"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address:

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

To Liberals, Democrats, and Neocomms: Bin Laden Is Not the War on Terrorism

I listen to a lot of talk radio. One of the best hosts is Michael Medved. In general, he allows callers of opposing viewpoints to talk, at least a lot more than the rest. That is important because of the second point: More liberals, Democrats, and neocommunists call this conservative, Orthodox Jew host more than any of the other conservative shows I can find. Instead of needing to cut off and dominate the caller, Medved lets the caller put forth whatever he or she is thinking, regardless of how bad it usually is. [BTW: I think Larry Elder is even better than Michael Medved.]

Today, a caller to Medved became the one caller too many on straw man topic. The topic is the running down of George W. Bush because he went to Iraq instead of spending 100% of his attention and our national assets hunting down Usama Bin Laden. Talk about narrow-mindedness! Mein Gott! Do not liberals, Democrats, and neocommunists not read? Are they 100% abysmally ignorant? They sure as hell seem that way. [Just for clarification, I have grave trouble separating out "liberals, Democrats, and neocommunists" -- David Horowitz's term -- so I just put the triad up as a loose single entity.]

A "straw man" is a logical fallacy of substituting a cause or argument which seems plausible for the real cause or argument. OK, I know that is a head-trip, but I will explain using the stupid argument from the anti-Bushites.

The "war on terror" is a RELIGIOUS WAR, and not a war on terror. Terror is an effect, not a cause. ISLAM is the cause. No, not radical Islam or extreme Islam or "hijacked" Islam. Just plain old, every day Islam. If this is unclear, please go to our website, 6th Column Against Jihad, for all sorts of clarifying educational materials and leads to excellent additional materials.

Second, Bin Laden is only PART of Islam, assuming he is still alive. Muslim jihadists infest the countries of the globe doing all the evil deeds they can get away with. One honest Arab-Islamic journalist, as reported by MEMRI, said that all Muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims. No one can make it plainer than that.

Bin Laden and his nest of evil do'ers must be caught and killed, or just killed outright. Of that, I have no question. Throw in Zawahiri as well. Nothing too bad can happen to these people. They were the perpetrators of 11 September 2001 in America and all of the events of the 1990s leading to 9-11.

Suppose, however, we have caught and killed every single one of Bin Laden's merry band. Suppose we have put out of business all of his fellow travelers and fifth columnists world-wide. Have we ended the "war on terror?" Obviously not, as anyone who follows the daily news knows. Many, many more are out there. Saudi Arabia and Iran are generating as many as their oil incomes will allow. These trainees are in Chechnya, Syria, Egypt, Europe, South America, Canada, North America, South and Southeast Asia, and Australia. They are blowing up people and things and subverting Western civilization wherever they can attack it.

THE UNIFIER BEHIND ALL OF THESE JIHADISTS IS ISLAM, not Al-Qaeda and other named groups.

Therefore, Bush attacked Iraq while looking for Bin Laden, who may or may not be alive. Why did he attack Iraq? He followed Sutton's Law, named after the bank robber Willie Sutton who when asked why he robbed banks, replied that that is where the money is. Iraq is an historical and contemporary hotbed of Islamic terrorism, and one possibility when Afghanistan wound down. I personally think he should have crushed Iran after Afghanistan. I think he should annihilate Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. That is where Sutton's Law also applies: Islamic Jihadists are there in vast numbers. No, there are more of them elsewhere than contained in these countries, but Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia provide STATE SUPPORTED TERRORISM. Without these countries, Islamic jihad terrorism would suffer severe constraints.

I know that these anti-Bushites are trying to shape reality in order to elect their candidate, and they say and think a number of contemptible distorted thoughts. I know they want to hang on to this straw man because they think it makes an argument. They need to stop thinking like Democrats and start thinking like Americans. We are in a war with Islam which threatens all of us Americans. Democrats will not be eaten last by the tiger.


  • At Tue Oct 05, 09:04:00 AM PDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    A religious war? That tells me that more than one religion is involved. Christian? Buddhist? Shinto? So the WOT is one or more of the above versus Islam?

    I reject this inchoate, solipsistic, paranoid, clash of civilizations bs. Anyone who stumbles upon this blog should do so as well.

    So how do we wage this war? Commit "cultural genocide"? Bombs, bombs, bombs. Kill, kill, kill. Screw that. We're sure stirring up the hornet's nest in Iraq. It's doing a hell of a lot of good. Guess what most of the Iraqi people are Muslim! First up, those future practitioners of democracy will have to be Christianized or Buddhized or Shintoized. Whatever. Talk to Ann Coulter about it.

    What do you wingnuts dream about at night. A draft? A world war? The rapture? To hell with all of you blood- lust crazed lunatics!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home