Politicizing 9/11

As far as a round up on The Path To 9/11, you can find many reactions through Memeorandum. Hot Air offers a contrast and compare between the edited and un-edited versions. While it's difficult to keep from politicizing the drama, particularly given recent antics of the Dems, as I said in a radio call in earlier today, the overall narrative is more important to America than any political opportunities involved.

Democrats can put forth whatever anti-terrorism policy they choose and take it to voters on election day. What America as a whole needs is to wake up and understand that we are indeed in a global war with radical Islam. For me, one of the most disappointing events to come from the recent controversy has to do with the Scholastic episode. Also see here.

Half, or more of American adults don't appear to comprehend the threat we face from radical Islam. It isn't going to be an easy or quick problem (war) to resolve. While I don't want the younger generation of Americans programed to hate all things Islamic, I also don't want them so filled with political correctness and the inability to assess the world candidly that they will never be able to carry on what will take more than one generation to do.

In the end, I'm not yet sure how effective The Path To 9/11 will be in drawing a consistent narrative of terrorism from the first bombing of the World Trade Centers right on up to today. Part of that may be that I, given my blogging, have been entrenched in the political implications. Make no mistake, they are there.

But what I really hope for The Path is that it helps America start to get it when it comes to global jihad. We saw Clinton called Satan, his screen image shot. Partisan pundits on the Left will likely claim it was some secret message from a supposedly conservative writer, I didn't take that away from it at all.

What it said to me was, they don't care which political party is in control, or what policies we advocate, America begins and ends as evil in their eyes and no amount of finesse through foreign policy is going to change that in the eyes of radical Islam.

Democracy can act as a pendulum swinging back and forth between two extremes. Clinton didn't go to war, Bush did. It isn't hard to imagine an electorate that sees these issues as domestic somehow, throwing off a philosophy of confrontation with radical Islam.

As we face an incredibly consistent enemy, one which continues to persevere in its goal of bringing death and destruction to America, as a Nation, we need to find a way of being every bit as consistent and dedicated in fighting back. If The Path To 9/11 can be effective in helping more Americans get it, both parties will be forced to either remain or become strong on National security, as they are both primarily driven from the ground up.

I suspect that was the real goal behind The Path - to start to define a war, not somehow brand any political party, one way or the other. And I hope all the political ramifications needlessly magnified by recent protests don't end up distracting from that important message. That would be a loss for Americans of every political stripe.

Do I think the Dems are right on terrorism? No, I don't. But that's an argument that can wait for another day. Right now I'd like to hope that the vast majority of Americans who care relatively little about politics start to care and come to understand at least a little bit more about the terrorism an evil people have unleashed and will again unleash against us here at home.

Comments

[lookin4info]

What it said to me was, they don't care which political party is in control, or what policies we advocate, America begins and ends as evil in their eyes and no amount of finesse through foreign policy is going to change that in the eyes of radical Islam.

DAN.........that is exactly what I got from this.They are just plain evil and so violent. Yes, our soldiers are trained to kill...WHEN PROVOKED!! THese people are just animals. If they just could put their energy into buildng a home instead of a cave maybe the'd feel better about themselves and others.

[Chad Evans]

"We saw Clinton called Satan, his screen image shot. Partisan pundits on the Left will likely claim it was some secret message from a supposedly conservative writer, I didn't take that away from it at all."

Exactly. That was a brilliant inclusion and accurate, or at least the shooting at Clinton's image.

[The Real Left]

Mr. Riehl, I respectfully put it to you that it is not about "hating" or "fearing" Islam, but rather seeing it for exactly what it is. If the Koran were written today, the world would give it no more consideration than the worst cult. Mohammed would be arrested for his crimes, which include murder, rape, and treason, and Islam would no more be considered as "one of the world's great religions" than Scientology.

I have studied Islam for over 25 years. It is a system of hate, created by a schizophrenic who had well-documented hallucinations during epileptic seizures. Even his nine-year old wife, when she was older, noticed that Mohammed's "visions" were often arbitrary, blatantly self-serving and contradictory.

Islam is a belief system that has for the most part been forced on a deeply uneducated and even illiterate population, who have almost no understanding of history or other ideas outside of their own communal superstitions and the Koran, which itself contains grammatical errors that any child fluent in Arabic can point out.

Please do not fall into the trap of worrying that any of us in free societies are guilty of some kind of "Islamophobia." That is a completely false and ridiculous term which implies that the rest of us non-Muslims have to accept Islam.

Think about it: we're not talking about a group of people, or even the usual stuff of clinical phobias.

We are talking about **a set of ideas.** The implication is that if I refuse to accept a set of ideas, I am therefore afraid of it because I don't understand it. (The notion being that [1] I am afraid of it at all, and [2] that I really don't understand it.)

The assertion at the bottom of this accusation of so-called "Islamophobia" is that if I only understood it, I would accept it.

This is exactly what Muslims have been saying for 1400 years... usually before an attack on those who will not accept their ideas.

I do understand Islam. I do NOT fear it. I OPPOSE it. Neither you or I are under any obligation to accept any ideas with which we do not agree.

[Dan Riehl]

I do understand Islam. I do NOT fear it. I OPPOSE it. Neither you or I are under any obligation to accept any ideas with which we do not agree.

To be honest, I don't "understand" it - nor do I have any desire to do so. And if someone wants to follow some ideology, whether it is or isn't what you say, I really don't care, UNTIL they use it as a justification to murder and launch imperialistic attacks. As long as that is going on, then whatever their religion, the offenders need to be confronted and ideally killed.

[The Real Left]

Agreed.