The Times Square (almost) Massacre

First, the AP story, which has some chilling quotes from Faisal Shahzad:

"Brace yourselves, because the war with Muslims has just begun."

"Consider me the first droplet of the blood that will follow."

"We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, homes and land, but if you call us terrorists, then we are proud terrorists and we will keep on terrorizing you until you leave our lands and people at peace."

The judge cut him off at one point to ask if he had sworn allegiance to the U.S. when he became a citizen last year. "I did swear, but I did not mean it," Shahzad said.

In his address to the court, he said Osama bin Laden "will be known as no less than Saladin of the 21st-century crusade" — a reference to the Muslim hero of the Crusades. He also said: "If I'm given 1,000 lives, I will sacrifice them all."

Somehow I doubt the third one.

And beyond the obvious death cult rambling, some questions come to mind:

1) I haven't seen any comment from Mayor Bloomberg, but I wonder if he feels bad for initially waxing detective and pinning this on teabaggers who didn't like the health care bill?

2) I wonder whether Faisal Shahzad supports the Islamic Cultural Center which is not a mosque and is located near Ground Zero but is not at Ground Zero?

3) I wonder what The Falling Man would have thought of the Islamic Cultural Center which is not a mosque and is located near Ground Zero but is not at Ground Zero?

4) How many Muslims take an oath of citizenship but do not "mean it"?

5) How many Faisal Shahzads are out there?

6) Does the punishment fit the crime?

This dude's ranting reminds me of a great column by Mark Goldblatt which says in part:

The war against Islamic totalitarianism — to call the thing what it is — is a war of perception as much as a war of bullets and bombs. Killing and capturing terrorists makes us marginally safer day by day but does not get at the core problem: the false perception among the terrorists' religious sympathizers and financial enablers (and there are millions of them) that their side has a fighting chance. Since the war is not an engagement between sovereign nations, it cannot end with a peace treaty; it can only end with the recognition that a worldwide Caliphate is not a possibility, that sharia law is not going to replace democratic government, that Islamic values are not going to trump Enlightenment values. The outcome of the war, on this level, is not in doubt. What is in doubt is whether the body count will number in the hundreds of thousands — if we continue the long hard slog of spreading democracy — or in the scores of millions — if we retreat from the world stage, defer the combat a generation or two, and bequeath to our children and grandchildren a bloodier but more recognizable world war.

Is it islamophobic to even be linking to and discussing this story? I suppose. I guess this is all just right-wing fear-mongering on my part. What can you do in such confusing times?

I am never sure if I'm supposed to believe the passive multicultists or if I am supposed to believe the jihadists – like Shahzad – who actually tell us what their goals are.

Case closed. Justice is served. We can go back to putting our heads in the sand.

Some have an amazing ability to self-delude

President Obama said this on January 5, 2010 during his remarks about the pantybomber:

But make no mistake: We will close Guantanamo prison, which has damaged our national security interests and become a tremendous recruiting tool for al Qaeda. In fact, that was an explicit rationale for the formation of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. And, as I've always said, we will do so – we will close the prison in a manner that keeps the American people safe and secure.

I am not even going to address in-depth the question of how Gitmo has "damaged our national security interests." But I would like to know exactly what Obama means by this and in what specific ways Gitmo has "damaged our national security interests." Did it "damage our national security interests" before 9/11 when it did not even exist as a terrorist detention center? Could it be there are other "recruiting tools" – such as the chance to kill Americans – that attract these fools to the jihadist death cult?

More importantly though, based on The President's logic, would it be fair to say that one of the objectives of the terrorists is to have Gitmo closed? So, by closing Gitmo, we will be doing something that the terrorists want. In other words, terrorist activity directly results in a desired goal and a change in American policy. They commit slaughter, babble on about holy war, and The Great Satan decides to close Gitmo.

Yes. This certainly seems like it will help to discourage future terrorist activity.

Or. Maybe. Perhaps. Just maybe. Appeasement and weakness actually encourage and motivate terrorists even more.

After all, it was Bin Laden who famously said, "When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse."

America did not ask for this war and would be happy for it to be over tomorrow. But the other side is not interested in ending this war.

And that is really unfortunate since America just doesn't seem to be interested in being the strong horse anymore.

With department heads like these...

With people like this in charge of our security, maybe it's a good thing the TSA chief position hasn't been filled yet.

Head, meet sand

A great piece by Bill Muehlenberg on why Political Correctness is not just silly, it's dangerous. You'll want to read the whole thing, but here's a highlight:

Political Correctness is certainly annoying, foolish and a pain in the neck. However, it can also be quite dangerous, especially when it is applied to issues of national security, policing and justice. In the attempt of our elites to make sure we do not offend anyone, ordinary citizens can find themselves in positions of real danger.

Consider a recent news item about the effort to turn all of our leaders – including the police – into politically correct lackies, regardless of the harmful consequences. Here is how an Age article describes this situation:

“A guidebook for politicians, police and public servants on how to talk about Muslims and terrorism without implicating the religion of Islam should be released by the end of the year. The book, A Lexicon on Terror, was conceived by Victoria Police and the Australian Multicultural Foundation, but was so popular it became a national project, an international conference on Islamophobia at Monash University heard yesterday.”

The article continues, “Multicultural Foundation head Hass Dellal told The Age many Muslims interpreted ‘war on terror’ as a war on Islam. Other terms to be avoided included ‘Islamic terrorism’, ‘Islamo-fascists’, ‘Middle Eastern appearance’, and ‘moderate Muslim’, which suggested to Muslims they were inadequate in their faith.”

While seeking to help different groups get along in order to achieve a harmonious society may be praiseworthy, there are at least three big problems with all of this. First, this attempt at PC simply denies reality. The sad truth is, the overwhelming majority of the acts of terrorism which we read about on a regular basis, including last week’s attacks on two hotels in Jakarta, are committed by Muslims.

No amount of PC can deny the truth that there is a war against the West taking place, and that this comes primarily from those who call themselves Muslim. From the September 11 attacks to the Bali bombings, the Madrid train bombings, the London underground attacks, the Mumbai terrorist attack, and the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore, to name just a few, what we have is violence done by Muslims in the name of Islam.

To ignore or seek to downplay the source of these attacks does nothing except benefit those who are carrying them out – Muslims. When we are faced with mortal danger, the first step in self defence is to know who the enemy is. Sure, not all Muslims approve of such violent jihad, but that does not do away with the fact that the terrorist threat we face is overwhelmingly an Islamic terrorist threat.

Here's a related story about the Islamofascist group Hizb ut-Tahrir and their recent conference in Chicago which was called "Fall of Capitalism, Rise of Islam". From Fox News:

A group committed to establishing an international Islamic empire and reportedly linked to Al Qaeda is stepping up its Western recruitment efforts by holding its first official conference in the U.S.

Hizb ut-Tahrir is a global Sunni network with reported ties to confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Al Qaeda in Iraq's onetime leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It has operated discreetly in the U.S. for decades.

Now, it is coming out of the shadows and openly hosting a July 19 conference entitled, "The Fall of Capitalism and the Rise of Islam," at a posh Hilton hotel in a suburb of Chicago.

Hizb ut-Tahrir insists that it does not engage in terrorism, and it is not recognized by the State Department as a known terror group.

But some terrorism experts say it may be even more dangerous than many groups that are on the terror list.

"Hizb ut-Tahrir is one of the oldest, largest indoctrinating organizations for the ideology known as jihadism," Walid Phares, director of the Future of Terrorism Project at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told FOXNews.com.

Phares said that Hizb ut-Tahrir, rather than training members to carry out terrorist acts like Al Qaeda, focuses instead on indoctrinating youths between ages of 9 and 18 to absorb the ideology that calls for the formation of an empire — or "khilafah" — that will rule according to Islamic law and condones any means to achieve it, including militant jihad.

Hizb ut-Tahrir often says that its indoctrination "prepares the infantry" that groups like Al Qaeda take into battle, Phares said.

"It's like a middle school that prepares them to be recruited by the high school, which is Al Qaeda," he said. "One would compare them to Hitler youth. ... It's an extremely dangerous organization."

Phares said Hizb ut-Tahrir has strongholds in Western countries, including Britain, France and Spain, and clearly is looking to strengthen its base in the U.S.

More about the recent conference in Chicago from Townhall.com:

On the morning of July 17th 2009, coordinated explosions tore through a pair of luxury hotels in Jakarta, Indonesia—killing nine people and injuring dozens more. The attacks are believed to be the work of a local Islamist terror outfit known as Jemaah Islamiyah, an Al Qaeda-affiliated group in Southeast Asia.

On the morning of July 19th 2009, hundreds of American Muslims gathered at a luxury Hotel in suburban Chicago. They were attending the first ever U.S. meeting of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamic supremacist organization whose extreme teachings have influenced hundreds of thousands of Muslims worldwide. Not coincidentally, the group has a strong following in Indonesia.

Put simply, Hizb ut-Tahrir serves as an ideological incubator that radicalizes Muslims, some of whom go on to join Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Its roster of notorious alumni includes 9/11 Mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammad and former Al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. Its leaders have urged Muslim governments to hinder international war efforts against radical Islam, and its literature has defended jihad as “legal, an obligation…the apex of Islamic ethics.” An official organization leaflet published in March called for the declaration of “a state of war” against the United States.

According to InvestigativeProject.org , attendees at Sunday’s event in Chicago heard from a number of speakers throughout the day, all addressing the event’s theme, “Fall of Capitalism, Rise of Islam.” One featured Imam offered this message to the assembled group:

“If [Americans] offer [Muslims] the sun, or the moon, or a nice raise, or a passport, or a house in the suburbs, or even a place to pray at the job—on the condition that we stop calling for Islam as a complete way of life, we should never do that, ever do that—unless and until Islam becomes victorious, or we die in the attempt.”

Also related, Turkish police arrest 'Islamists', from BBC News:

Turkish police have arrested almost 200 people suspected of being members of the banned Islamist group Hizb al-Tahrir al-Islami, reports say.

The arrests were made early in the morning during simultaneous raids in 23 cities, the Anatolia news agency said.

Turkish police have repeatedly detained members of the group in the past.

Founded in 1953, Hizb al-Tahrir seeks to establish a pan-Islamic state covering all Muslim lands. It is banned in many countries throughout the world.

The group is widely viewed as extremist and anti-Semitic. However, it denies these charges and says it preaches non-violent political Islam.

Yes. The Chicago in Illinois which is in America.

And finally, another Islamic 'honor' killing.

The dismal tide

Should any of this surprise us?

The Dow is crashing.

Job losses are mounting.

The general unease is growing.

Universal Health Care that is neither constitutional nor affordable is creeping.

The Global Warming swindle — with its boring and brainwashed moonbats — is marching forward.

The War on Capitalism is in full swing.

The War on Terror is in full retreat.

But again I ask, should any of this surprise us?

When you elect someone with zero executive experience, who marinated in radicalism their entire adult life, who learned the art of the "manufactured crisis" from Moonbat-in-chief Saul Alinsky, who pretended to be a centrist during an unvetted campaign — should any of this surprise us?

Thanks, Obama voters.

Are you eating crow yet?

Another doozy of a cover from Newsweek

Let's learn to live with Radical Islam?

Are these people kidding me?



Maybe they're right. After all, this comment on Gateway Pundit probably represents a majority opinion:

There is no such thing as "radical", "moderate", or "liberal" Islam. There is only Islam itself, which is the complete way of life prescribed by Allah (swt) for all of humanity.

Look about you. Everywhere you look, Islam is advancing and the corrupt and man-made societies are in disorganized retreat.

Every day, more people embrace Islam. New mosques rise everywhere while churches and pagan temples fall into disrepair or are used as public latrines. Every day, more Muslim children are born while the cross worshipers and Jews slaughter their unborn children in filthy abortion mills.

The long struggle is nearly finished. It is time to act. Renounce your false religions now. Embrace Islam and live in peace in submission to the will of Almighty Allah (swt).

Your grandchildren will be Muslim.

Allahu akbar!
American Muslim | 03.02.09 - 9:16 pm |

Read more about this insanity here.

And people ask me why I'm pessimistic.

With each passing day there seems to be more evidence that a large number of Westerners — including many Americans — are willing to just raise the white flag and submit. Apparently believing that this is just a new reality we must accept. "This war is lost," as Harry Reid might say.

And hey, it's probably mostly our fault for creating Radical Islam in the first place, right?

Mr. Zakaria, and for that matter, "American Muslim", you should probably note that despite my pessimism I still believe there are many Americans who will resist Radical Islam with every ounce of their beings. Perhaps, if necessary, until their last breaths.

Count me as one of them.

There will come a day when the death-cult that is Radical Islam is dispensed upon the ash heap of history, like so many other failed ideologies before. Until that day comes, there is no 'learning to live' with it.

There should be only defiance of it.

Sunday must-reads

George Will — On our way to Waterloo

Scott S. Powell — The Culprit Is All of Us

Veronique de Rugy — Here's What $800 Billion Buys Today

Rick Martinez — One stimulus for sale

Rich Lowry — Last Gasp for Limited Government?

Monica Crowley — They're Just Not That Into You

Charles Krauthammer — Iraq: Good News is No News

Andrew C. McCarthy — It's Not the Prison, It's the Prisoners

Dutch politician Geert Wilders banned from the UK

Great Britain, a once great empire, has been eroding from the inside for some time now. Unfortunately, it's becoming a case study in how extreme political correctness leads to national suicide.

While the streets of London are filled with hate-spewing imams, a Dutch politician named Geert Wilders was denied entry into the UK simply because he has been critical of Islam.

From the BBC:

A Dutch MP who called the Koran a "fascist book" has been sent back to the Netherlands after attempting to defy a ban on entering the UK.

Freedom Party MP Geert Wilders had been invited to show his controversial film - which links the Islamic holy book to terrorism - in the UK's House of Lords.

But Mr Wilders, who faces trial in his own country for inciting hatred, has been denied entry by the Home Office.

He told the BBC it was a "very sad day" for UK democracy.

The Dutch ambassador was also at Heathrow to make clear his government's opposition to the ban on Mr Wilders entering the UK.

'Free speech'

Mr Wilders' film Fitna caused outrage across the Muslim world when it was posted on the internet last year.

After being questioned at Heathrow, the MP said he had been to the House of Lords two weeks ago and there had been "no problem".

He added: "I'm not doing anything wrong. I'm not protesting or running through the streets of London."

Mr Wilders added: "Democracy means differences and debate. It's a very sad day when the UK bans an elected parliamentarian... Of course I will come back."

He said the government's actions had proved that Gordon Brown was the "biggest coward in Europe".

Mr Brown's spokesman said the prime minister "fully supports the decision" taken by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

Mr Wilders was invited to the House of Lords for a screening of Fitna by the UK Independence Party's Lord Pearson.

The peer said it was a "matter of free speech", telling the BBC: "We are going to show it anyway because we think MPs and peers should see this film."

'No purpose'

He added: "The film isn't offensive unless you are a violent Islamist. Most of my Muslim friends think it's a very good film."

Fitna's opening scenes show a copy of the Koran followed by footage of the 9/11 attacks in the US and the bombings in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005.

The Lords screening went ahead as planned, despite Mr Wilder's non-attendance.

Read Andrew McCarthy's excellent column at NRO about all this here. It begins:

It has come to this: If you are an Islamic radical, trained to carry out terrorist atrocities in al-Qaeda’s jihad against the United Kingdom, the British will welcome you with open arms. Not content with that, Great Britain will lobby insistently for your release from custody so that you may freely roam British streets—and the halls of Westminster.

If, by contrast, you are a duly elected representative in the democratic government of a country to which England is bound in the European Union, and you speak about the undeniable—though mulishly denied—nexus between Islamic doctrine and jihadist terror, Great Britain will slam her door in your face.

Up is down, my friends.

Read about Geert Wilders' movie Fitna here.

Sunday must-reads

A new feature, when there is time — or will. A round-up of the the best columns of the week, or recent times, or from whenever I feel like pulling them. Enjoy.

Mark Steyn — Obama, All at Sea

Charles Krauthammer — The Fierce Urgency of Pork

Victor Davis Hanson — Our Brave New World

Ike Brannon and Chris Edwards — Barack Obama's Keynesian Mistake

Monica Crowley — Change We Can Roll Our Eyes At

Wall Street Journal — The Stimulus Tragedy

Deroy Murdock — President Obama May Reverse Damage of Ghetto Culture

Marc Sheppard — Save The Children (From Global Warming Propaganda)

Fouad Ajami — Obama Reassures Despots

Charles Krauthammer — Obama's Unnecessary Apology

BBC: Ancient Persians 'gassed' enemies

Shocker. The BBC reports new evidence that suggests the Ancient Persians were the first to use chemical warfare:

Ancient Persians were the first to use chemical warfare against their enemies, a study has suggested.

A UK researcher said he found evidence that the Persian Empire used poisonous gases on the Roman city of Dura, Eastern Syria, in the 3rd Century AD.

The theory is based on the discovery of remains of about 20 Roman soldiers found at the base of the city wall.

The findings were presented the Archaeological Institute of America's annual meeting.

The honeymoon is over

Well that didn't take very long. As I stated in a previous post, I have really tried to have an open mind and keep a wait-and-see attitude with President Obama. Well, it hasn't taken very long to come to the conclusion that this administration is off to a bad start.

Let's review some of the crap decisions:

1) Closing Gitmo — Just a good old-fashioned dumb idea, and one that only 44% of Americans agree with.

2) Appointing tax cheats - Tom Daschle, Nancy Killefer, and Timothy Geithner; all may or may not be qualified for the positions they were nominated to, but what kind of message are we sending when such high-ranking officials are shown to be tax cheats? And by the way, on a philosophical level, I'm in complete agreement with all three of them: The Federal Government should get less of our money, and we should keep more of it. This is probably the first thing Tom Daschle and I have ever been on the same page about. However, this should be accomplished through shrinking the government, legislation and tax code reform, not fraud. Isn't it funny how Liberals are so quick to raise your taxes, but don't want to pay them themselves?

3) Sending taxpayer money overseas to fund "family planning" (abortions) — Set aside the abortion debate itself, this is a questionable idea even in good economic times; but certainly a piss-poor one during a recession. Only 35% of Americans think this is a good decision.

4) Scaring the public and whipping everyone into such a frenzy about the economy — with a brain-dead, soulless media as accomplice — so he can hastily force this porked-up bloated mess of a "stimulus" bill through Congress without anyone seriously examining or questioning it. It's nothing more than a giant spending bill covering just about every special interest except the most important special interest: economic growth. Not only is it a massive transfer of wealth, but the largest expansion of Federal power in the history of this Republic. An expansion that funds wasteful programs, rewards left-wing interest groups (victim blocks) and punishes private sector success. An expansion that could take a generation to roll back, if not longer.

Wasn't there a band of rebels who fought a revolution against such massive central power a couple of hundred years ago?

5) Shifting to a soft line on Iran — In typical Lefty kumbaya fashion, reaching out with a carrot only hardens the enemy and results in an Iranian government spokesmen saying things like, "This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed." Listen, there are many approaches to the Iran issue, and talking is certainly one of them. The people of Iran are not who we have a problem with, it's the nutjobs in charge, and they must not be allowed to forget that American "hard power" will always win the day.

There are certainly some other choices that have been made by this President that I can question, but these are the major ones.

Throughout the campaign I heard a lot of rhetoric about "change", doing away with "politics as usual", stopping the influence of lobbyists and interest groups, and getting the people's work done. A sweeping return to "ethics".

Why should I be surprised these were empty words?

We live in The Age of Absurdity, where up is down. Where American Idol results are more important than remembering our history or preserving our national identity. Where securing our borders equals racism. Where no one is responsible for anything anymore. Where bailouts turn me into an unwitting shareholder of Wall Street banks that I never chose to buy stock in myself. Where taxpayer money is taken and given to idiots who are then supposed to turn right around and loan that money back to the taxpayer...with interest.

Up is down, and people actually look to Washington for solutions...with a straight face.

Politicians in Washington have become just another class of sanctimonious celebrities. Out of touch, self-important, constantly campaigning. There are no more Statesmen, no true public servants who just want to do what's best for the country for a couple of years and then get the hell out and return to the private sector. Washington is a career now, and a damn lucrative one on the working man's dime.

And from what I've seen, Barack Obama is only feeding this monster. Just more of the same old business-as-usual.

Yes, the honeymoon is officially over.

The Third Jihad

Were you aware that there is a concerted effort to overthrow America and Western Civilization and ultimately dominate the world in the name of Islam?

Were you aware that solving the Arab-Israeli conflict will not suddenly cure Islamic Jihadism and cause it to go away? That's nothing but a myth.

Were you aware that many everyday Muslims, even non-violent ones, are completely in support of the idea of a Global Islamic State?

I suppose to the Keith Olbermann's of the world, this is just more "Neocon Pornography". To any person who doesn't have their head buried in the sand, this is an absolute must-see. It should be required viewing in every American school starting tomorrow.

You can read more about the movie at the website The Third Jihad.

"Damaged Relations"

As is usually the case, it is not so much the story itself I have an issue with, it's the way the soulless, brain-dead media reports it that confounds me.

In this case, the story is Obama sitting down for an interview with an Arabic TV channel. Okay, whatever. The story itself isn't a big deal, but the way these things actually get written up is usually good for some laughs.

As an example, I give you the AP reporting on Obama's interview the other day:

CAIRO, Egypt – President Barack Obama chose an Arabic satellite TV network for his first formal television interview as president, part of a concerted effort to repair relations with the Muslim world that were damaged under the previous administration.

This sentence leaves no doubt, the AP places the blame for any "damaged relations" with the Muslim world at the feet of George W. Bush.

I mean, it's not like the fact that two airplanes flew into and destroyed a couple of the largest buildings every built a few years ago had anything to do with those relations being "damaged".

Right?

Also in the story:

Obama's predecessor, former President George W. Bush, launched wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which prompted a massive backlash against the U.S. in the Muslim world.

Where was the massive backlash in America's heartland against Muslims after 9/11? Oh right, there wasn't one.

Where were the riots and burning-of-Muslim-flags parties held? Oh right, there weren't any.

In contrast to the enthusiastic reception Obama's victory has garnered around the world, the Arab world has been much more cautious about the new U.S. president — with most people skeptical that American policy in the region will change substantially.

"I can't be optimistic until I see something tangible," said Hatem al-Kurdi, 35, a Gaza City engineer who saw parts of the interview. "Anyone can say nice words, but you have to follow with actions."

Does anyone else see the absurdity in all of this? Not just the content, but the fact that we are even asking the question: What we must do to repair relations with the Muslim world?

"Something tangible"? "Follow with actions"? — Such as planes flying into buildings? Certainly "tangible" "actions" indeed.

This writer is not waiting for America to bend over backwards to repair relations with the Muslim world. On the contrary, this writer is waiting for the Muslim world to repair relations with America.

Purging itself of the death-cult radicals among it's ranks would be a good start, followed by a complete reformation.

I'm not holding my breath.

"We will defeat you"

As I watched Barack Obama's inaugural address today I have to admit I perked up a little when I heard him say this:

We will not apologize for our way of life nor will we waver in its defense. And for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that, 'Our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken. You cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.'

I was impressed by that. And I really hope he means it.

When the guard is down

Parker Griffith, Democratic candidate for Congress in Alabama's 5th District said this a few weeks ago:

I think America's greatest enemy is America and its materialism.

And I think that . . . uh . . . we have nothing to fear from radical Islam. We have nothing to fear from any other religion if we are strong on our own beliefs. I don't fear radical Islam.

Further evidence of what the Left in this country really thinks. The only thing we have to fear is...America!

In the interest of fairness (which I will probably be required by law to do under The Obama Administration) I should say that the candidate has tried to spin the remarks and say they were taken out of context. Read that story here.

Maybe the remarks were taken out of context, to an extent. But, the larger issue to me is this: There are a hell of a lot of people that would agree with those exact words, context or not.

And do you think those people reside on the Right, or on the Left?

I have leaned Libertarian most of my life, and in fact, I've never voted a straight Republican ticket. But the more and more I see of this type of thinking coming from the other side, it brings me inexorably closer to an unmovable position: Until the Democratic party purges itself of those who believe this naive, stupid and dangerous nonsense, I have zero interest in "reaching across the aisle".

Remember Beirut

Many people believe the War on Terror began on September 11, 2001. Or possibly in August 1998 when the U.S. Embassies were bombed in Africa. Or perhaps even on February 26, 1993 – the first time the World Trade Center was attacked.

But actually, The Long War really began 25 years ago today, on the morning of October 23, 1983. On that day, Islamic terrorists bombed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon killing 241 brave American warriors, 58 French soldiers, 6 civilians and injuring scores of others.

The organization Islamic Jihad took responsibility for the attack. (Wouldn't you think true so-called 'freedom fighters' would launch attacks and go on about their day? Why do Islamic thugs take so much joy in the death they deliver?)

Islamic Jihad is an arm of Hezbollah, which receives help from the zealots who run Iran.

So while the vile acts of 9/11 certainly brought this war home to our doorstep, they were by no means the first shots fired. The Jihadists have hated us long before 2001, long before 1998, 1993 and yes, even before 1983. The attacks and hijackings of the 1970's were merely omens of things to come – much bigger things.

So as you go about your day today, try to remember those brave American soldiers who died in Beirut in 1983. And while you're at it, think of those American soldiers who are out there fighting right now, meeting and humiliating thousands of terrorist idiots on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan...and wherever this war takes us.

For all you moral equivalence types

...who are somehow able to talk about 'Radical Christianity' with a straight face, as if it is just as much a source of violence, blood and death across the planet. Or for those who would silence criticism of fundamentalist Islam because Muslims who commit acts of terror in the name of jihad (or merely sympathize with them) are such a rare anomaly, it is politically incorrect and 'hateful' to even speak of it.

Well, Clifford May has an interesting story to tell you at NRO. It's a must read actually.

Not since the Nazi book burnings of the 1930s has free speech been as endangered as it is today. Firebombing publishers, murdering filmmakers, issuing death threats against writers and cartoonists, suing researchers, restricting freedom of expression through bogus “human-rights commissions” and the U.N. — these are some of the ways militant Islamists, their enablers, and their apologists are seeking to silence their critics.

Much more on this topic to come...

Islamic thugs attack U.S. embassy in Yemen, kill 16

While the headlines are dominated by a (supposedly) shaky economy, it's important to note that Islamic terrorists do not care what's happening on Wall Street.

I've never been an 'issues' voter, and certainly not a 'one issue' voter. But if I was, it damn sure wouldn't be the economy...stupid.

From the AP:

SAN'A, Yemen (AP) — Attackers armed with automatic weapons, rocket-propelled grenades and at least one suicide car bomb assaulted the U.S. Embassy in the Yemeni capital on Wednesday. Sixteen people were killed, including six assailants, officials said. No Americans were hurt in the deadly attempt to breach the compound walls, which the U.S. said bore "all the hallmarks of an al-Qaida attack."

Multiple explosions rang out outside the heavily guarded facility, and gunfire raged for at least 10 minutes at the concrete checkpoints that ring the compound. The dead included six attackers, six Yemeni guards and four civilians, the state news agency SABA reported. Security officials said people lined up for visas were among those killed or wounded.

It was the deadliest attack on a compound that has been targeted four times in recent years by bombings, mortars and shootings. Yemen, the ancestral homeland of Osama bin Laden, has struggled to put down al-Qaida-linked Islamic militants, often to the frustration of U.S. counterterrorism officials.

Yemeni security officials said a little-known group called Islamic Jihad, unrelated to the Palestinian group of the same name, claimed responsiblity for the attack. But Yemeni authorities have blamed the group in past attacks that have later been claimed by al-Qaida in postings on the Internet.

Read the entire story here.

India bombings carried out by Muslim terrorists

From the AP:

NEW DELHI (AP) — Police commandos carried out raids across New Delhi, detaining several people believed to be connected to a series of blasts that ripped through the Indian capital, killing at least 21 people and wounding about 100 others, police said Sunday.

A series of at least five explosions struck a park and crowded shopping areas in New Delhi just after sundown Saturday, a prime time for weekend shoppers in the crowded, chaotic city.

An Islamic militant group claimed responsibility for the bombings in an e-mail sent to several Indian news organizations.

By Sunday the death toll had risen to 21, said city police spokesman Rajan Bhagat. At least 97 others were wounded, he said.

Read the entire story here.

Some more 9/11 notes from around the web

I didn't get a chance to post a roundup of 9/11 related stories and notes the other day. Here are a few I thought were worth pointing out:

From Mark Steyn:

With allies like these...

23% of Germans, 30% of Mexicans and 36% of Turks believe the United States government was behind the 9/11 attacks.

Click here to read an excellent column from Victor Davis Hanson over at National Review:

A highlight [emphasis added]:

While many rightly point to lapses in the conduct of the Iraq war, faulty intelligence, and wrongheaded emphasis on supposed arsenals of WMDs rather than the casus belli outlined in the 23 writs authorized by the Congress, few can answer a more existential question: Had we not met, defeated, and humiliated tens of thousands of jihadists on the battlefields of Iraq, where else might we have inflicted such a terrible defeat on our enemies — given the nuclear sanctuary of Pakistan, the bellicose governments of Iran and Syria, and the duplicity of the Gulf monarchies? And if we had not killed, captured, scattered, and turned our enemies abroad, how then might we have prevented them from coming back here to attack us at home? And are the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq, as in the past, aiding anti-American terrorists, or helping to hunt them down?

RedState.com has a fine take on the kooky Left's attitude towards 9/11 called "September 11th for Demmies":

Highlights:

This attitude shouldn't be a surprise to us. Perhaps the particular viciousness of the mocking graphic will catch you off-guard, but the "sick of 9-11" routine is hardly new. "Progressive" folks have been telling America to get over 9-11-01 since 9-12-01. (Well, 9/13, 9/12 was reserved for mealy-mouthed columnists to bleat about the "danger" of reprisals against Muslims in America which the New York Times kind of American was all too certain would be swift, abundant, and heinous from the bitter, gun-toting, religious nuts in flyover country.)

Take, for example, this article by Chris Thompson, currently of the Village Voice, published at East Bay Express on the first anniversary of 9/11. The essential point of his article was that it was all too dramatic and, really, oughtn't we just treat it like a fluke and never the more fret? "What really happened one year ago? Some bad men got lucky and hurt us, so we bombed the s**t out of some caves they were hiding in. Now what's on TV?" That wasn't snark. It was his point.

Joan Smith at The Independent/UK said it in February of 2003. She wonders when we'll get over it, and summarizes her position by saying, "If the world has become a more dangerous place since 11 September 2001, it is not solely because of the activities of a bunch of Islamic terrorists." It's America, you see. Sort of like, when a person is being mugged, and they punch the mugger in the face; well the mugger isn't really the only one bringing violence to the street is he?

Another great Mark Steyn piece called "Being Sad isn't Enough":

Highlights [emphasis added]:

Seven years is a long time in a present-tense culture, and attitudes to the war - if, indeed, it is still a war to most people - evolved pretty quickly. Here's what I wrote on the third anniversary, marked by the Beslan massacre, in The Spectator, September 11th 2004:

On the eve of this week’s anniversary, hundreds of children were murdered in their schoolhouse by terrorists. Terrible. But even more terrible was the reaction of what passes for the civilized world, the reluctance to confront the truth of what had occurred. The perpetrators were “separatists”, according to The Christian Science Monitor – what, you mean like my fellow Quebecers? They were “commandoes”, according to Agence France-Presse – you mean like the SAS?

“We have been confronted with a deep human tragedy,” said Dutch Foreign Minister Ben Bot, speaking for the European Union. “I am appalled that a school and its pupils are being used for political ends,” said UNESCO’s Director-General Koichiro Matsuura. A “tragedy”? “Political ends”?

Five days after the slaughter, The New York Times finally got around to using the I-word, and then only in paragraph 24:

While the extent of international support may be debated, the attacks bear some trappings of Islamic militancy. Officials here in Beslan said they had found notebooks with Arabic writing, and witnesses reported hearing Arabic exhortations, though the attackers mostly spoke Russian.

Any Arabic exhortation in particular? Only the slogan of the age, “Allahu Akbar.” Nothing to worry about, folks. They may kill kids, but they’re just “separatists”, “radicals”, “activists”. No connection with any events you may have heard about in Madrid, Istanbul, Bali, Tel Aviv or New York. The approved tone in polite society is that of my Telegraph colleague Adam Nicolson: keep it tasteful, keep it elegant, lots of exquisitely honed over-written allusions - each dead child was “a Pietà, the archetype of pity. Each is a Cordelia carried on at the end of Act V…” Lovely stuff, may even be an award in it. But not a word about the killers or a hint of their identity. Only a limpid, passive sadness. Nicolson is sedated but, unlike Clinton, not arousable.

Three years after September 11th, the Islamist death cult is the love whose name no-one dare speak. And, if you can’t even bring yourself to identify your enemy, are you likely to defeat him? Can you even know him? He seems to know us pretty well. He understands the pressures he can bring to bear on Spain, and the Phillipines, and France, too. He’s come to appreciate the self-imposed constraints under which his enemy fights – the legalisms, the political correctness, the deference to ineffectual multilateralism. He’s revolted by the infidels’ decadence but he has to admit it’s enormously helpful: the useful idiots of the pro-gay, pro-feminist left are far more idiotic and far more useful to him than they ever were to Stalin.

Monica Crowley talks about the anniversary in this column over on her blog:

In the seven years since the attacks of September 11, 2001, there has been a movement to call the enemy by an euphemism, to strip away any label describing them as they really are: radical Islamic terrorists.

These Islamists believe they are engaged in a holy war against us. Listen to them. They have declared war on us. Listen to them. They routinely tell us what they believe, what their intentions are, and how they plan to carry them out. Listen to them. They tell us they are coming back for us. Listen to them.

Finally, check out this post from Crush Liberalism which I found particularly good:

Highlights [emphasis added]:

To those of you on the left: Feel free to Google that date if it doesn’t ring a bell for you.

It’s hard to believe that it’s been seven years since that fateful day. All of us remember what we were doing when we heard about the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon, as well as United Flight 93 going down in Shanksville, PA. The face of this country changed forever.

See, gone were the days of Clintonian capitulation. Gone were the days of Reagan’s scamper out of Beirut. Gone were the days of bombing an aspirin factory in the Sudan, or trying to serve an warrant to Osama bin Laden or reading him his rights. That fateful day marked the turning point in this country when we looked at the backwards savages who slaughtered in the name of their god and said “We will hunt you down like the couscous-sucking dogs that you are and snuff you out, for however long it takes!” We meant it, too.

At least, we meant it back then.

There's much more out there obviously. But the anniversary has come and gone now. You can go back to watching 90210 and burying your head in the sand.