« Zarqawi Was Still Alive When US Forces Arrived at Site of Bombing | Main | Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™ »

To Fight Terrorism You Have To Correctly Identify The Enemy

Captain Ed points to two excellent editorials today about the continued reluctance of those in positions of power to describe and address the true nature of Islamic terrorism. In an Examiner editorial, "The Broad Strata of Delusion", we see how security is inadequately addressed as a result. In an Investor's Business Daily editorial, "Sanctuaries of Terror", the connection between terrorism and those who frequent mosques is discussed.

Read both pieces. As Ed concludes, the refusal to correctly identify the enemy is one that has to end if we are to really get serious about security and preventing future terrorist attacks.

We continue to see an almost deliberate aversion from the truth about the nature of the terrorists every time we find disrupt their plans or arrest the plotters. The Canadians aren't alone in this; we see it in the US as well. IBD points out that mosques figured heavily into the efforts of the 9/11 terrorists, including one near the Pentagon, an ultimate target for one of their teams. The 1993 World Trade Center bombing also involved an imam, Omar Abdel Rahman (the "blind Sheikh"), currently serving a life sentence here in Minnesota for his part in the attack. In London, a raid on the Finsbury mosque associated with the July 7 bombings turned up stolen and forged passports and chemical warfare suits.


Another fact to keep in mind: eighty percent of mosques in the US, according to IBD, get their financing from the Wahhabist Saudis -- and we have over 1,200 of them.

We cannot win this war while we ignore the lines of communication from the enemy. We certainly cannot win any war if we remain afraid to name our enemy. Western governments want to pretend that our enemy is a tactic rather than a person, and so play a little dance when the tactic continually gets used by one particular strain of religious fanatics -- Islamists. This dance insults our intelligence, and it insults the intelligence of everyone else, our enemies included.

Our governments need to stop the charade of "broad stratas" and shaking down old Medal of Honor winners at airports in order to extend the delusion. The pattern of terrorist attacks show them to have almost exclusively committed by males, and young, radical Islamic males. Let's get serious about our security and the war and acknoweldge that Islamists declared war on us years ago, and that we will make sure our security protocols are geared to fight that war.

Update: James Joyner points out that while they compose the majority, all terrorists are not young, Arab men.

Still, although Lorie Byrd is axiomatically right when she observes, "To Fight Terrorism You Have To Correctly Identify The Enemy," the enemy is jihadist killers, not young Arab men. The enemy is using teenage girls and old women as suicide bombers these days. They also have white co-conspirators, including the likes of John Walker Lindh. And black men such as the DC snipers and the would-be University of North Carolina killer. So, while young Arab men should reasonably receive more scrutiny than little old ladies, focusing exclusively on the former will let bad guys through; indeed, once the profile became evident, the enemy would use those who don't fit the profile for most of their operations, with perhaps the occasional sacrificial Arab thrown in to keep us off the scent.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference To Fight Terrorism You Have To Correctly Identify The Enemy:

» Outside The Beltway | OTB linked with Racial Profiling and Counter-Terrorism

Comments (21)

I wouldn't be surprised to ... (Below threshold)

I wouldn't be surprised to one day find that the DNC was funneling money into the mosques.

(The above is only about 50... (Below threshold)

(The above is only about 50% sarcasm).

Now THAT is speaking truth ... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Now THAT is speaking truth to power!

They can not discriminate b... (Below threshold)

They can not discriminate between good and evil.

They can not discriminat... (Below threshold)

They can not discriminate between good and evil.

Well, remember: discrimination is wrong.

</liberal airhead>

They can not discr... (Below threshold)
kbiel:
They can not discriminate between good and evil.

Sure they can:

Liberal speech good, conservative speech evil.

First the left will have to... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

First the left will have to 'believe' there is evil in the world before they can recognize it. So far the head in the sand posture isn't working too well. They keep getting on the part that is sticking up.

Okay wingnuts, whaddya do a... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

Okay wingnuts, whaddya do about it then? You've brilliantly identified the elephant in the room: Islamofascist terrorists are all Muslims! You get a gold star! The hard part is figuring out what the hell to do about it. Do you outlaw Islam? Do you place FBI observers in every mosque during every religious observance? Do you kill all the brown people and let Allah sort 'em out?

Either you take the path of fascism, where all Muslims are treated as potential terrorists; or you get all liberal and dare to address the sociological underpinnings of the radical movement in your country while hoping that the CIA and FBI are capable of catching those who are beyond the pale of reason.

I know it's more fun to just swagger around acting all tough on the internet, but I think confronting the problem of domestic and international terrorism will require more than just chest-pounding.

Heh. Behold the Lefty templ... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

Heh. Behold the Lefty template:

"You've brilliantly identified the elephant in the room: Islamofascist terrorists are all Muslims! You get a gold star! "

See how it works? Put up a P.C. wall of self-imposed blindness, deny, deny, deny and then when it is no longer possible to avoid the truth....say 'Well, duh! EVERYBODY knows that!'

And if you REALLY want to gild the lily, you throw in something like 'well, you have to understand the 'root causes' that these poor oppressed darlings have to cope with'.

Truly ironic thinking, cons... (Below threshold)
LJD:

Truly ironic thinking, considering the moonbats have attempted to hamstring every effort, both domestic and international, to bring them to justice.

When did I deny the common ... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

When did I deny the common culture of the terrorists, Les? When did I call them darlings? I'm not Noam Chomsky. I'm not talking about coddling the bastards; I'm talking about preventing radical clerics (the Islamic kind, not Dobson/Falwell) from furthering their recruiting efforts on campuses, in their mosques, etc.. If sociological analysis can prove fruitful in this regard, why ridicule it? Oh, right: because as a right-wing American, you have an inborn distaste for, and suspicion of, anything that cannot be expressed with grunts and/or gunfire.

Nice of you to ignore my point: tough talk and no action is still inaction. What do you propose to do about the problem of Islamofascist terrorism in the domestic context?

LJD, if by hamstringing the... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

LJD, if by hamstringing the war effort, you mean insisting on not violating the edicts of international and domestic law, then yeah, the left is totally in bed with Osama.

You see, we're crazy enough to believe that when liberties are curtailed, the terrorists win. That's what they want. They hate it when you live like a free American, in a diverse society that respects individual rights. So excuse the left for attempting to ensure that any victory in the war on terror is not also a victory for the people who quite literally hate your freedom. What's the point in fighting Islamic terrorists if you don't hold your government and your troops to a higher moral and legal standard of conduct than your enemies?

I'm just finishing 'Havoc, in Its Third Year' by Ronan Bennett. Probably the best historical fiction I've read in five years. It's about religious turmoil in 17th c. England, but the language is not dense as the period typically dictates and the book should resonate with any reader interested in 21st century American domestic politics in a time of terror. On par with 'The Crucible'.

What Captain Ed and almost ... (Below threshold)

What Captain Ed and almost every other right-wing blogger I've read today who's covered this editorial fail to point out are the factual inaccuracies in the piece.

Should there be a dialogue about the roots of terrorism? Absolutely. But, when the jumping off points are false, they need to be called out first. We Canadians are getting pretty damn tired of the distortions in the US media about our country and its affairs.

BemusedIt's been a c... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

Bemused
It's been a common PC/Liberal/Lefty mantra for years now : 'You can't 'profile' certain people even if the statistics prove it's warranted and besides you shouldn't be compiling those statistics in the first place and you're a racist if you do and all cultures are morally eqivalent anyway...' et cetera, ad nauseum.

To suddenly jump up now and say 'Yeah, we knew it all along, it's not anything new ' is a bit disingenuous.

If you don't adhere to this Lefty dogma, that's to your credit. But don't deny that this PC thinking has been influencing our institutions for years now.

As to the 'root causes', again for years now that term has almost exclusively been used as a PC excuse for not being held accountable. Unless our western cultures realize that not all cultures should be given the same deference, then it's just going to be the same old same old.

To Fight Terrorism You H... (Below threshold)
astigafa:

To Fight Terrorism You Have To Correctly Identify The Enemy

And that would be the MSM! Yes, the MSM! They're behind bin Laden! They're behind Zar-however-you-spell-that-name-after-2-oxycontins-and-12-hours-on-a-morphine-pump, it's them! I'm so glad I found this blog.

Blame CanadaBlame Ca... (Below threshold)
scsiwuzzy:

Blame Canada
Blame Canada
With their beady little eyes...

Heh, good post, scsi. =)</p... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

Heh, good post, scsi. =)

You too, astigafa. Funny shit.

Hear hear, catnip. Even our right-wing rags look decidedly moderate and even-keeled in their response to the foiled attacks compared to Special Ed, the other Malkinites, and "liberal" CNN.

Les, as for hiding behind PC b.s. reasons for not profiling Muslims, I will concede that it makes little sense to pretend that a little old Japanese lady is as likely to be smuggling explosives onto an airplane as a man of Middle Eastern heritage with a big frickin' beard. I just happen to think, though, that such profiling need not be overt (i.e. X-ray scan all airplane passengers rather than having to choose), and need not be codified in public policy; doing so inflames tensions between Muslims who work hard and have never committed a violent act, and their fellow Americans who are thereby basically told that Muslims are prone to blowing things up.

The media and the government in the U.S. do their damndest to scare the shit out of everybody; I just don't see that happening in Canada. It makes life a lot more pleasant, obviously; but it is not unreasonable to suggest that on top of that it would be more difficult to radicalize susceptible youth in an environment where they are not treated with overt suspicion by every law enforcement officer and security guard. That's what secretive intelligence agencies are for. Ours seems very capable. Perhaps your fear and suspicion is more justified because your country's agencies have committed unforgivable mistakes over the past few years.

BemusedI am sure you... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

Bemused
I am sure your agencies are very capable, especially with mutual cooperation with allied agencies. Cooperation benefits all. Whatever our mistakes, it's easier not to have to do most of the heavy lifting for the rest of the world.

You are right about that, L... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

You are right about that, Les. Our army is doing fine in Afghanistan, but we aren't exactly a superpower, and our borders are porous to a fault. And we do depend on our American and British allies a great deal; we earned that, though, in WW I & II, and in Korea.

We don't bite off more than we can chew. I hope your gov't doesn't make the same mistake, i.e. with Iran.

You earned the right to let... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

You earned the right to let others protect you?
That's rich...

We didn't earn the right to... (Below threshold)
Bemused:

We didn't earn the right to hide behind you; we earned the right to expect full cooperation from your agencies in regards to our national security (and vice versa). Military defense is pretty well redundant in this day and age. That's not what I was referring to.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy