Return
Home
The
Credits
The
Cast
Act
1
Act
2
Act
3
The
End
The
Reviews
Photos
     
 

TERRORISM 1

.
.
.

TERRORISM

see "EVIL" for related links


. . . Al Qaeda spokesman Suleiman Abu Gheith has stated
Al Qaeda's objective: "to kill 4 million Americans--2
million of them children--and to exile twice as many
and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands."

Nearly 3,000 died in the September 11 attacks. It
would take about 1,334 similar assaults to reach 4
million. Or it could take one nuclear weapon.

Al Qaeda has made its intentions clear. America's
challenge is to prevent the terrorists from
succeeding.

--Graham Allison
_Los Angeles Times_ [19 September 2004]
"Al Qaeda Wants To Nuke A U.S. City. There
Are Simple Ways To Stop It."

--

There's some pride in my heart. For the
white people, it serves them right.
--Bali blast defendent Amrozi, in Indonesian
court, http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=story&cid=586&ncid=586&e=6&u=/
nm/20030612/wl_nm/indonesia_bali_dc

--

By God's leave, we call on every Muslim who
believes in God and hopes for reward to obey
God's command to kill the Americans and plunder
their possessions whenever he finds them and
whenever he can.
--Osama bin Laden, in the London-based Al-
Quds Al-Arabi newspaper [February 1998]

We -- with Allah's help -- call on every Muslim who believes
in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah's
order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever
and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema,
leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's
U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them,
and to displace those who are behind them so that they may
learn a lesson.
--Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders World
Islamic Front Statement 23 February 1998
Shaykh Usamah Bin-Muhammad, Bin-Ladin
et al http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/
980223-fatwa.htm

--

The weak are strong because they are
reckless. The strong are weak because
they have scruples.
--Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898)
Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Prussia
1862-1890.
Quoted by Henry Kissinger to James Callaghan
in 1975. In James Callaghan _Time and Chance_
[1987]

--

There is no more dangerous theory in international
politics than that we need to balance the power of
America with other competitive powers; different
poles around which nations gather.

Such a theory may have made sense in 19th-century
Europe. It was perforce the position in the Cold War.

Today, it is an anachronism to be discarded like
traditional theories of security. And it is dangerous
because it is not rivalry but partnership we need;
a common will and a shared purpose in the face of
a common threat.

--Tony Blair (1953- )
British Labour statesman, Prime Minister [1997-],
Speech to US Congress [17 July 2003]

More from the speech:

The risk is that terrorism and states developing
weapons of mass destruction come together. And when
people say, "That risk is fanciful," I say we know
the Taliban supported Al Qaida. We know Iraq under
Saddam gave haven to and supported terrorists. We
know there are states in the Middle East now actively
funding and helping people, who regard it as God's
will in the act of suicide to take as many innocent
lives with them on their way to God's judgment.
Some of these states are desperately trying to
acquire nuclear weapons. We know that companies
and individuals with expertise sell it to the highest
bidder, and we know that at least one state, North
Korea, lets its people starve while spending billions
of dollars on developing nuclear weapons and exporting
the technology abroad. This isn't fantasy, it is 21st-
century reality, and it confronts us now.

Can we be sure that terrorism and weapons of mass
destruction will join together? Let us say one thing:
If we are wrong, we will have destroyed a threat that
at its least is responsible for inhuman carnage and
suffering. That is something I am confident history
will forgive. But if our critics are wrong, if we are
right, as I believe with every fiber of instinct and
conviction I have that we are, and we do not act, then
we will have hesitated in the face of this menace when
we should have given leadership. That is something
history will not forgive.

--ibid.

Tell the world why you're proud of America. Tell them
when the Star-Spangled Banner starts, Americans get to
their feet, Hispanics, Irish, Italians, Central Europeans,
East Europeans, Jews, Muslims, white, Asian, black, those
who go back to the early settlers and those whose English
is the same as some New York cab driver's I've dealt with
... but whose sons and daughters could run for this
Congress.
--ibid.

That is what this struggle against terrorist groups
or states is about. We're not fighting for domination.
We're not fighting for an American world, though we
want a world in which America is at ease. We're not
fighting for Christianity, but against religious
fanaticism of all kinds.

And this is not a war of civilizations, because each
civilization has a unique capacity to enrich the stock
of human heritage. We are fighting for the inalienable
right of humankind--black or white, Christian or not,
left, right or a million different--to be free, free
to raise a family in love and hope, free to earn a
living and be rewarded by your efforts, free not to
bend your knee to any man in fear, free to be you so
long as being you does not impair the freedom of others.

That's what we're fighting for. And it's a battle worth
fighting.

And I know it's hard on America, and in some small
corner of this vast country, out in Nevada or Idaho
or these places I've never been to, but always wanted
to go...I know out there there's a guy getting on
with his life, perfectly happily, minding his own
business, saying to you, the political leaders of
this country, "Why me? And why us? And why America?"

And the only answer is, "Because destiny put
you in this place in history, in this moment in
time, and the task is yours to do."

--ibid.

--

[re: the 2004 assassination of Hamas "spiritual leader"
Sheikh Ahmed Yassin]

Provoke Hamas? Really make them angry? You gotta be
kidding. What are they going to do now? Kill hundreds
of Israelis? They are already doing that. Dismember
pregnant women? Been there, done that. Blow the arms
and legs off children? Ditto.
...

While we may, from time to time, eliminate terrorist
leaders like Yassin or even Osama bin-Laden, a total
end to Middle East terror will not come about until
there is complete Arab democratization in the Middle
East. And President Bush, in a sharp departure from
his father, who lacked "the vision thing" and left
Saddam Hussein in power, understands this.

--Scmuley Boteach, "Burning Bush",
_The Jerusalem Post_ [24 March 2004]

--

Like the Second World War, our present conflict began
with a ruthless, surprise attack on the United States.
We will not forget that treachery, and we will accept
nothing less than victory over the enemy.

Like the murderous ideologies of the 20th century, the
ideology of terrorism reaches across borders, and seeks
recruits in every country. So we’re fighting these enemies
wherever they hide across the earth.

Like other totalitarian movements, the terrorists seek
to impose a grim vision in which dissent is crushed,
and every man and woman must think and live in colorless
conformity. So to the oppressed peoples everywhere, we
are offering the great alternative of human liberty.

Like enemies of the past, the terrorists underestimate
the strength of free peoples. The terrorists believe
that free societies are essentially corrupt and decadent,
and with a few hard blows will collapse in weakness and
in panic. The enemy has learned that America is strong
and determined, because of the steady resolve of our
citizens, and because of the skill and strength of the
Army, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard and the United States
Air Force.

And like the aggressive ideologies that rose up in the
early 1900s, our enemies have clearly and proudly stated
their intentions: Here are the words of al Qaeda’s self-
described military spokesman in Europe, on a tape claiming
responsibility for the Madrid bombings. He said, “We choose
death, while you choose life. If you do not stop your
injustices, more and more blood will flow and these attacks
will seem very small compared to what can occur in what
you call terrorism.”

Here are the words of another al Qaeda spokesman, Suleiman
Abu Gheith. Last year, in an article published on an al
Qaeda website, he said, “We have the right to kill four
million Americans - two million of them children - and to
exile twice as many and wound and cripple hundreds of
thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to fight them
with chemical and biological weapons.”

In all these threats, we hear the echoes of other enemies
in other times - that same swagger and demented logic of
the fanatic. Like their kind in the past, these murderers
have left scars and suffering. And like their kind in the
past, they will flame and fail and suffer defeat by free
men and women.

--George W. Bush (1946- )
The 43rd President of the United States and a former Governor of Texas.
Commencement speech, U.S. Air Force Academy, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040602.html


I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the
people who knocked these buildings down will hear all
of us soon.
--George W. Bush (1946- )
The 43rd President of the United States
and a former Governor of Texas,
{to rescue workers at the site of the
destroyed World Trade Center}

--

During the decade of the 1990s, our times often seemed
peaceful on the surface. Yet beneath the surface were
currents of danger. Terrorists were training and planning
in distant camps. . . . America's response to terrorism
was generally piecemeal and symbolic. The terrorists
concluded this was a sign of weakness, and their plans
became more ambitious, and their attacks more deadly.
Most Americans still felt that terrorism was something
distant, and something that would not strike on a large
scale in America. That is the time my opponent wants to
go back to. A time when danger was real and growing, but
we didn't know it. . . . September 11, 2001 changed all
that. We realized that the apparent security of the 1990s
was an illusion. . . . Will we make decisions in the
light of September 11, or continue to live in the mirage
of safety that was actually a time of gathering threats?
--George W. Bush (1946- )
The 43rd President of the United States
and a former Governor of Texas, [18 October 2004]

--

This great and urgent responsibility has required a shift
in national security policy. For many years prior to 9/11,
we treated terror attacks against Americans as isolated
incidents, and answered--if at all--on an ad hoc basis,
and never in a systematic way. Even after an attack inside
our own country--the 1993 bombing at the World Trade Center,
in New York--there was a tendency to treat terrorist incidents
as individual criminal acts, to be handled primarily through
law enforcement. The man who perpetrated that attack in New
York was tracked down, arrested, convicted and sent off to
serve a 240-year sentence. Yet behind that one man was a
growing network with operatives inside and outside the
United States, waging war against our country. For us,
that war started on 9/11. For them, it started years
before. After the World Trade Center attack in 1993 came
the murders at the Saudi Arabia National Guard Training
Center in Riyadh, in 1995; the simultaneous bombings of
American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, in 1998; the
attack on the USS Cole, in 2000. In 1996, Khalid Shaykh
Muhammad--the mastermind of 9/11--first proposed to
Osama bin Laden that they use hijacked airliners to
attack targets in the U.S. During this period, thousands
of terrorists were trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan.
And we have seen the work of terrorists in many attacks
since 9/11--in Riyadh, Casablanca, Istanbul, Mombasa,
Bali, Jakarta, Najaf, Baghdad and, most recently, Madrid.
[...]
In one of Sen. Kerry's recent observations about foreign
policy, he informed his listeners that his ideas have
gained strong support, at least among unnamed foreigners
he's been spending time with. Sen. Kerry said that he has
met with foreign leaders, and I quote, "who can't go out
and say this publicly, but boy they look at you and say,
'You've got to win this, you've got to beat this guy,
we need a new policy,' things like that. A few days ago
in Pennsylvania, a voter asked Sen. Kerry directly who
these foreign leaders are. Sen. Kerry said, "That's none
of your business. But it is our business when a candidate
for president claims the political endorsement of foreign
leaders. At the very least, we have a right to know what
he is saying to foreign leaders that makes them so
supportive of his candidacy. American voters are the
ones charged with determining the outcome of this election
--not unnamed foreign leaders.
[...]
Sen. Kerry speaks often about the need for international
cooperation, and has vowed to usher in a "golden age of
American diplomacy." He is fond of mentioning that some
countries did not support America's actions in Iraq. Yet
of the many nations that have joined our coalition--allies
and friends of the United States--Sen. Kerry speaks with
open contempt. Great Britain, Australia, Italy, Spain,
Poland and more than 20 other nations have contributed
and sacrificed for the freedom of the Iraqi people. Sen.
Kerry calls these countries, quote, "window dressing."
They are, in his words, "a coalition of the coerced and
the bribed." Many questions come to mind, but the first
is this: How would Sen. Kerry describe Great Britain--
coerced, or bribed? Or Italy--which recently lost 19
citizens, killed by terrorists in Najaf--was Italy's
contribution just window dressing? If such dismissive
terms are the vernacular of the golden age of diplomacy
Sen. Kerry promises, we are left to wonder which nations
would care to join any future coalition. He speaks as
if only those who openly oppose America's objectives
have a chance of earning his respect. Sen. Kerry's
characterization of our good allies is ungrateful to
nations that have withstood danger, hardship, and insult
for standing with America in the cause of freedom.

--Dick Cheney, "A Clear Choice",
March 17, 2004 speech at the Ronald Reagan Presidential
Library and Museum in Simi Valley, Calif.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004831

--

It is a great mistake for Americans to believe that their
country is hated because it is misunderstood. It is hated
because it is understood only too well. ... the Islamic
fundamentalists don't just object to the excesses of American
liberty: they object to liberty itself. Nor can we appease
them by staying out of their world. We live in an age in
which the flow of information is virtually unstoppable.
We do not have the power to keep our ideals and our
culture out of their lives.

Thus there is no alternative to facing their hostility.

--Dinesh D'Souza (1961- )
American author,
_What's So Great About America_ [2002]

--

With his high cheekbones, narrow eyes and long brown robe, Mr Bin Laden looks every inch the mountain warrior of mujahedin legend. Chadored children danced in front of him, preachers acknowledged his wisdom. ''We have been waiting for this road through all the revolutions in Sudan,'' a sheikh said. ''We waited until we had given up on everybody - and then Osama Bin Laden came along.''

Outside Sudan, Mr Bin Laden is not regarded with quite such high esteem. The Egyptian press claims he brought hundreds of former Arab fighters back to Sudan from Afghanistan, while the Western embassy circuit in Khartoum has suggested that some of the ''Afghans'' whom this Saudi entrepreneur flew to Sudan are now busy training for further jihad wars in Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt. Mr Bin Laden is well aware of this. ''The rubbish of the media and the embassies,'' he calls it. ''I am a construction engineer and an agriculturalist.
If I had training camps here in Sudan, I couldn't possibly do this job."

--Robert Fisk,
"Anti-Soviet warrior puts his army on the road to peace"
_The Independent_ [6 December 1993]

--

...we are seeing - from Bali to Istanbul - the birth of a virulent, nihilistic form of terrorism that seeks to kill any advocates of modernism and pluralism, be they Muslims, Christians or Jews. This terrorism started even before 9/11, and is growing in the darkest corners of the Muslim world. It is the most serious threat to open societies, because one more 9/11 and we'll really see an erosion of our civil liberties. Ultimately, only Arabs and Muslims can root out this threat, but they will do that only when they have ownership over their own lives and societies. Nurturing that is our real goal in
Iraq.
--Thomas L. Friedman, "The Chant Not Heard",
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/30/
opinion/30FRIE.html

--

This administration came into office to discover that al Qaeda had been allowed to grow into a full-blown menace. It lost six precious weeks to the Florida recount - and then weeks after Inauguration Day to the go-slow confirmation procedures of a 50-50 Senate. As late as the summer of 2001, pitifully few of Bush's own people had taken their jobs at State, Defense, and the NSC. Then it was hit by 9/11. And now, now the same people who allowed al Qaeda to grow up, who delayed the staffing of the administration, who did nothing when it was their turn to act, who said nothing when they could have spoken in advance of the attack - these same people accuse George Bush of doing too little? There's a long answer to give folks like that -
and also a short one. And the short one is: How *dare* you?
--David Frum,
http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/diary032904.asp

--

Terrorism and deception are weapons not
of the strong but of the weak.
--Mohandas K. Gandhi (1869-1948)
Indian statesman and leader of the nationalistic
movement against British rule.
_Young India_ [22 September 1920]

--

Serious students of terrorism rejected the "root causes" theory long ago.
Terrorism does not spring spontaneously from social deprivation or political
oppression. If it did, then every poor and undemocratic country would be
a hive of terrorists. Soviet dissidents never resorted to murdering innocent
civilians, nor did the opponents of Nazism -- though they were fighting
some of the worst forms of oppression ever seen.
--Marcus Gee,
Canada's _Globe and Mail_ (9/15/01)

--

Let those who say we must understand the reasons for terrorism
come with me to the thousands of funerals we are having in New
York City and explain those insane, maniacal reasons to the children
who will grow up without fathers and mothers, to the parents
who have had their children ripped from them for no reason at all.
--Rudy [Rudolph W.] Giuliani (1944- )
Mayor of New York City [1994-2001]

The evidence of terrorism's brutality and inhumanity, of its
contempt for life and its contempt for peace, is lying beneath
the rubble of the World Trade Center less than two miles from
where we meet today. Look at that destruction, that massive,
senseless, cruel loss of human life, and then I ask you to
look in your own hearts and recognize that there is no room
for neutrality on the issue of terrorism.
--Rudy [Rudolph W.] Giuliani (1944- )
Mayor of New York City [1994-2001]
In an address to the United Nations

--

If an enemy power is bent on conquering you, and proposes
to turn all of his resources to that end, he is at war with
you; and you - unless you contemplate surrender - are at
war with him. Moreover - unless you contemplate treason -
your objective, like his, will be victory. Not peace, but
victory.
--Barry Goldwater (1909-1998)
American conservative politician
"The Conscience of a Conservative"

The best political weapon is the weapon of terror.
Cruelty commands respect. Men may hate us. But,
we don't ask for their love; only for their fear.
--Heinrich Himmler (1900-1945)
Nazi politician, leader of the SS and
prime architect of the Holocaust

Terror is the most effective political instrument. I shall not permit
myself to be robbed of it simply because a lot of stupid, bourgeois
molleycoddles choose to be offended by it.
--Adolf Hitler (1889-1945)
German dictator,
in Hermann Rauschning _The Voice of Destruction_ [1940], ch. 6

--

Did you ever read the Koran? I recommend it. What the Koran
teaches people is aggression; and what we [Christians] teach
our people is peace. . . . Christianity aspires to peace and
love. Islam is a religion that attacks.

If you start teaching aggression to the whole community, you
end up pandering to the negative elements in everyone. You
know what that leads to: Such people will assault us.

--Pope John Paul II [Karol Wojtyla] (1920-2005)
The first non-Italian Pope since the 16th century
(In Carl Bernstein and Marco Politi's
_His Holiness: John Paul II and the Hidden History of Our Time_ [1996])

-

-

One of the points laid down by Ali [Muhammad's
son-in-law] is that if a man is killed while obeying
his lord's orders his soul goes into a more pleasing
body than before. That is why the Assassins are not
in any way averse to being killed as and when their
lord [known as the Old Man of the Mountain]
orders, because they believe they will be happier
after death than when they were alive.
--Jean de Joinville (c. 1224-1317)
French chronicler
in M.J. Cohan and John Major {eds.}
_History in Quotations_ [2004] p. 234

& see:

In one respect the Assassins are without precedent -
in the planned, systematic and long-term use of
terror as a political weapon they may well be the first
terrorists.
--Bernard Lewis (1916- )
British-born American professor and
Middle-Eastern scholar,
_The Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam_ [1967] p.129

-

Terror is not a new weapon. Throughout history it has been used
by those who could not prevail, either by persuasion or example.
But inevitably they fail, either because men are not afraid to
die for a life worth living, or because the terrorists themselves
came to realize that free men cannot be frightened by threats, and
that aggression would meet its own response. And it is in the light
of that history that every nation today should know, be he friend
or foe, that the United States has both the will and the weapons
to join free men in standing up to their responsibilities.
--John Fitzgerald Kennedy (1917-1963)
American Democratic statesman, President of the U.S. [1961-1963]

--

The tyrant dies and his rule is over, the martyr
dies and his rule begins.
--Sören Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
Danish philosopher

The terrorist lives for terror, not for the
change he tells himself he wants. He
masks his desire to kill and destroy
behind the curtain of a cause.
--Louis L'Amour (1908-1988)
American author of Western fiction
_A Trail of Memories_

--

There was another, perhaps more important, factor
driving bin Ladin. In the past, Muslims fighting
the West could always turn to the enemies of the
West for comfort, encouragement, and material and
military help. Now, for the first time in centuries,
there is no such useful enemy. Bin Ladin and his
cohorts soon realized that, if they wished to fight
America they would have to do it themselves. In 1991,
the same year that the Soviet Union ceased to exist,
bin Ladin and his cohorts created Al-Qa'ida, which
included many veterans of Afghanistan. Their task
may have seemed daunting to anyone else, but they
did not see it that way. In their view, they had
already driven the Russians out of Afghanistan, in
a defeat that was so overwhelming that it led directly
to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Having overcome
the superpower that they had always regarded as more
formidable, they felt ready to take on the other; in
this they were encouraged by the opinion, often
expressed by bin Ladin among others, that America was
a paper tiger. Muslim terrorists had been driven by
such beliefs before. One of the most surprising
revelations in the memoirs of those who held the
American Embassy in Tehran from 1979 to 1981 was that
there original intention had been to hold the building
and hostages for only a few days. They changed their
minds when statements from Washington made it clear
that there was no danger of serious action against
them. They finally released the hostages, they
explained, only because they feared that the president-
elect, Ronald Reagan, might approach the problem "like
a cowboy."
--Bernard Lewis, _The Crisis of Islam_


During the Cold War, two things came to be known and generally recognized in the Middle East concerning the two rival superpowers. If you did anything to annoy the Russians, punishment would be swift and dire. If you said or did anything against the Americans, not only would there be no punishment; there might even be some possibility of reward, as the usual anxious procession of diplomats and politicians, journalists and scholars and miscellaneous others came with their usual pleading inquiries: "What have we done to offend you? What can we do to put it right?"

A few examples may suffice. During the troubles in Lebanon in the 1970s and '80s, there were many attacks on American installations and individuals -- notably the attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, followed by a prompt withdrawal, and a whole series of kidnapping of Americans, both official and private, as well as of Europeans. There was only one attack on Soviet citizens, when one diplomat was killed and several others kidnapped. The Soviet response through their local agents was swift, and directed against the family of the leader of the kidnappers. The kidnapped Russians were promptly released, and after that there were no attacks on Soviet citizens or installations throughout the period of the Lebanese troubles.

These different responses evoked different treatment. While American policies, institutions and individuals were subject to unremitting criticism and sometimes deadly attack, the Soviets were immune. Their retention of the vast, largely Muslim, colonial empire accumulated by the tsars in Asia passed unnoticed, as did their propaganda and sometimes action against Muslim beliefs and institutions.

Most remarkable of all was the response of the Arab and other Muslim countries to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979. Washington's handling of the Tehran hostage crisis assured the Soviets that they had nothing to fear from the U.S. They already knew that they need not worry about the Arab and other Muslim governments. The Soviets already ruled -- or misruled -- half a dozen Muslim countries in Asia, without arousing any opposition or criticism. Initially, their decision and action to invade and conquer Afghanistan and install a puppet regime in Kabul went almost unresisted. After weeks of debate, the U.N. General Assembly finally was persuaded to pass a resolution "strongly deploring the recent armed intervention in Afghanistan." The words "condemn" and "aggression" were not used, and the source of the "intervention" was not named. Even this anodyne resolution was too much for some of the Arab states. South Yemen voted no; Algeria and Syria abstained; Libya was absent; the non-voting PLO observer to the Assembly even made a speech defending the Soviets.

One might have expected that the recently established Organization of the Islamic Conference would take a tougher line. It did not. After a month of negotiation and manipulation, the Organization finally held a meeting in Pakistan to discuss the Afghan question. Two of the Arab states, South Yemen and Syria, boycotted the meeting. The representative of the PLO, a full member of this organization, was present, but abstained from voting on a resolution critical of the Soviet action; the Libyan delegate went further, and used this occasion to denounce the U.S.

The Muslim willingness to submit to Soviet authority, though widespread, was not unanimous. The Afghan people, who had successfully defied the British Empire in its prime, found a way to resist the Soviet invaders. An organization known as the Taliban (literally, "the students") began to organize resistance and even guerilla warfare against the Soviet occupiers and their puppets. For this, they were able to attract some support from the Muslim world -- some grants of money, and growing numbers of volunteers to fight in the Holy War against the infidel conqueror. Notable among these was a group led by a Saudi of Yemeni origin called Osama bin Laden.

To accomplish their purpose, they did not disdain to turn to the U.S. for help, which they got. In the Muslim perception there has been, since the time of the Prophet, an ongoing struggle between the two world religions, Christendom and Islam, for the privilege and opportunity to bring salvation to the rest of humankind, removing whatever obstacles there might be in their path. For a long time, the main enemy was seen, with some plausibility, as being the West, and some Muslims were, naturally enough, willing to accept what help they could get against that enemy. This explains the widespread support in the Arab countries and in some other places first for the Third Reich and, after its collapse, for the Soviet Union. These were the main enemies of the West, and therefore natural allies.

Now the situation had changed. The more immediate, more dangerous enemy was the Soviet Union, already ruling a number of Muslim countries, and daily increasing its influence and presence in others. It was therefore natural to seek and accept American help. As Osama bin Laden explained, in this final phase of the millennial struggle, the world of the unbelievers was divided between two superpowers. The first task was to deal with the more deadly and more dangerous of the two, the Soviet Union. After that, dealing with the pampered and degenerate Americans would be easy.

We in the Western world see the defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union as a Western, more specifically an American, victory in the Cold War. For Osama bin Laden and his followers, it was a Muslim victory in a jihad, and, given the circumstances, this perception does not lack plausibility.

From the writings and the speeches of Osama bin Laden and his colleagues, it is clear that they expected this second task, dealing with America, would be comparatively simple and easy. This perception was certainly encouraged and so it seemed, confirmed by the American response to a whole series of attacks -- on the World Trade Center in New York and on U.S. troops in Mogadishu in 1993, on the U.S. military office in Riyadh in 1995, on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen in 2000 -- all of which evoked only angry words, sometimes accompanied by the dispatch of expensive missiles to remote and uninhabited places.

Stage One of the jihad was to drive the infidels from the lands of Islam; Stage Two -- to bring the war into the enemy camp, and the attacks of 9/11 were clearly intended to be the opening salvo of this stage. The response to 9/11, so completely out of accord with previous American practice, came as a shock, and it is noteworthy that there has been no successful attack on American soil since then. The U.S. actions in Afghanistan and in Iraq indicated that there had been a major change in the U.S., and that some revision of their assessment, and of the policies based on that assessment, was necessary.

More recent developments, and notably the public discourse inside the U.S., are persuading increasing numbers of Islamist radicals that their first assessment was correct after all, and that they need only to press a little harder to achieve final victory. It is not yet clear whether they are right or wrong in this view. If they are right, the consequences -- both for Islam and for America -- will be deep, wide and lasting.

--Bernard Lewis
"Was Osama Right?"
_The Wall Street Journal_ [16 May 2007]

--

They don't have helicopters, we're told, so they
use suicide bombers. If they had helicopters, they
would have strafed the bus and everyone waiting at
the corner. Give them a nation where Hamas runs
unchecked, and they'll have helicopters. They won't
be Apaches. The bill of sale will be calculated in
Euros and the manual written in French. By then the
excuse for the terror won't be oppression; it'll be
"the legacy of oppression." Sometimes I swear the
mainstream media won't take a look at the Palestinian's
horrid death-cult subculture until we learn that a
suicide bomber played "Doom" at an Internet cafe
for five minutes. And then they'll blame Intel.
--James Lileks, http://www.lileks.com/
bleats/archive/03/0603/061203.html

--

THE RECENT WAVE of church bombings, kidnappings, and executions
of civilians in Iraq seems to support a contested claim by the Bush
administration: that radical Islam is the philosophical cousin to European
fascism; that it has less to do with politics than with nihilistic rage.
As Bush put it in his address to Congress barely a week after the
9/11 attacks, "By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions--
by abandoning every value except the will to power--they follow in
the path of fascism, and Nazism, and totalitarianism." The president
has asserted an Islamist-fascist link in at least a dozen speeches
over the last three years.

Critics assail this argument as dangerously "ideological"--there's
too much moralizing about the evil of terrorism, they say, and not
enough curiosity about the "root causes" of Islamic violence.
Religious liberals such as Bob Edgar of the National Council of
Churches deride Bush's moral vocabulary as a way of "dehumanizing"
America's enemies. Writing recently in the _New York Times Book
Review_, political scientist Ronald Steel scolds administration
hawks for ignoring "the essentially political causes of terrorism."

The eyewitnesses to Nazi terrorism, however, might well take
exception to that view. Eric Voegelin, whose 1938 book _The
Political Religions_ made him a target of the Third Reich, offers
perhaps the best-known critique of the moral and spiritual
rationalizations of fascist ideology. A short work published in 1939
by philosopher Lewis Mumford, however, is also worth revisiting.
Titled _Men Must Act_, the book grew out of Mumford's visit to
Germany in the early 1930s. There he saw copies of _Mein Kampf_ ("my
struggle," Hitler's autobiography and political manifesto published
in 1926) being snatched up in bookstores. He watched how Nazi
brownshirts had taken over the streets in Lübeck, and listened at
dinner parties as upper-class Germans praised Hitler's program
against the Jews.

Writing when America was still in a pacifist mood, Mumford aimed to
prod U.S. support for the Allied cause. His summary of fascist principles
reads today like a recruiting manual for the al Qaeda network: (1) the
glorification of war, (2) a hatred for democracy, (3) a hatred for
civilization, (4) a contempt for science and objectivity, and (5) a
delight in physical cruelty.

[...]

"We had glibly assumed," Mumford wrote, "that barbarism was a condition
that civilized man had left permanently behind him." The Nazis refuted all
those assumptions, and no appeals to reason or diplomacy would deter
them. Indeed, although a secular thinker, Mumford came to believe in
"radical evil"--that savagery is the easy way for mankind, the natural
drift of things apart from some restraining force or grace.

That insight is worth bearing in mind in light of the 9/11
Commission report. Its authors complain of a "failure of
imagination" in the face of terrorist threats, but it's still not
clear that Washington's policy elites appreciate the religious
nihilism that sustains radical Islam.

In his recent book _The Third Reich_, historian Michael Burleigh argues
that Hitler's Germany clung to a Teutonic myth of heroic doom, a high-
stakes war for national and racial restoration--or perdition. The ideology
of Nazism, he writes, "offered redemption from a national ontological
crisis, to which it was attracted like a predatory shark to blood."

Today, it seems, the predators have returned. The crisis this time is
not national and race-based, but supranational and faith-based. The
stakes are equally high, the methods as thoroughly wicked: videotaped
beheadings, the mutilation and public parade of corpses, the murder
of women and children, the recruitment of boys for suicide missions.
"We must keep in mind the nature of the enemy," President Bush told
graduates at the U.S. Air Force Academy in June. "No act of America
explains terrorist violence, and no concession of America could
appease it."

Some reject that argument--such as the governments of Spain and
the Philippines, which have bowed to terrorist demands to pull their
troops out of Iraq. Yet the early warnings about Nazism seem eerily
relevant today. "What will finally emerge, if fascism continues to prevail
in Europe, will be a system of barbarism: its stunted, emasculated
minds: its grandiose emptiness: its formalized savagery," Mumford
wrote. "The relapse into barbarism is a recurrent temptation.
Only _men_ can resist it."

--Joseph Loconte,
"Barbarism Then and Now Appeasement still doesn't work."
_The Weekly Standard_ [16-23 August 2004]

--

It's great to be color blind, and ethnic blind, and religious blind--but blind i
s blind. It means you can't see. I'd rather see and then judge, as opposed
to cutting off the cognitive process quite so early. Why suppress what
separates us from the lower forms of life that can't think and replace it
with modes of non-reason, like political correctness, term limits or "zero
tolerance?"

Look at the World War II posters: we used to be able to trust our citizens
to be our eyes and ears. But then again, we used to have common sense,
and hold it in some esteem. Political correctness is almost always the
opposite of common sense.

It's what has us pretending at the airport that Ray Charles is just as likely
to blow up the plane as the guy with the bin Laden lunchbox. I'm not saying
turn in everyone with an accent and a bad attitude--we'd have no cab drivers.
And I'm not suggesting that the government monitor our every move and
habit. That's already being done by the credit card industry.

I'm just saying that it takes neighbors looking out for neighbors, and a
postman passing along the fact that at 180 Maplewood, the seven
addressees all named Mohammed are building "something" in their
living room.

If it turns out to be just a pole for strippers they get back to the house
(the 72 virgins is more likely), then at least we know they're just perverts,
and not terrorists. Like the lady said: it takes a village.

--Bill Maher (1956- )
American comedian and author
_When You Ride Alone You Ride With Bin Laden_ [2002],
"Neighbors Looking Out For Neighbors"

--

The third anniversary of Sept. 11 is upon us. We remain
at war - and the media remain in denial.

How many times have you picked up a newspaper and read about
terrorist attacks perpetrated not by Muslim terrorists, but
by generic "militants" or "guerrillas" or "rebels" or, as
Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes noted, the Pakistan Times
called them, "activists"?

Contrast the media whitewashing of our Islamofascist enemies
with the press coverage of the Waco, Texas, siege in 1993 -
which constantly reminded us that David Koresh and his Branch
Davidian followers were members of a "peculiar religious sect"
(New York Times, March 3, 1993) and "a group of religious zealots
with a known propensity for violence" (Washington Post, March 2,
1993) who were steeped in a "culture of Christian extremism"
(San Francisco Chronicle, April 20, 1993).

A Nexis search of the terms "Branch Davidian" and "religious" and
"cult" in the New York Times for the year 1993 yielded 151 hits.
The vast majority of these references were in headlines and news
articles, as opposed to editorials, letters or book reviews. A Nexis
search of the terms "al Qaeda" and "religious" and "cult" in the New
York Times for the year 2004 yielded just one article - a magazine
piece in March.

The mainstream media pounded President Bush for trying to explain
that the War on Terror is unwinnable in a conventional sense. The
mainstream press itself proves the president's point every time its
reporters disguise the deadly fanatical nature of our opponents in
this global war. How are we to win a war against blood-spattered
enemies whom our own free press continues to protect through
politically correct sanitization?

It wasn't no-name militants or wayward guerrillas who have butchered,
beheaded and slaughtered thousands of innocents over the last three
years alone. Anniversary reality check:

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Russia stabbed babies
to death, shot toddlers in the back, forced children to eat rose
petals and drink their own urine, raped teenage girls, executed
their teachers and blew themselves up in a crowded school
gymnasium. Death toll: 338.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Spain detonated bombs
on four commuter trains during Madrid's rush hour. Death toll: 190.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Bali blew up a beach
resort with an electronically triggered bomb at one bar and a car
bomb hidden in a van at another nightclub filled with young Western
tourists on holiday. Death toll: 202.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Pakistan kidnapped and
beheaded American journalist Daniel Pearl.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Saudi Arabia kidnapped
and beheaded American engineer Paul Johnson.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Iraq kidnapped and
beheaded American independent contractor Nick Berg.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Iraq kidnapped and
executed Italian security guard Fabrizio Quattrocchi.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in the Philippines
kidnapped and killed American missionary Martin Burnham.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Israel engineered
near-simultaneous suicide attacks on two buses, killing at least 15
people.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Morocco waged suicide
bombing attacks in Casablanca.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Turkey bombed
synagogues and the British consulate.

* In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in America hijacked and
incinerated three planes full of men, women and children, trapped
pregnant women and firefighters in smoke-filled stairways, and forced
office workers to leap 99 stories to their deaths after saying final
prayers from the ledges of the World Trade Center on a peaceful
September morning. Death toll: 3,000.

They tell us to "never forget." First, let's stop misremembering.

--Michelle Malkin, Remember 9-11: Stop sanitizing the killers
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40341

--

As a former law-enforcement person, I know we're never going
to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling.
But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where
it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every
day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to
fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life.
--Sen. John Kerry, interview,
_New York Times Magazine_ [10 October 2004]

& see:

That's right - finding out that your children are being held
hostage in a school rigged with explosives is right up there
with opening your telephone book and finding suggestive escort
agency ads.

--Catherine McMillan,
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/000880.html

--

What's it going to take to get them to hit al Qaeda in
Afghanistan? Does al Qaeda have to attack the Pentagon?

--State Department's Michael Sheehan to counter-terrorism
chief Richard Clarke, after the attack on the USS Cole was
deemed "not sufficiently provocative" to warrant an armed
response, in Richard Miniter,
_Losing Bin Laden: How Bill Clinton's Failures Unleashed
Global Terror_, 2003

--

We don't make a distinction between civilians
and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents.
Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the
life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no
sanctity.
--Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad,
"Militant Cleric Says Attack on London 'Inevitable'",
http://news.yahoo.com/news?mpl=story&u=/nm/
20040418/wl_nm/portugal_britain_attacks_dc_1

--

No one can terrorize a whole nation, unless
we are all his accomplices.
--Edward R. Murrow [Egbert Roscoe Murrow]
(1908-1965) American broadcaster and journalist

--

But as frightening as terrorism is, it's the weapon of losers. When
someone detonates a suicide bomb, that person does not have
career prospects. And no matter how horrific the terrorist attack,
it's conducted by losers. Winners don't need to hijack airplanes.
Winners have an air force.
--P.J. O'Rourke (1947- )
American political satirist,
_Peace Kills_

--

Making one's enemies suffer is currently an under-valued
activity. [...]

If we had not deposed Saddam, dictators everywhere, as well as
terrorists, would have continued to believe that the United States
was all bluster, that Afghanistan was a one-off exception, an easy
score. Indeed, even the tough occupation and our continued presence
serve to prove that the Clinton era is over, that you can no longer
make America run by killing its sons and daughters.

--Ralph Peters, "It's Worth The Price",
http://www.californiarepublic.org/archives/
Columns/Peters/20040803WhatIfIraq.html

--

The demands to shut down our Guantanamo lock-up for
terrorists have nothing to do with human rights. They're
about punishing America for our power and success.

From our ailing domestic left to overseas America haters,
no one really cares about the fate of Mustapha the Murderer
or Ahmed the Assassin. The lies told about Gitmo are meant
to undercut U.S. foreign policy and embarrass America.

The Gitmo controversy is about many things, from jealousy
of the United States and outrage that we refuse to fail, to
residual anger that we won the Cold War and exploded the
left's great fantasy of a dictatorship of the intellectuals.
But the one thing the protests aren't about is human rights.

Except, of course, as a means to slam the United States.

Torture? Who and when? Koran abuse? I'd rather be a Koran
in Gitmo than a Bible in Saudi Arabia. Illegal detentions?
Suggest a better way to handle hardcore terrorists.
Maltreatment? Spare me. The food the prisoners receive
is better than what I had to eat in the Army.

Another thing: Would it be more humane to incarcerate the
declared enemies of civilization in northern Alaska, rather
than on a Caribbean beach?

Has the Bush administration made mistakes regarding
Guantanamo? You bet. The biggest one was attempting
to placate the critics.

[...]

There's a military maxim that applies to all the
nonsense about Gitmo: Don't let the entire battalion
get bogged down by a sniper. By attempting to
respond to the wild charges leveled by those who
offer no solutions themselves - who have no interest
in solutions - we've allowed anti-American basket
cases from Harvard Yard to the German parliament
to create an issue from nothing.

Oh, and thanks to the "mainstream" media for assuming
that our country's always wrong.

There is a culture of torture in the world. Blessedly,
America isn't part of it. When a few of our troops
make mistakes, they're punished. Given the magnitude
of our task and the unprecedented conditions we face,
it's remarkable our errors have been so few...

--Ralph Peters, "Keep Gitmo - Get Tough, Get Real,
Stay Strong Americans" _New York Post_ [16 June 2005]
http://www.craigslist.org/sfc/pol/79273618.html

--

A few days ago we commented on the trend among the
Moonbatocracy to create pseudo-art celebrating Rachel Corrie, the
clueless campus radical who commmitted suicide while trying to prevent
Israeli bulldozers from destroying a smuggling tunnel used by the
Palestinians in Gaza to smuggle in explosives, weapons, and missiles.
Well, last night, the play "My Name is Rachel Corrie"
premiered in London at the prestigious Royal Court Theatre. No mention
in the play of Corrie burning US flags or defending suicide bombing.
Well, we thought we would mention some other Rachels who have
NOT been similarly commemorated in the London posh theaters yet (with
thanks to Tom Gross). Here are the names of some plays that have not
yet been produced in London:

1. My Name is Rachel Levy (Israeli girl age 17, blown up in a grocery
store)
2. My Name is Rachel Thaler (Israeli girl aged 16, blown up in a
pizzeria)
3. My Name is Rachel Levi (Israeli girl aged 19, murdered while
waiting for the bus)
4. My Name is Rachel Gavish (killed with her husband and son
while at home)
5. My Name is Rachel Charhi (blown up while sitting in a cafe)
6. My Name is Rachel Shabo (murdered with her three sons aged 5, 13
and 6 while sitting at home)

It would be interesting knowing how many of THESE Rachels were
murdered with explosives smuggled in through the same tunnels that
Rachel Corrie and her ISM pro-terrorist friends were "defending"!
--Steven Plaut,
http://tinyurl.com/99muq

--

We are especially not going to tolerate these attacks from
outlaw states run by the strangest collection of misfits,
Looney Tunes, and squalid criminals since the advent of
the Third Reich.
--Ronald Reagan (1911-2004)
U.S. President [1981-1989] and former Hollywood actor,
speech following the hijack of a U.S. plane [8 July 1985]

--

If we like them, they're freedom fighters . . . If we don't
like them, they're terrorists. In the unlikely case we can't
make up our minds, they're temporarily only guerrillas.
--Carl Sagan (1934-1996),
_Contact_ [1985]
Part I : The Message, Ch. 2, "Coherent Light"

Martyrdom. . . the only way in which a man
can become famous without ability.
--George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
Irish playwright,
_The Devil's Disciple_ [1901]

--

When bin Laden started yakking on about his "war aims" - taking back
Spain, the restoration of the Caliphate - it was easy to scoff,
yeah, dream on, loser. But a cursory glance at demographics quickly
made it clear that, insofar as Europe has a future, it's likely to
be an Islamic one. That being so, why louse things up by flying
planes into buildings? Why not just lie low and in the fullness of
time everything you want will come your way? The Wahhabists have
successfully radicalized hitherto moderate Muslim communities from
Albania to Indonesia; they've planted their most radical clerics as
in-house padres throughout U.S. prisons and even the armed forces.
Why screw things up by doing something so provocative it meets even
Bill Cohen's criteria for a response?

Here's why. It's always useful to test the limits of your
adversaries, and, though it cost them their camps in Afghanistan and
much of their leadership, the 9/11 attacks exposed many useful
tidbits about the decadence of the West - the worthlessness of the
post-modern NATO "alliance" and the active hostility of many of its
key members to the United States, the immense deference accorded
not just to Islam but to the most radical Islamic groups, especially
when it comes to immigration and other aspects of national security.
Many Islamists might have suspected all this, but it's heartening to
have it confirmed: If the "sleeping giant" is hard to wake up, his
European pals aren't sleeping so much as in irreversible comas.

--Mark Steyn, "A War Without Polkas"
_National Review_ [23 May 2005]

--

The flea bites, hops, and bites, again, nimbly avoiding
the foot that would crush him. He does not seek to
kill his enemy at a blow, but to bleed him and feed on
him, to plague and bedevil him, to keep him from resting
and to destroy his nerve and morale.
--Robert Taber
_War of the Flea: A Study of Guerrilla Warfare Theory and Practice_ [1965]

--

We must try to find ways to starve the terrorist and the
hijacker of the oxygen of publicity on which they depend.
--Margaret Thatcher (1925- )
British Conservative stateswoman and Prime Minister [1979-1990],
speech [15 July 1985]

--

We don't need a "commission" to find out how 9-11
happened. The truth is in the timeline:

PRESIDENT CARTER, DEMOCRAT

In 1979, President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah of Iran to be deposed by a mob of Islamic fanatics. A few months later, Muslims stormed the U.S. Embassy in Iran and took American Embassy staff hostage.

Carter retaliated by canceling Iranian visas. He eventually ordered a disastrous and humiliating rescue attempt, crashing helicopters in the desert.

PRESIDENT REAGAN, REPUBLICAN

The day of Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were released.

In 1982, the U.S. Embassy in Beirut was bombed by Muslim extremists.

President Reagan sent U.S. Marines to Beirut.

In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut were blown up by Muslim extremists.

Reagan said the U.S. would not surrender, but Democrats threw a hissy fit, introducing a resolution demanding that our troops be withdrawn. Reagan caved in to Democrat caterwauling in an election year and withdrew our troops - bombing Syrian-controlled areas on the way out. Democrats complained about that, too.

In 1985, an Italian cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, was seized and
a 69-year-old American was shot and thrown overboard by Muslim extremists.

Reagan ordered a heart-stopping mission to capture the hijackers after "the allies" promised them safe passage. In a daring operation, American fighter pilots captured the hijackers and turned them over to the Italians - who then released them to safe harbor in Iraq.

On April 5, 1986, a West Berlin discotheque frequented by U.S. servicemen was bombed by Muslim extremists from the Libyan Embassy in East Berlin, killing an American.

Ten days later, Reagan bombed Libya, despite our dear ally France refusing the use of their airspace. Americans bombed Gadhafi's residence, killing his daughter, and dropped a bomb on the French Embassy "by mistake."

Reagan also stoked a long, bloody war between heinous regimes in Iran and Iraq. All this was while winning a
final victory over Soviet totalitarianism.

PRESIDENT BUSH I, MODERATE REPUBLICAN

In December 1988, a passenger jet, Pan Am Flight 103, was bombed
over Lockerbie, Scotland, by Muslim extremists.

President-elect George Bush claimed he would continue Reagan's
policy of retaliating against terrorism, but did not. Without
Reagan to gin her up, even Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher went
wobbly, saying there would be no revenge for the bombing.

In 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait.

In early 1991, Bush went to war with Iraq. A majority of Democrats opposed the war, and later complained that Bush didn't "finish off the job" with Saddam.

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON, DEMOCRAT

In February 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed by Muslim fanatics, killing five people and injuring hundreds.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In October 1993, 18 American troops were killed in a savage firefight in Somalia. The body of one American was dragged through the streets of Mogadishu as the Somalian hordes cheered.

Clinton responded by calling off the hunt for Mohammed Farrah Aidid and ordering our troops home. Osama bin Laden later told ABC News: "The youth ... realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat."

In November 1995, five Americans were killed and 30 wounded by a car bomb in Saudi Arabia set by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In June 1996, a U.S. Air Force housing complex in Saudi Arabia
was bombed by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

Months later, Saddam attacked the Kurdish-controlled city of Erbil.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, lobbed some bombs into Iraq hundreds of miles from Saddam's forces.

In November 1997, Iraq refused to allow U.N. weapons inspections to do their jobs and threatened to shoot down a U.S. U-2 spy plane.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In February 1998, Clinton threatened to bomb Iraq, but called it off when the United Nations said no.

On Aug. 7, 1998, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

On Aug. 20, Monica Lewinsky appeared for the second time to testify before the grand jury.

Clinton responded by bombing Afghanistan and Sudan, severely damaging a camel and an aspirin factory.

On Dec. 16, the House of Representatives prepared to impeach Clinton the next day.

Clinton retaliated by ordering major air strikes against Iraq, described by the New York Times as "by far the largest military action in Iraq since the end of the Gulf War in 1991."

The only time Clinton decided to go to war with anyone in the vicinity of Muslim fanatics was in 1999 - when
Clinton attacked Serbians who were fighting Islamic fanatics.

In October 2000, our warship, the USS Cole, was attacked by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH, REPUBLICAN

Bush came into office telling his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, he was "tired of swatting flies" -
he wanted to eliminate al-Qaida.

On Sept. 11, 2001, when Bush had been in office for barely seven months, 3,000 Americans were murdered in a savage terrorist attack on U.S. soil by Muslim extremists.

Since then, Bush has won two wars against countries that harbored Muslim fanatics, captured Saddam Hussein,
immobilized Osama bin Laden, destroyed al-Qaida's base, and begun to create the only functioning democracy in
the Middle East other than Israel. Democrats opposed it all - except their phony support for war with Afghanistan, which they immediately complained about and said would be a Vietnam quagmire. And now they claim to be outraged that in the months before 9-11, Bush did not do everything Democrats opposed doing after 9-11.

What a surprise.


But just a year ago Clarke was singing a different tune, telling reporter
Richard Miniter, author of the book "Losing bin Laden," that it was the
Clinton administration - not team Bush - that had dropped the ball on
bin Laden.

Clarke, who was a primary source for Miniter's book, detailed a meeting
of top Clinton officials in the wake of al-Qaida's attack on the USS Cole
in Yemen.

He urged them to take immediate military action. But his advice
found no takers.

Reporting on Miniter's book, the National Review summarized the episode:

"At a meeting with Secretary of Defense William Cohen, Director of Central
Intelligence George Tenet, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Attorney
General Janet Reno, and other staffers, Clarke was the only one in favor
of retaliation against bin Laden."

--Richard Clarke Flashback: Clinton Dropped Ball on bin Laden http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/3/20/232055.shtml


Democratic nations must try to find ways to starve the
terrorist and the hijacker of the oxygen of publicity on
which they depend.
--Margaret Thatcher (1925- )
British conservative stateswoman and Prime Minister [1979-1990].

Those who can make you believe absurdities
can make you commit atrocities.
--Voltaire (François Marie Arouet) (1694-1778)
French writer and philosopher.



| ABORTION - ARABS | ANTI-AMERICANISM | ANTI-SEMITISM | BALI - BUSH | CAPITAL PUNISHMENT - CLINTON (HILLARY) | ELECTION [AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL - 2004] & FOX NEWS | GLOBAL WARMING & GUANTANAMO | GUN CONTROL & GUNS | HEALTH CARE (CANADIAN) - HOMOSEXUALS | HURRICANE KATRINA | IRAN | IRAQ 1 | IRAQ 2 | ISLAM - ISRAEL v. PALESTINE | LEFTISTS | MEDIA (THE) & MEDIA BIAS | MOORE (MICHAEL) & NEW YORK TIMES | NORTH KOREA - PATRIOT ACT | RADICAL THOUGHT | RAP MUSIC | STEM CELL RESEARCH | TERRORISM 1 | TERRORISM 2 | TERRORISM 3 | TERRORISM 4 | TERRORISM (PREVENTING) | UNITED NATIONS |
| Return Home | The Credits | The Cast | Act 1 | Act 2 | Act 3 | The End | The Reviews | Photos |
 
     



Copyright © 2008, someworthwhilequotes.com. All rights reserved.