I am bristling at the refusal of the Islamic world to condemn the murder and mayhem being rained down around the world by the extremist fascists among them. Rather than attacking the language in press releases, why not hold a press conference attacking the attackers?

    Hey, if they were my tribe perpetrating this ongoing murder and mayhem I’d have long ago disowned them and renounced them publicly. I’ve been waiting since 9/11 for the big Million Man March in DC, Paris, London, Dearborn, Berlin, anywhere it is safe to assemble by Mulisms to denounce terrorism. They have places where it is fitting and safe to assemble. Sadly, poll after poll in Europe shows a shocking empathy for the terrorists by Muslim residents.

    When are people going to give up the multi-culti agenda and realize that all cultures and religions aren’t equal. A religion/culture that treats women as chattel, denounces science, the arts and literature; that hasn’t reformed internally or allowed for secular democracy is sick and twisted.

    Muslims can “bristle” all they want. It’s their default posturing, but in the end they can reform or perish. Their choice.

  • Jeff – thanks, just thanks for being a sane voice.

    BTW – I have become so twistedly cynical and tired lately of the press, politics, extremism and the general lack of knowledge on the terror & the middle east subject that one of my reactions today was, “just wait, someone will come out with a conspiracy theory that the Heathrow incident was concocted by the rght wing neo-cons to bolster Bush and Blair and there never was a real threat”. Just like 9/11. Where is the sane middle-ground?

  • Kat

    We are fighting a politically correct war–can’t even name the enemy–demented muslims.

  • Mumblix Grumph

    The CNN webpage has a big headline stating that a “spy” helped break this case.

    Thanks, CNN. You’ve helped the remaining terrorists narrow their search parameters for who to blame.


  • Pingback: post bop: Quote of the Day()

  • It is a very frightening day, but it could have been much worse. Thank God that they at least found out about the plot before the planes left the ground. I have a very good friend that was flying to London on Monday. He has now wisely decided to stay in California until well after September.

    Look on the bright side, at least air fare will be going down next week. Small consolation, but there has always got to be a bright side.

    -RJ REALTOR Tools

  • Eileen

    “Reuters reports that Muslims are “bristling” at the term Islamic fascists. Well, tough shit.”





    Jeff…you’re On It Now.

    And btw, your dates in your last post are not important. What IS important as a date is 8/22/06, according to Ahmalittledespot and his crazy minions; i.e., all of Islam. Batten down the hatches. Hold your families close..

    The world is about to become fully familiar with the reality of what “ISLAMIC FASCISTS” means in our midst.

  • owl

    Thanks JJ. This post reminds me of why I check by here occasionally. A sane liberal that is not into deliberate suicide and not afraid to say so.

  • Eileen

    Are you afraid of Islam yet?

    I confess I have been in the five years I’ve been reading about it, learning about it.

    But the fact is, light will prevail.

    Have no fear.

    [Yet in the midst, we will all need to batten down the hatches and fight back.]


  • Jim Karna

    You do sanctimonious pretty well eh Penny? What is “your tribe”? Blameless i’d guess for any atrocity? I can understand that the average muslim would bristle at being tarred with the same brush as terrorist murderers in the same way the 49% of Americans who didn’t vote for Bush would probably bristle at being tarred as neo-con war mongers.

    Of course the religion that denounces science, art and literature did a pretty good job of keeping all three alive as the catholic church tried it’s best to denounce them pre renaissance

  • Jim Karna

    Originally (and surprisingly) from the Evening Standard around the time of the London bombings last summer. A good line in the difference between muslims and islamic terrorists

  • Tom

    Jeff writes: Reuters reports that Muslims are “bristling” at the term Islamic fascists. Well, tough shit.’

    So what is fascism? The noted British philosopher Roger Scruton in ‘A Dictionary of Political Thought’ answers: The anti-communist and anti-liberal stance of fascist movements . . . have made the fight against fascism a rallying point for the left and liberal cause, so that the label ‘fascist’ may be applied very losely, to denote almost any doctrine that conflicts left-liberal ideology. In this expletive use the term conveys no very clear idea, a fact which perhaps explains its popularity.’ In other words fascism is a catch word – a term of propaganda. It is an emotive term that does little to help us understand our current predicament.

    Politicians love catchwords. They deter honest discussion and debate.

    Fascists worship the state and its leader. They embrace a devient form of socialism (national rather than international in outlook – National Socialism) mixed with a repulsive racism.

    The terrorists are repulsive people, but I doubt that many are fascists. Islam, even terroist Islam, is international rather than national in outlook, and it is not especially marked by racism. (btw, a rather large number of Muslims are semites.)

    My hunch is that many Islamic terrorists feel that they are the victims rather than the perpetrators of racism. That’s one reason why, in my opinion, the case for Israel shouldn’t be argued (as it has by some in response to one of your other posts) in terms of brown skinned Arabs and white skinned Jews. Such arguements will only validate the terrorist’s basic emotional assumptions. And, of course, Jews may be white of brown skinned.

    In any case, no matter how satisfying one may find name calling, it is not likely to lead any workable solution to the problems we face. I prefer pleasing results to pleasing methods. Calling Muslims names may feel good, but it will produce little else that might be described as good.

  • Kat

    I am hearing that one was a convert of 6 months who married a muslim. How the hell can one become a gutblower after joining the religion of body pieces only 6 months ago?
    Of course they may not be muslim(excuse me while I barf)
    {Asjad Ibn Abdussamed, the head imam of the Abu Bakr mosque, recalled that after the July 7 terrorist attacks the faithful had slept there to protect it from reprisals.
    “This morning I was upset,” he said yesterday, playing with his young son in his office. “I knew that Islam would be portrayed in a bad light again. As soon as I heard that Heathrow was closed, I thought — I bet they will say that Muslims were behind it. The key word is ‘alleged’. Nothing is proven. We must accept that just because we have a beard or dress Islamically we are going to be the first targets.}

  • penny

    The terrorists are repulsive people, but I doubt that many are fascists. Islam, even terroist Islam, is international rather than national in outlook, and it is not especially marked by racism.

    Get real. If they aren’t religious fascists, then just what are they? Perhaps you’ve never examined dhimmitude as an Islamic concept which accords second class status to non-Muslims. As far as Islam’s relationship to racism, they were very highly involved in the African slave trade two centuries ago. And as a small footnote, Saudi Arabia only officially denounced slavery in the 1980’s. Slavery is still being practiced in parts of the ME. Darfur is a stunning example of racism.

    Jim Karna – you can dredge up any historic incident or period you want as an exercise in wasting time and brain cells when it comes to the sorry state of Islam today. Who cares? What really matters is the here and now. What my forefathers did or failed to do isn’t relative to how I conduct my life. Collective guilt is rather stupid, isn’t it?

  • Kat

    I am sure it won’t be long before the mullahs come out and attribute this plot to British foreign policy and not islamic fascism. The wheels of spin are churning in muslim communities worldwide.

  • Tom


    They are not fascists, they are Islamists (

    You note that ‘dhimmitude’ accords second class status to non-Muslims. There is no arguing that point, but it does raise a question, or two:
    What status is accorded non-Jews in Israel?


    2. Are non-Orthodox converts (e.g. Reformed or Conservative) able to immigrate to Israel from other lands on the basis of their Jewish faith?

  • A week ago nobody was using the term ‘Islamic fascists’. A couple of high-profile emails and a usage by the president, and now it’s the phrase of the week. Whether or not the term is appropriate is irrelevant. What is relevant is the sudden parroting of the term by a very compliant media.

    A week ago nobody cared about bottled water or toothpaste on aircraft. Today everybody is acting like it’s the most dangerous thing in the world. And the media is all fresh and set to jump on this latest new threat, as though it is some sort of proof of the new danger.

    Give me a break. Yes there are dangerous people out there. But nothing has changed in the last week. The terrorists were just as fascist then as they are now, but this has only (after how many years?) downed on our governments now. Liquids are as dangerous as they were, but only this week did our authorities realize this.

    Either our leaders are the biggest morons ever to set foot on the planet, utterly incompetent and incapable of fighting a war on terror, or they are lying to us (a) about the threat, and (b) about their response.

    Handy, isn’t it, that this new crisis comes less than two months before election day.

  • carsonfire

    deb schultz Says: “just wait, someone will come out with a conspiracy theory that the Heathrow incident was concocted by the rght wing neo-cons to bolster Bush and Blair and there never was a real threat”

    The conspiracy theories hit the ground the first day. Didn’t you notice that these arrests were made — the day after Lieberman got beat? The arrests were the neocons sending a message to Connecticut!

    Thank goodness for the comic relief provided by tinfoil hats on

  • Tom

    Penny writes: As far as Islam’s relationship to racism, they were very highly involved in the African slave trade two centuries ago. And as a small footnote, Saudi Arabia only officially denounced slavery in the 1980’s. Slavery is still being practiced in parts of the ME. Darfur is a stunning example of racism.’

    Slavery is an evil institution, but it isn’t automatically a racist institution. Were the slaves in Saudi all of African heritage? Was only one race of people enslaved? As I recall, there were Black Africans slave traders. Were they racist?

    Wasn’t Onesimus a slave owned by one of St Paul’s friends (Philemon)? Indeed, I don’t believe that Philemon was the only Christian to own slaves. Do you know if slavery as practised by early Christians was based on race? Or just misfortune?

    Of course, Slavery as established in the United States was definitely racist. Would it be fair, on that basis, to conclude that Christians were, to use your phrase, ‘highly involved in the African slave trade two centuries ago’?

  • Jim Karna

    Penny, why waste time and brain cells dredging up a historic incident or period by referring to the arabic involvement in the slave trade? It may have passed you by but American’s and Western European were pretty complicit in the whole slave thing, seems a bit churlish to blame the Arabs for that one.

    In the way you don’t wish to be judged by the actions of others (your forefathers) do you think it’s fair to judge every muslim as a terrorist? And Islamic states aren’t the only ones in a sorry state, or the only ones causing international pain and misery.

    Did you read the benadorassociates link? it’s an interesting perspective on the context of extremism within islam

  • tomythewho

    It is asinine that other muslims don’t attempt to separate themselves from the radical fundamentalists who kill in the name of Islam. Aside from the few abortion clinics every now and then, Christian fundamentalists don’t terrorize. Jerry Fallwell and Fred Phelps are the closest thing we have to these groups and they’re bad enough. It’s fantastic that we stand up to those idiots and deny them any right to power and politics in this country (the Dems could be doing a far better job, admitedly).
    The problem, Penny, is your ethnocentrism, saying things like “all cultures and religions are not created equal.” That has become the Muslim’s view of America and it only makes them want to hunker down more and protect their culture/religion at any cost. This mentality is going to cost us.

  • penny

    Stephen – every terrorist event comes right before something for someone.

    And, I hardly see “Islamofascist” becoming widely used with the self-censoring pc agenda driven MSM. Some of the MSM can barely print the word terrorist with insurgent being more neutral and nuanced for their agenda. I mean these are the organizations that, after all, couldn’t print the Mohammed cartoons in mock deference to sensitivities which were seldom applied to Christians and Jews. So much for freedom of the press.

    Tom, you can find your answers at Wikipedia:

    On the flip side of the coin, how many Jewish immigrants would be welcomed by the Palestinians?

  • Terrorism’s intent is to instill paralysis and confusion by way of fear. Even though the terrorists didn’t succeed in blowing up a bunch of planes yesterday, they still succeeded in panicking the general population, paralyzing air travel and hurting the stock prices of major airline corporations. Moreover, we are not safer because we are afraid. Terrorism is the new reality. This is the way things are now. No matter what we do we will still be attacked and people will die. We can’t predict everything. The point is to come to terms with this new reality and, while doing everything in our power to prevent future attacks, refrain from instilling a disproportionate fear in the people.

  • Ravo

    do you think it’s fair to judge every muslim as a terrorist?

    What don’t you people get?

    Islam’s doctrines demand death (or conversion) for unbelievers.


  • Tom

    Ravo asserts: What don’t you people get? Islam’s doctrines demand death (or conversion) for unbelievers. Period.’

    Ravo where did you find this doctrine? Could you point to a passage in the Koran? There have been Christian communities in Muslim governed countries for many centuries. My wife is Serbian. Her country was occupied by Muslims for hundreds of years. The Serbs were not required by their Muslim occupiers to convert or die. I am no friend of Islam, and have no desire to live in a Muslim land, but I don’t believe that your statement is factual. As I recall, the Koran requires Muslims to recognise and tolerate ‘the people of the book.’ I open to evidence to the contrary.

  • Kat

    Actual Quotes from the Koran

    The Muslim Bible commands Muslims to murder all non-Muslims:

    “O Prophet! Make war against the unbelievers [all non-Muslims] and the hypocrites and be merciless against them. Their home is hell, an evil refuge indeed.” (Koran, 9:73)

    “When you meet the unbelievers in jihad [holy war], chop off their heads. And when you have brought them low, bind your prisoners rigorously. Then set them free or take ransom from them until the war is ended.” (Koran, 47:4)

    “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and his messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be to be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet and genitals cut off, or to be expelled out of the land. Such will be their humiliation in the world, and in the next world they will face an awful horror.” (Koran, 5:33-34)

    “When we decide to destroy a population, we send a definite order to them who have the good things in life and yet sin. So that Allah’s word is proven true against them, then we destroy them utterly.” (Koran, 17:16-17)

    “In order that Allah may separate the pure from the impure, put all the impure ones [all non-Muslims] one on top of another in a heap and cast them into hell. They will have been the ones to have lost.” (Koran, 8:37)

    “How many were the populations we utterly destroyed because of their sins, setting up in their place other peoples.” (Koran, 21:11)

    “Remember Allah inspired the angels: I am with you. Give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their fingertips off of them.” (Koran, 8:12)

  • Tom

    Kat states: Actual Quotes from the Koran. The Muslim Bible commands Muslims to murder all non-Muslims:

    Kat, I have read the text and I don’t see one that commands Muslims ‘to murder all non-muslims.’ One seems to indicate that murder of all non-Muslims is not part of the doctrine:

    ‘when you have brought them low, bind your prisoners rigorously. Then set them free or take ransom from them until the war is ended.” (Koran, 47:4)

    Setting free doesn’t sound like murder.

  • Tom

    Kat states: Actual Quotes from the Koran. The Muslim Bible commands Muslims to murder all non-Muslims . . .

    Kat, One more question I am told the Koran states:

    ‘No compulsion is there in religion. Rectitude has become clear from error.’ (Koran2:256)

    Does that sound like an incitement to murder?

  • Jim Karna

    And from the far more liberal and right thinking christian bible:

    Leviticus 24:16 “And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death”

    Exodus 31:15 “Whosoever shall work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death”

    Exodus 21:17 “And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death”.

    Romans 1 :29-32 “Those filled with unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, hate for god, despite, proud, boasters, inventions of evil things, disobedience to parents, without understanding, covenant breakers, unnatural affection, implacable or unmerciful nature: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death”.

    “Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

  • Tom

    To extend Jim Karna’s list:

    ‘Whoever rebels against your word and does not obey your words, whatever you may command them, will be put to death.’ (Joshua 1:18)

  • Kat

    Yes, let’s quote the old testament–that’s what terrorist enablers do. After all it was Christians planning to blow up a dozen planes so let’s concentrate on them. Muslims, of course, preach Love thy neighbor as thyself.

  • Tom

    Kat writes: Yes, let’s quote the old testament–that’s what terrorist enablers do. After all it was Christians planning to blow up a dozen planes so let’s concentrate on them. Muslims, of course, preach Love thy neighbor as thyself.’

    How about let’s not make exagerated statements. It’s not about enabling terrorists. It is about being honest. The truth is not on the terrorists side, but lies will play into their hands.

  • Tom

    Michael Cook, Professor in the Department of Near Eastern Studies (University of Princeton), writes in his The Koran: a very short introduction:

    ‘Non-Muslims living in an Islamic state will , of course, have to accept that Islam is the state religion, and that power is in the hands of the Muslims. As non-Muslims, they will be required to pay a tax in lieu of military service. Should they wish to serve in the army rather than pay a tax, the Muslims will consider the request . . .’

    That doesn’t sound like convert or die to me, but maybe Cook is misconstruing the facts.

  • LT

    It is about being honest, and if you don’t admit that there are islamic fanaticals, murdering non-muslims across the world , whether it be the philippines, darfur, or palestinians wishing martyrdom by climbing aboard a bus and blowing up a bunch of children in Israel), in the name of Allah/Islam, then your are not. Ever seen videos of “freedom fighters” in Iraq chanting “Allah akhbar” (god is great)? Also, you quote the Bible as a counter to Kats Koran verses. The problem that I have is I don’t see the Bible INSTRUCTING others to kill in the name of Christianity, and I may be wrong, but I don’t see real numbers using it as justification for murder either. Look at the wording of the Koran, ex. ““When you meet the unbelievers in jihad [holy war], chop off their heads.” Seems pretty plain to me? What exactly are you not getting?


  • LT

    post above should actually have been addressed to Jim. My apologies. However, I still think its applicable to your point of view Tom.


  • Tom


    I’ve not denied that there are Islamic fanaticals murdering non-Muslims. That, however, isn’t proof that all Muslims consider themselves under a command to murder non-Muslims. When I assess a situation I prefer facts to pseudo-facts.

    The verse you are quoting is clear, but according to Professor Cook it applies to Arab pagans and not Christians or Jews who have the option of paying a tax. In any case, the verse seems to apply to combat situation rather than peaceful encounters. No doubt there are Islamic terrorists who feel differently, but do they represent the majority opinion? Tom

  • LT

    I don’t know that they do represent the majority, and I’m not arguing that position. I do think however, that the Koran represents their belief systems, and many(although I cannot say majority), as I mentioned earlier, use a literal translation as the basis for war against non-muslims. As you can tell, there’s really no point in this post, i just enjoy the dialogue.


  • Tom


    I too enjoy the dialogue.


  • Ravo

    Tom you asked Could you point to a passage in the Koran?

    I found this posted somewhere – I assume it is correct but not having a Koran I cannot check. Perhaps someone who does could check.


    “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

    It appears from world events, the more devout a Muslim becomes, the more they adhere to these passages or at the very least support those who do.

    Tom, though there are some passages in the old Testament where God oversees war, but in most of those passages quoted from the Old Testament, the word “death” is pertaining to one’s afterlife…ie: the spiritual death in not reigning with Christ.

    In the New Testament, the new Covenant which REPLACED the Old Testament entirely, God commanding followers to kill simply does NOT happen.

  • The more I think about it, the more this post bothers me. Jeff, are you saying that fear is an appropriate tool to motivate a nation’s people? Personally, I see our government using and controlling the language of fear to retain and exert power over a nation that might otherwise be skeptical of its moves.

    Would we have gone into Iraq if the president wasn’t taking advantage of and encouraging overblown fear? Could the Patriot Act have been approved if the people weren’t afraid? Shouldn’t there be a bigger ruckus over government endorsed spying programs that have clearly crossed the line? The biggest problem with fear is that it quickly manifests itself as anger and hate. Labels like ‘Islamic Fascist’ are stupid and reductive.

    I’m glad that the Brits caught the jackasses who were planning to blow-up those planes. Had they succeeded, it would have been a horrible tragedy. But to react to it like we have today, to hunker down in fear and terror, to broadcast television programs like last night’s TARGET: AMERICA on ABC, is to fail to understand these events in their real context.

    It’s time to get real. It is inevitable that in the future we will see a terrorist attack that we failed to catch. It’s time to accept this. We should do everything in our power to stop it, but we should accept it and be ready for it when it happens. We are not safe. We were never safe. But we shouldn’t ever be afraid. Fear is not a good or positive motivation. It is weak and sniveling, the worst emotion.

  • Tom

    Ravo, Many thanks for the reference. I have looked it up in a version of the Koran that the Muslims in Oxford hand out. I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the translation (Pickthall), but here is the passage as I find it (9: 4-6):

    4. Excepting those of the idolators with whom ye (Muslims) have your treaty, and who have since abated nothing of your right nor have supported anyone against you. (As for these), fulfil their treaty to them till their term. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty (unto Him).

    5. Then when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

    6. And if anyone of the idolators seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the word of Allah, and afterward convey him to safety. That is because they are folk who know not.

  • tomythewho

    The great majority of muslims obviously do not natrually believe in murder and terrorism. There are many moderate Muslims, just as there are many moderate Christians in middle America. However, when people feel their sense of identity, values, and general way of life being attacked, nut-jobs fighting for their cause (even in an extreme form) become more appealing. It happened with Hitler…and just think of all of the “values voters” in the most recent election who knew that George W was a radical idiot. Yet, they weren’t voting for his apptitude. They were voting against gay marriage and abortion and liberalism. That’s why attacking Muslim way of life as being inferior and saying that they need to be more like us is a problem and will never work.

  • Ravo

    Tom…sounds like…convert or kill, with a third option of paying dues (enslave/dimmify)

    (Yet in America aren’t Muslims often excused from some taxes on their businesses – at least in the beginning years) resulting in an advantage over non-Muslims?)

    Remember that letter the President of Iran wrote Pres. Bush?

    (found at another site)

    “The Prophet of Islam himself wrote to the Byzantine emperor Heraclius and other rulers, telling them, “Accept Islam and your lives and property will be safe” — with the clear implication that their lives and property would not be safe if they did not accept Islam. Muhammad directed his followers to call unbelievers to accept Islam or dhimmitude, and to go to war if they rejected both (cf. Sahih Muslim 4294).

    Ahmadinejad here makes clear that that is exactly what he is doing with Bush: telling him to accept Islam, or face the consequences.”

    “We are all free to choose. But please give him this message, sir: Those who refuse to accept an invitation will not have a good ending or fate…”.

    Seems like a still observed doctrine.

  • Tom


    Sorry, but I don’t much about the tax code (especially the sections dealing with Muslim business). However, I don’t believe the code should favour one business group over another.


  • Ravo

    Quinn writes: Fear is not a good or positive motivation. It is weak and sniveling, the worst emotion.

    What is weak and sniveling is not arming ourselves with the tools needed to combat this terror.

    Without the proper tools, the Brits – with co-operation from America USING those very tools you object to – would NOT have caught those who were planning to blow-up those planes.

  • Ravo

    Tom, you seem like you are interested in truth. It’s tough to find it any more in the mainstream media.

    Charles Johnson’s blog, (the guy who exposed Reuter’s “fauxphotos”, Dan Rather, etc.) is a trusted spot to find out what’s really going on.

    Sometimes the commentors are off the wall, but from what I’ve observed, if Charles were to goof, he’d be quick to make it right.

  • james

    Then why is this admin doing this?
    From the AP:
    “WASHINGTON – While the British terror suspects were hatching their plot, the Bush administration was quietly seeking permission to divert $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new homeland explosives detection technology.”
    “Homeland Security’s research arm, called the Sciences & Technology Directorate, is a “rudderless ship without a clear way to get back on course,” Republican and Democratic senators on the Appropriations Committee declared recently.

    “The committee is extremely disappointed with the manner in which S&T is being managed within the Department of Homeland Security,” the panel wrote June 29 in a bipartisan report accompanying the agency’s 2007 budget.”
    “The department failed to spend $200 million in research and development money from past years, forcing lawmakers to rescind the money this summer.

    The administration also was slow to start testing a new liquid explosives detector that the Japanese government provided to the United States earlier this year.”

    What I’m tired of is the rhetoric of the republican admin. about terrorism all designed for elections, while letting the real business of fighting terrorism, as noted in the AP slide.

  • “Convert or kill”… ah, yes, I remember well that awkward moment at my Moroccan friend’s house when after several hours of tea, pastries, and conversation (not to mention a sumptuous dinner whipped up on the fly for me and my wife, who had merely stopped by to say hello) our hosts suddenly produced a scimitar from the linen closet and demanded that we embrace Allah as our One True God or lose our heads for our blasphemous ways.

    Oh, wait. That last part never happened. Because despite what Jeff’s Online Crusader Commentariat Posse would have you believe, 99.999 percent of the Muslim world isn’t batshit insane. Yes, ponder that number again: Ninety-nine point nine nine *nine* percent (most credible intelligence sources put al-Qaeda’s numbers in the tens of thousands, a miniscule percentage of the billion odd people of Islamic faith. Don’t believe me? Go to the MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base, created by the Rand Corporation and the Department of Homeland Security). If a billion devout Muslims honestly wanted us dead, do you think we would have gone five years here in the United States without another 9/11-style terrorist attack?

    Muslim extremists only wish they had the ability to command armies of willing jihadis as the fascists of last century could. But in truth the only people they can win over to their twisted cause are the most jaded of nihilists at heart. That a relative handful of demented fucks can strike such terror and paranoia in the heart of Western Civilization is a testament to the realities of “assymetric warfare”, but just as Hizbollah doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of destroying the state of Israel, nor does al-Qaeda present anything even approaching the existential threat to our way of life that some would have you believe.

    Of course we should practice due diligence. Of course we should fight the scourge of global terror. But why don’t we concentrate our precious resources on the real enemy, rather than lashing out in ignorance and fear?

  • Ravo

    99.999 percent of the Muslim world isn’t batshit insane.

    A large percentage just support those who are.

    Re: World dominion/Sharia Law

    “A third of those questioned said they would rather live under Sharia law in the UK than British law.

    A quarter of British Muslims are willing to tell a pollster that
    they think the 7/7 bombings were justified.

  • Eileen

    Today, three naturalized Palestinians who live in TExas were picked up in MIchigan:

    “Around 1:00am August 11th the three men purchased cell phones from the Wal-Mart store on M-81 near the corner of M-24 in Caro. Wal-Mart places a limit on the number of cell phones that can be purchased at once, that number is three. The three men allegedly bought 80 by purchasing them three at time so that an alert wouldn’t be triggered by the cash register. They also paid cash.

    An alert clerk grew suspicious and called Tuscola County central dispatch. The Caro Police Department sent a unit and stopped the rented van on M-81 just east of Caro. The suspects were headed towards Bad Axe on M-81 where there is another Super Wal-Mart.

    The three men are described as being of Palestinian descent but live in Texas. Police say the three, ages 19, 22, and 23 appear to be naturalized citizens.

    One man was driving while the other two were in the back opening the phone packages with box cutters throwing the phones in one box, batteries in another and the packaging and phone charger in another container. The suspects had 1000 other cell phones in the van. There was also a bag of receipts showing that someone was in Wisconsin the day before.

    The phones were Nokia TracFones selling for $20 at Wal-Mart. For your twenty dollars you receive a phone charger and 40 minutes of airtime. The phones do not have to be registered with a name. Also discovered was a laptop with store addresses and store logos.

    Tim Nausler with the Michigan State Police bomb squad says this has all the tell tale signs of using cell phones to detonate bombs. He says you need two phones to detonate a bomb one to be with the explosive and the other to make the call to that phone. In some instances he says you can detonate with one phone using the alarm clock function.”

    Three Middle Eastern Men Found with 1000 Cell Phones, Now Face Charges

    I suppose the terrorist apologists/taqiyya talkers will keep whistling Dixie, while the rest of us identify Islam for what it is.

  • Ravo

    re: apologists/taqiyya talkers

    a quote from elsewhere fits the situation…..

    ” It’s a campaign of deceit designed to shore up the falsehood that the religion of the plotters is incidental, despite the fact that it is almost certainly their primary motivation.”

  • Eileen


    It isn’t a far stretch to believe that those who ‘support’ the batshit insane aren’t *also* batshit insane. And that’s just those who admitted their support. Now, take an Islamic country like Indonesia, and those numbers of support are much, much higher. Geez, the Koran INSTRUCTS them on how to provide support to the active, batshit insane jihadis!


    I tried to welcome you home and congratulate you on your growing family below, but I’m having trouble posting except via Preview. So, welcome home!!

  • Eileen

    “the religion of the plotters”… I like that… but I favor my own, TMed appellation a little more:

    The Religion of Bombers and Beheaders

  • Kat

    I read that many come from good middle class homes and some are engineers. One works at Heathrow where he used the job to deceive…lie to please allah as he planned to murder.

  • Kat

    “A gripping account of how Islamism is taking control of Britain’s culture and institutions.” — National Review
    by Melanie Phillips

    The suicide bombings carried out in London in 2005 by British Muslims revealed an alarming network of home-grown terrorists and their sympathizers. Somehow, London had become the European hub for the promotion, recruitment and financing of Islamic terror and extremism — so much so that it was mockingly dubbed “Londonistan” by exasperated European security forces. Now, British investigative journalist Melanie Phillips reveals how widespread Muslim immigration into Great Britain, and the country’s paralysis by multiculturalism and fear, has created a fifth column of jihadists plotting against the West from deep inside its bosom.
    Londonistan paints a picture of a country so terrified of giving offense to its Muslim minority that it has been cowed by radical clerics. Institutions across British society — the judiciary, security circles, the Church of England, the universities, the media — have all been reduced to silence or appeasement. With the resulting license to incite hatred and terror, London’s mosques have churned out literally thousands of foot soldiers in Islamic terrorism’s war against the West — including shoe-bomber Richard Reid, 9/11 plotter Zacarias Moussaoui, and the British Muslims who perpetrated last year’s hideous London Underground and bus bombings that killed 52 people.

    The result, Phillips shows, is an ugly climate in Britain of fear and defeatism, which now threatens to undermine the alliance with America and imperil the defense of the free world. In the end, she argues, British authorities are walking the same path as those who capitulated to Adolf Hitler — a strategy that is as likely to earn peace as Neville Chamberlain’s.

  • Ravo

    Tom, Islam is a supremist and imperialistic organization. I read recently that assimilation and a true loyalty to a host country is not even allowed. Is it not insane to let seditious people settle amongst you?

    Moderate Islam is a myth. A Muslim is either a jihadist, a potential jihadist or an apostate.

    While in the midst of a search at yahoo for what I had read (but can’t find again) I came across this – it’s quite enlightening and a must read.

    “Almost all the learned Muslim scholars and Imams, who lead a visibly religious life as per the standard prescription of Islam with conviction, are also known to interpret Islam the same way Osama bin-Laden and other prominent Islamic radicals do.”

  • Kat

    Tom–the 911 bombers were all highly educated and some came from millionaire families. Quit trying to find excuses. If you want a reason, read the Koran. I did and then I burned it…I cooked pork chops over the pit in which it burned on Sept 11. 2002.

  • Kat

    Good article–never saved link–sorry.
    The “Banality of Evil” and The Political Culture of Hatred
    By Paul Hollander

    THERE WAS A TIME when the most massive and premeditated forms of political violence, exemplified by the Holocaust were associated with the “banality of evil” — a concept introduced by Hannah Arendt. She popularized the idea that the Holocaust was a form of bureaucratized mass murder carried out by “desk murderers” who had no strong feelings about it, perfectly ordinary human beings, such as Eichman and his associates, impersonal and interchangeable cogs in the gigantic killing machine. Anybody could have performed the task; no political passion or ideological conviction was involved or required. It was implied that this type of violence was emblematic of modernity and mass society and their key characteristics: anonymity, standardization, homogenization, impersonality as well as increasing specialization and reliance on technology. Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience to authority further bolstered the notion that people are able and willing to inflict great pain and suffering on total strangers for no reason other than their willingness to obey authority, as the Nazis did, supposedly.

    In the wake of these theories it has become widely accepted, with a curious mixture of horror and relish — especially among intellectuals — that potentially all of us are amoral, robotic monsters, but monsters without convictions, distinction or originality. There was something morbidly fascinating about the combination of extraordinary moral outrages (such as the Nazis perpetrated) and the pedestrian, mundane character of the perpetrators. The popularity of these ideas was nurtured by the questioning of modernity which brought us technology, mass production, efficiency, bureaucracy, impersonality, mass culture and the decline of community. These ideas were especially congenial with the protest movements of the 1960s whose stock in trade were impassioned critiques of impersonality, dehumanization and faceless bureaucracy.

    The banality of evil, approach also lent itself to a generous extension of the idea of “complicity” and the rejection of American (or any other Western) society. If anybody could readily become a mass murderer, or assist in mass murder, and if beliefs and motivation were largely irrelevant to behavior, then no society was immune to genocidal temptations. Moreover the allegedly homogenized mass societies overly reliant on technology such as the U.S. might have a special affinity to devising new, efficient forms of mass murder, even genocide. Not by accident did “genocide” and “genocidal” become favorite epithets of the social critics and political activists of the 1960s (hardly ever directed at truly genocidal political systems). It may also be recalled here that the 1960s generation of radicals took great pleasure in comparing the United States to Nazi Germany (they spelled America with a “k”) and whenever possible threw at it terms like “fascist,” and “nazi” and compared American institutions to the Gestapo, the storm troopers and Auschwitz.

    The Vietnam War further stimulated the inclination to associate mass murder with technology and view the United States as a genocidal country intent on killing good-natured peasants impersonally with sophisticated technology from high altitudes, rather than in manly, authentic, face-to-face combat. American soldiers in this perspective were “professional killers” and their lack of passion was also held against them by many anti-war activists. Repeatedly such critics of the United States contrasted favorably the supposedly poorly armed, deeply committed, simple guerillas, operating in small groups with the mechanized might of the U.S. forces for whom fighting was a “job” to be performed impersonally and efficiently.

    The recent waves of political violence committed by Islamic groups and individuals have dealt a heavy blow to the theories and ideas Arendt popularized. A greatly neglected factor of political conflict and violence suddenly and dramatically reemerged, namely, fanatical hatred and the religious-political beliefs generating it. It was these beliefs that legitimated the ruthless violence the hatred inspired. Rarely in history has the relationship between belief and behavior been so clear as in the actions of the Islamic suicide pilots and bombers fortified and reassured as they had been by conceptions and personifications of evil defined with great clarity and held unhesitatingly. There was nothing banal, impersonal, dispassionate or detached about their behavior. A pure, burning hatred of the evil eagerly embraced motivated them as well as certain specific, if peculiar but deeply felt beliefs in other-wordily rewards. (More down to earth motives also played a part as families receive substantial material compensation for their “martyred” sons or daughters in addition to a marked improvement of their social standing in the community which applauds suicide bombings.)

    In numerous Arab countries and communities a hate-filled political culture evolved which enshrines violence as a sacred mission directed at the designated objects of hate. In these settings virulent hatred is inculcated from an early age; it is disseminated by the mass media, in schools and places of worship and sanctioned by both religious and political authorities.

    It is one thing to kill or harm one’s enemies in a matter-of-fact way in combat or in what is usually perceived as self-defense, and something quite different to publicly rejoice in, celebrate and glorify such killings. It is the hallmark of a political culture drenched in self-righteous hate that it allows and encourages individuals to joyously display their bloody hands to television cameras and bystanders after they committed murder, as was the case last year when two Israeli soldiers were lynched on the West Bank. The same political culture sustains the behavior of people who dance on the streets when hearing about the indiscriminate mass murder of their supposed enemies, as was the case in several Arab cities after September 11. One can also readily associate this political culture with the attitude of parents who express great joy upon hearing of the “martyrdom” their children incurred in the course of blowing to bits innocent civilians.

    Whatever the ingredients or sources of such hatred–material deprivation, lack of education, frustration, resentment, sense of inferiority, the scapegoating impulse — it has become the dominant force fuelling political conflict and violence. Its “root cause” is not poverty but relative deprivation or frustrated expectations and the overpowering but comforting belief that others are responsible for one’s misfortune. It is highly relevant here to recall that (as reported in a recent New York Times op-ed piece) opinion polls in the West Bank and Gaza found “that better educated Palestinians were more likely than others to approve of violence.”

    There is certainly nothing banal or inauthentic about the violence of the suicide bombers enthusiastically killing themselves in the pursuit of their ideals. Religious beliefs and a climate of public opinion legitimate and nurture such hatreds, which in other cultures most people are embarrassed to display in public, let alone act on.

    It is perhaps the authenticity of such violence and the belief that its perpetrators are the virtuous victims of the West (of the United States, and Israel) that impels the hardcore supporters of the adversary culture in this country to take a more charitable view of it and its perpetrators. Even if these warriors have not attracted as much open sympathy as the Vietcong used to, they benefit from the identity of their enemies in the eyes of the radical-left beholders whose better known representatives include Noam Chomsky, Terry Eagelton, Barbara Ehrenreich, Eric Foner, Frederic Jameson, Norman Mailer, Katha Pollit, Edward Said, Susan Sontag and Gore Vidal, among many others. They cannot help being drawn to virtually any group or individual passionately opposed to and willing to take militant action against the United States and Israel since they regard the United States “the great Satan” and the source of all evil and injustice in this world and Israel its ally and lackey.

    In the wake of 9/11 these attitudes have taken several forms. One was the search for “root causes” which invariably led to the conclusion that the United States and Israel are in the final analysis responsible for the violence directed against them; if they are so bitterly hated there have to be good reasons for such hate. Another expression of the same attitude was the solicitousness shown toward those accused of or suspected of the terrorist violence against the U.S. and Israel. A great surge of concern about their civil and human rights and welfare swept through left-liberal circles that would be praiseworthy if such concern had also been shown for the corresponding rights and welfare of the victims of the various anti-Western, anti-American and anti-Israeli guerillas and movements.

    At numerous universities administrators have been anxious to protect the sensitivity of Arab students and adherents of Islamic beliefs by deeming offensive any expression of American patriotism including the display of the American flag; likewise campus critics of the U.S. war on terrorism in Afghanistan and elsewhere were assured a far more supportive environment than those supporting it.

    Another symbolic gesture of support and solidarity was extended by Western “peace activists” who rushed to Arafat’s headquarters in Ramallah and to the besieged terrorists in the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem to keep them company and protect them by their presence.

    There have also been many attempts to deny that Islamic religious beliefs could have inspired or legitimated the murderous political impulses and behavior of the suicide bombers. These attempts are reminiscent of the old dispute about the relationship between Marxism and the practices of communist states. The repressive nature of these states cannot be directly blamed on Marx and his theories but there was a connection, at the very least in the sense of entitlement to ruthlessness on behalf of great ideals to be realized. A paradise awaiting the suicide bomber is such an ideal or aspiration, and it is a religious notion not invented by the individuals in question who act on it. None of the other violent enemies of Western societies in recent times (the Weathermen, the Red Brigade in Italy, the Bader-Meinhof gang in Germany, the IRA in Ireland, the Basque terrorists etc) were suicidal. They did not have the kind of religious assurance and encouragement their Islamic counterparts possess at the present time.

    The evil of Nazism was not banal, nor is the evil of Islamic suicide bombers. Whatever the social and political circumstances which contribute to their actions they do not provide moral license or the kind of “understanding” that shades into a mitigation of their behavior; these were individuals who, according to all indications, choose their actions freely, with utmost deliberation and under no compulsion other than the prodding of their beliefs and the enthusiastic support of their community.
    Paul Hollander is professor emeritus of sociology at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. His books include Political Pilgrims, Anti-Americanism, Political Will and Personal Belief and most recently Discontents: Postmodern and Postcommunist (Transaction, 2002)

  • Ravo

    Tom.. in the article I mentioned above at

    Moderate Islam: A Myth…(you have to scroll down for it)
    – if a Muslim is moderate – he or she hasn’t read the Koran.

    Quote: “Yet, it appears that those so-called moderate Muslims – who are Muslims just because of their birth in Muslim family and who might not have read the Koran, Sunna and Islam’s history at all or only in insufficient details (if at all) – are the ones overly enthusiastic to give verdicts on these radicals who are unrivalled in their knowledge and understanding of the Islamic faith.

    This is a case like an illiterate street vendor giving a verdict on whether “Einstein’s Theory of Relativity” is correct or not.”

  • Ravo

    Tom. I’m Christian.. no particular denomination. But I can tell you this….

    If Christians worldwide were randomly blowing up others in wholesale slaughter on buses, in pizza parlors, wedding chapels, trains, workplaces, airplanes and screaming Jesus’s name claiming they were doing it in His name

    …….EVERY Christian denomination in the world would be holding catechism classes in Churches worldwide tomorrow to tell them they were ignorant of the New Testament!

    Mosques can’t and won’t … because the jihadists are NOT misinformed about Islamic doctrines.

  • Kat

    I read the English translation–not the version that sugar coats everything but that long tedious terror like manual. I also read the works of Khomeini–that was one sick read–if you have sex with a cow you can’t eat the meat and about sex with six year olds being OK as long as you don’t hurt the child.
    You are naive. I once was. After 911 I really struggled with my conscience because my leftist priest kept telling me that I must not judge. He preached about turning the other cheek. Problem is–that gets you a knife in the back. I believe in just war. Our war against these scumbags is just.
    Upon hearing an immigrant Islamist speaker instruct an audience of Muslims that they were “obligated to desire, and when possible to participate in, the overthrow of any non-Islamic government–anywhere in the world–in order to replace it by an Islamic one,” one American-born convert remembers protesting in dismay that this would involve people like himself in political treason. “Yes, that’s true,” was the lecturer’s blithe response (Jeffrey Lang, Even Angels Ask: A Journey to Islam in America, 1997).
    We either fight this disease or we will all succumb to it. And it is high time these moderate muslims spoke up against the rot in their midst.

  • Ravo

    They tried that in Ireland, but it didn’t work. The Protestant’s and Catholics kept on blowing up pubs and pizza parlors in His name.

    Yeah, remember how they were blowing up people in Thailand and Germany and trade centers all over the world to make their point in that conflict – weren’t they? I heard them screaming of Kill for Jesus all the time. People in EVERY single country in the world were on constant terror alerts. /sarcasm

    You can stare at your navel all day long if you like and play “why do they hate us”. (I’ve better things to do then play that stupid meaningless libtard game)

    Today it’s because of UK politics. Tomorrow it will be another greviance. Whether it be a train in India, a Jordanian wedding, or a Beslan schoolyard, – there will be an excuse for the inexcusable, while everyone avoids the elephant in the room.

    The more DEVOUT the Muslim; the greater the incidence of Jihadism.

  • Kat

    I was against the tactics used in Kosovo–bombing civilians from 15,000 feet as instructed by Clark. I think the muslims lied about the numbers like they lied about Jenin and the 40 death massacre last week that was 1. I think Milosevic needed to be arrested and tried but it was wrong to target those who were killed in the village of Pristina, the children who were blown to bits iin Prizren or the people who were incinerated by Nato on the train to Belgrade. The attack by Nato was cowardly–fly high so you suffer no casualties.,,help the Albanians install sharia. As long as the Serbs are good dhimmi, peace will reign.

  • Kat


  • Ravo

    “Upon hearing an immigrant Islamist speaker instruct an audience of Muslims that they were “obligated to desire, and when possible to participate in, the overthrow of any non-Islamic government–anywhere in the world–

    in order to replace it by an Islamic one,” ….

    Yup, that’s it! That is the elephant in the room all right; the one the world refuses to acknowledge.

    I’m so tired of the damn conflicts and have no desire to sort them out. They are so complicated no one could. If every infidel disappeared tomorrow, the killing would continue as Muslims would just murder one another.

    Without Islam and it’s incessant conflicts since the time it began, 98% of the violence in the modern world would cease to be.

    If only we could establish an “Islamic Free” zone where the rest of us can live in peace.


  • Tom

    Ravo writes: Without Islam and it’s incessant conflicts since the time it began, 98% of the violence in the modern world would cease to be.’

    You think that WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam account for less than 2% of the violence our modern world has seen?

  • Tom

    Jeff, This is a reposting of a comment that got caught in your spam catcher. Tom

    Bin Laden and radical Muslim groups have been deeply involved in the Balkans since the civil wars in Bosnia from 1992 to 1995. Despite a UN arms embargo and with the knowledge and support of the United States, arms, ammunition and thousands of Mujahideen fighters were smuggled into Bosnia to help the Muslims. Many remain in Bosnia today and are recognized as a serious threat to Western forces there. The Bosnian government is said to have presented bin Laden with a Bosnian passport in recognition of his contribution to their cause. He and his al-Qaeda network were also active in Kosovo, and KLA members trained in his camps in Afghanistan and Albania.

    Kat, Ravo and Others,

    I’d find it a lot easier to accept Pres. Bush’s integrity (re the war on terror) if he reversed our Balkan’s policy. It looks to me like we fight bin Laden in one region, and comfort him in another. In the near future Kosovo will be turned over to the children of the KLA.

    Did the Serbian leadership make mistakes? Yes, they made the same mistakes in Kosovo that Israel is making in Lebanon. If the Serbians are quilty of war crimes, then I’d say the Israelis are as well. Milosevic wasn’t a great guy, but I am not convinced the Israeli leaders are all that much better – nor, are they much worse. Both nations want to guarantee their survival.

    Sec Albright, in a BBC interview, acknowledged that the KLA is a terrorist organisation, but she added (I must paraphrase) I was hoping the KLA wouldn’t commit any newsworthy atrocities before I could get the NATO resolution to take action against Serbia.


    As I have mentioned in a previous post, NATO did a splendid job of bombing my mother-in-law’s farm. The pigs are dead. But, I promise, we didn’t know the pigs were persecuting Muslim terrorists in Kosovo.

    Call me cynical, but I don’t trust Bush, Blair or Clinton.

  • Tom

    Ambassador James Bissett writes:

    ‘United States policy in the Balkans has been dysfunctional since March 1992 when their Ambassador, Warren Zimmerman, persuaded Izetbegovic the Islamist leader of the Bosnian Muslims to withdraw his signature to the Lisbon Agreement. This decision which led to US acceptance of the results of an illegal referendum and recognition of the first Muslim state in Europe triggered civil war in Bosnia and led directly to the death and destruction that followed. In the following years US decisions have proven to be equally disastrous for the region.

    The United States subversion of the Vance-Owen plan and the following Vance-Stoltenberg agreement prolonged the war in Bosnia unnecessarily. The violation of the United Nations arms embargo and the decision to permit several thousand mujihadeen fighters into Bosnia and to provide them with modern military equipment was also a decision bound to have “blow back” implications damaging not only to the region but also to the ongoing US war against terrorism.

    The decision of the United States government to support the cause of the terrorist KLA in its armed rebellion to secede from Yugoslavia is another example of US policy making gone wrong. There is evidence that the KLA military incursions into southern Serbia and later in Macedonia were backed by American agents. Their current policy supporting independence for Kosovo is but another chapter in an unfolding series of strategic errors. More seriously it reveals an indifference to the concept of sovereignty and of respect for the rule of law that is not in keeping with the principles laid down by the founding fathers of that great nation.

    United States policy in the Balkans has been characterized by cynicism, duplicity and short term tactical gain. By backing Islamist aims in the region and supporting terrorist groups in Kosovo there might be the immediate advantage of establishing a large military base in Kosovo or appeasing further Albanian demands by advocating independence for Kosovo but in the long term it will backfire.

    For centuries past Serbia, as one of the largest country in the Balkans and situated on the strategically important crossroads between Europe and the Near-East, was proud of its well earned reputation as the “guardian of the gate.” A democratic Serbia can be a powerful ally to democratic and free countries everywhere. In these perilous days when even the United States with all of its awesome military might can be terribly damaged by a handful of fanatical Islamist terrorists it would seem only prudent and in the national interest of Americans and of Europeans to reverse their ongoing policy of humiliating this key Balkan nation and find a solution to the Kosovo problem that falls short of independence.’

  • Eileen


    Where are you posting from and what is your nationality?

    You’ve succeeded in hijacking this thread to talk about Serbia – and play the blame game against the U.S. – when no one is defending Clinton’s sanity, representative of typical moonbat idiocy. That about sums up his efforts regarding the WOT, other than failing to pick up Bin Laden when he could have and bombing an aspirin factory. Bush inherited the prior, internationally sanctioned position taken with regard to Milosevic, prior leader of the Serbian Communist Party, which might have had a little something to do with it, along with his plans for a greater Serbia. [And I’ll grant you, efforts at establishment of a base in Islamic territory probably figured in as well.] Should Bush change that position given the current state of affairs with respect to Islamofascism? Maybe. We’ve learned a whole lot more about Islam since a Communist despot attempted to decimate a bunch MORE jihadis. Trust me, the education hasn’t been welcomed. In fact, you might even say it’s been thrust upon us through murder and mayhem, even though we’ve gone to certain lengths to support OR protect jihadis when comparative ‘threats’ or efforts at peace keeping suggested that was the more prudent policy in Serbia, or with respect to Russia/Afghanistan or Palestine (sic)/Israel.

    You say: “I’d find it a lot easier to accept Pres. Bush’s integrity (re the war on terror) if he reversed our Balkan’s policy.” OUR? We don’t spell favor favour in the U.S., or rely on Korans provided by Muslims in Oxford.

    I’ve noticed that terrorist apologists do their best to divert, deny and distract.

    After reviewing all your posts, I’d say you’re doing a very good job of all that.

    Relying on Cook (no doubt a liberal academic terrorist apologist) may serve your purposes, but enough citations have been provided by a number of posters here to present a much better case that jihad is not practiced or pursued by only a tiny fraction of radical Islamists, which is certainly the picture you attempt to paint.

    You conveniently ignore little facts like Muslims butchering and beheading Christian school girls in – what was it, Thailand or Indonesia that time – most assuredly a ‘peaceful encounter’ and not a ‘combat situation’. Were they, after ‘being brought low’ (i.e., into the hell of submission of Islam) and ‘rigorously bound’ (whatever horrors that might entail), SET FREE or Given The Grand Option of paying the jizya? No, their heads were merely chopped off.

    You were very careful to note with regard to that verse, “No doubt there are Islamic terrorists who feel differently [regarding Cook’s analysis], but do they represent the majority opinion?”

    If Cook were correct, the world would not be listening to the deafening silence of those *moderate Muslims* regarding ISLAMIC FASCISTS who are killing Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., in the name of Islam across the globe daily. That smacks of majority opinion to me. If their ‘reticence’ to reign in their barbaric butchers is due to the constraints (to put it mildly) of Sharia law, then those laws needs to be changed and Islam needs to be reformed. [But not according to those bastions of Moderate Muslims, CAIR and their fellow travelers like the Muslim Council of Britain. All they do is issue thinly veiled threats and provide more taqiyya trash talk.]

    We infidels tend to think that Islam really IS about exactly what they loudly proclaim it to be daily; i.e., establishment of a global caliphate, and either killing OR causing the dhimmification of all those who aren’t Muslim. None of those are options we will ever – not even a snowflake’s chance in hell – accept.

    I suspect we’ll be helping *moderate Muslims* accomplish some ‘adjustments’ in very short order – as soon as Ahmalittledespot makes good on his stated aims, in combination with whatever other vile deeds the Islamic Fascists are plotting – or activating – as we speak.

    If you truly don’t wish to live in a Muslim state, then you might reconsider your lengthy list of apologist arguments.

    Ravo, I share your angst.

  • Eileen

    On a happier note, may I remind the terrorist taqiyya talkers and their apologists here of one simple fact: there are FOUR BILLION of us you’re gonna need to ‘contend with’ if you persist in bringing on the clash of civilizations to usher in your Mahdi (spit be upon him).

    Sleep well, Infidels.

  • Tom

    Eileen writes: After reviewing all your posts . . .

    Eileen, If you really had reviewed all my posts you would not need to ask questions about where I am posting from or my nationality. I question the quality of your research methods. For the record (once again) I am a US citizen posting from Britain (Oxford). I am married and in my 50’s. Most of my friends would probably describe me as a conservative, but not necessarily as a Republican. I believe in free-trade and the rule of law.

    In my younger days, when everyone told me that communism was monolithic, and that if Vietnam were to fall there would be communist marching down my hometown Main Street, I marched off to one of our nation’s elite service academies. After losing a few friends to that poorly thought out, but at the time popular war, I decided to form my own opinions on matters of war and peace rather than accept them predigested. Eileen, I’d recommend the same course of action to you.

    You dismiss Cook by writing: ‘Cook (no doubt a liberal academic terrorist apologist) may serve your purposes, but enough citations have been provided by a number of posters here to present a much better case that jihad is not practiced or pursued by only a tiny fraction of radical Islamists, which is certainly the picture you attempt to paint.’

    How convenient for you. No need to think about what he has written, just make an assumption. As to the number of citations posted, I have found them to be of uncertain quality. I am more concerned with finding a solution than proving a point, and I do make an effort to understand other views. How about you?

    As to the claim that all Muslims are terrorist. I don’t buy it. I’ve met hundreds of well educated Muslims, and few – if any – are militant. How many Muslims do you know?

    With regard to the Serbian question, I plead some special interest. My wife is Serbian. (You already knew that, right?). Our policy against the Serbs has been ill thought out since its inception. And the conduct of our so-called war on terror reveals the hypocricy on the part some of our leadership. If you can’t see the relationship between our Serbian policy and the war on terror, I can’t help you. Should we change the policy? The best you can come up with is ‘maybe’. Do you need someone to do your thinking for you?

    You write: We don’t spell favor favour in the U.S., or rely on Korans provided by Muslims in Oxford.

    Who is we? I am just happy you can spell. With regard to the Koran, if you are going to quote from it, why not use an accurate translation? My reference to the version I was quoting from was provided for the sake of clarity. If you know it to be an unreliable translation, point it out. I notice you haven’t provided a citation for the version you refer to. Do you have something to hide?

    For the record, I am no apologist for terrorism. I want to see the terror end. Having read most of your posts, I don’t think you have provided much beyond rah, rah, rah. I do not believe that cheerleading will solve the terror problem, but perhaps I am over complicating things.

    Eileen: We’ve learned a whole lot more about Islam since a Communist despot attempted to decimate a bunch MORE jihadis. Trust me, the education hasn’t been welcomed.

    I do trust that you have not welcomed your education.

  • Tom

    Eileen writes: even though we’ve gone to certain lengths to support OR protect jihadis when comparative ‘threats’ or efforts at peace keeping suggested that was the more prudent policy in Serbia, or with respect to Russia/Afghanistan or Palestine (sic)/Israel.

    Yes, we have supported and protected jihadis in Serbia, but it wasn’t and isn’t prudent policy. There was a time the Serbian people wanted to emulate the US, but after selling them out to the USSR at the end of WW2, and supporting jihadis on there doorstep today, they don’t want much to do with us anymore.

    I guess we have so many allies in the war on terror that it doesn’t really matter if we trample on a few of them.

    The Serbs probably wouldn’t be much of an ally anyway would they Eileen? Look at how the Germans handled them in WW2. I guess the Serbs just don’t have enough fighting spirit to be on our team.

    The lamentable war undertaken by the United States and NATO against Serbia is distressing and deeply regrettable. Serbia was a staunch ally of the west in both World Wars. Serbian army officers had in fact overthrown a pro-Nazi government in 1941. During the course of the war Serbs fought on the anti-Nazi side while Croats, Bosnians, and Yugoslav Albanians fought for the Germans. In Croatia, fascist leader Ante Pavelic set up a state that became a Nazi puppet state. Likewise, Bosnians and Albanians collaborated with the fascists against the Serbs. Over 700,000 Serbs were exterminated during the Second World War. Between 1941 and 1945, one out of four Bishops, Priests, and monks of the Serbian Orthodox Church were killed.

    Since 1998, Serbia has been under siege in Kosovo. Kosovo is the cradle of Serbian culture and religion. Under the rule of [Croatian] Communist dictator Tito, tens of thousands of Albanians were settled in this province of Serbia. In the meantime, Serb residents of Kosovo were driven out by anti-Serb pogroms and discriminatory measures against Serbs. As a result, ninety percent of Kosovo’s population is Albanian today. The treatment of Serbia by Washington and the western media is appalling for its utter neglect of Serbian views and national feelings.

    History will condemn the Clinton administration and NATO for abandoning Serbia’s democratic activists. When Belgrade was full of demonstrations in the winter of 1996-97, Milosevic could have been pressured to hold elections while Serbian and Albanian dissidents could have been united in opposing the regime. Instead, the Clinton administration chose to wait for Kosovo to explode and support the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA).

    Reports have surfaced that the KLA is involved in drug dealing and with Iranian fundamentalists. Many more reports have been published detailing the KLA’s extremist agenda. At the same time, the regime of Milosevic has been exposed as a repressive and tyrannical regime against Albanians and Serbs.

    The problem with NATO’s war against Serbia is that it is aimed at the Serbian nation rather than the regime.

    Atrocities among all factions in Yugoslavia should be condemned. However, it is alarming that the Serbian viewpoint has been missing from the “mainstream” media since Yugoslavia was dismembered in 1991. A genuine democratic debate about the Balkans has failed to occur in western countries over the past several years.

    Serbs have been subject to various outrages. In 1998, the Vatican canonized Archbishop Stepinac, a Croatian prelate implicated in the forced conversions and persecution of Serbs during WW2. In 1992, the United States recognized the independence of Bosnia on April 6, the anniversary of Hitler’s invasion of Yugoslavia. For Greeks, this would be the equivalent of America recognizing the Turkish backed state in Cyprus on October 28, the anniversary of Italy’s attack on Greece.

    It is disheartening to hear Serbs referred to as “Nazis”. On July 29, 1998 the “National Committee of American Airmen rescued by General Mihailovic” placed a message in the Washington Times stating that five hundred American pilots shot down in Yugoslavia during WW2 were rescued by the Serbs. Similarly, Serbs protected and supported the Jews.

    Finally, there is the alarming prospect of the re-Ottomanization of the Balkans. In 1994, the Clinton administration allowed Turkish, Iranian, and Saudi troops to go to Bosnia. In Albania, Osama Bin Laden has established a base. Saudi newspapers have called for an Islamic Kosovo while Turkey and Albania develop closer relations. Never has the foreign policy establishment in America and its President been so dangerous or destructive.

    President Bush could do something about this, but has given no indication that he is the least bit concerned with jihadist activity in the Balkans. In fact we still support gifting Kosovo to the jihadist proxies. Of course Eileen, the connection between what is going on in the Balkans and cheerleading have only a tenuous connection. Pay it no mind.

  • Tom

    Tom writes: They tried that in Ireland, but it didn’t work. The Protestant’s and Catholics kept on blowing up pubs and pizza parlors in His name.

    Ravo responds: Yeah, remember how they were blowing up people in Thailand and Germany and trade centers all over the world to make their point in that conflict – weren’t they? I heard them screaming of Kill for Jesus all the time. People in EVERY single country in the world were on constant terror alerts. /sarcasm

    Ravo, What I remember is an innocent 10 year old girl killed by a bomb placed by these good Irish Christian warriors. She had just returned from the States. It was her welcome back to Britain.

    So much for your claim that Christians don’t kill each other. I know they do.

  • Eileen

    It’s just not worth any more of my time. I’ll leave stuck-on-Serbia to talk to himself.

    Have a great Sunday, Infidels!

  • Joe

    I’d kill any Muslim just to watch ’em bleed.

  • Pingback: The Countertop Chronicles » Blog Archive » God Bless Jeff Jarvis()