Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Unease but realistic about life

The recent confession of terrorist Zazi is a great victory for the government. Yet, I wonder how the governments tactics would be portrayed in the media if this were the Bush administration.

The guilty plea was apparently coerced by the FBI explaining that it could prosecute
Zazi's mother for immigration violations. In reality we cringe and should cringe at going after family members of criminals. However, unfortunately this is part and parcel of the governments strategy in many cases. Much of our adversarial form of justice is handled via negotiation by lawyers.

The question that is unanswered is why Zazi wanted his mother to remain in a country that he sought to bomb will never be asked or answered.

A larger question that we discussed here was answered by Zazi. Zazi did directly state that the goal of his bombings was to raise publicity for his cause. This is something we have suspected all along. The origins of media marketing publicity stunts is communist. This is done by Red Army factions and by the Commie PLO. Oddly,
this concept of branding has more in common with Proctor and Gamble than Marx. It was also the desire of spoiled rich Little Lord Fauntleroy types like Bill Ayers as well.

One of the authors we highly respect is Stephen Schwartz. He has questioned the long term impact of his coreligionists aligning themselves with far left types. The truth is that when progress is made it is frequently from the right. Nixon could go to China and Begin could make peace in a way that a type like Obama can not. Obama has the burden of proving he can use decisive force and knows he is vulnerable on charges about his patriotism.

Terrorism will only end when Muslims themselves start to grasp the serious damage that it has done to Islam. Each publicity stunt marketing bombing produces a counter reaction. If Osama wanted the USA out of the region his publicity stunt has not worked. The lives of those in the PA have gotten worse with each bombing. Even the myth that lawless demonstrations in the 1970's had any impact on the end of the Vietnam War is also wrong. The end of that war had more to do with Watergate than lawless unwashed Hippie Communists and spoiled rich incompetent terrorists like Bill Ayers.

Of course nobody is ever going to sit down and write this in book form. Sad, but it is what is seriously needed most.

8 comments:

Ducky's here said...

Has this got anything to do with Louis Malle's great (and unfortunately out of print) comedy "Zazie on the Metro"?

Ducky's here said...

Beak, the Vietnam war ended because we lost.

Ducky's here said...

Terrorism will only end when Muslims themselves start to grasp the serious damage that it has done to Islam.

----------------------

Wrong. Like all fundamentalist freaks they see the religion as defiled if it includes any moderate movement.

They aren't interested in what you or AOW or Beamish or most anyone thinks. They want the religion purified and that includes moderate manifestations.

They are the Protestant dominionists of the Muslim world.

beakerkin said...

Ducky

At a certain point radicalism burns out.

The Pagan Temple said...

It doesn't ever burn out completely. It just dies down for a while, and after a period of smoldering, it flares up again, eventually. Maybe one of these days Islam will go through this reformation period I've been seeing people suggest. I hope so. The way things stand now, the religion as a whole is a breeding ground for fanaticism. Very few redeeming qualities to it, in relative terms, compared to the capacity for intolerance and hate that are etched across so many of its Korans pages. Until it is brought into the civilized world, it will remain a savage anachronism. Unfortunately, the only thing that is going to bring about any kind of systemic change is hardship, tragedy, and failure. Understanding, tolerance, and acceptance ain't going to cut it with them, because far too many of them, including even among the ones who are not terrorist, nor for that matter even violent, see such things as signs of weakness.

The_Editrix said...

TPT, very thoughtful words! I once believed if not in a reformation of Islam (I never gave it a thought) but in assimilation of Muslims. How naive I was. The danger is not just Islam as we perceive it now, the danger is that any nice, assimilated Muslim living in the West is a potential time bomb. The re-Islamisation as well of countries (Turkey is a more recent example, Iran another one) as of individuals is frightening. There are countless examples in your country where formerly peacefull, assimilated Muslims suddenly "freak out" and commit murder. And I do not believe they are deliberately planted "sleepers", I think they are just behaving to Islam's intrinsic quality.

You (plural as in "you Americans") are still pretty relaxed about it because the number of Muslims in your country is, yet and just, relatively small. Estimates range from 2.5 million to 7 million, which includes (I presume) "Black Muslims". To get a feeling what is going on here in Europe, you'd need at least a (Middle Eastern and Turkish) Muslim population of 15 to 20 million. Think Dearborn, Michigan, but applied to several important large regions of your country.

The problem is that it is the very core of the Free West that lets them become the threat they are. Here I discuss the facts that only a certain small percentage of Muslims is tolerable before they start to damage their host society and that a secular totalitarian system will keep them at bay. That is not a plea for a secular totalitarian system, but a plea for self protection of the, yet and just, Free West.

Alligator said...

Ducky's here said...

" Beak, the Vietnam war ended because we lost."

We had no political will to win. Interestingly, since World War II, we've not won anything decisively since becoming the global policeman. We have seldom if ever defined the enemy let alone defined what constitutes victory. I'm still waiting to hear on Iraq and Afghanistan. A declaration fo war makes a difference in how you handle it.

Ducky's here said...

"Terrorism will only end when Muslims themselves start to grasp the serious damage that it has done to Islam."

I agree, but how will that be achieved Duck? The Japanese had essentially the same mentality in WW II. It took two atomic bombs to finally get them to that realization. I'm not advocating dropping nukes on the Middle East, I'm just wondering what it will take for an epiphany in the Muslim world.

"They aren't interested in what you or AOW or Beamish or most anyone thinks. They want the religion purified and that includes moderate manifestations."

I agree again. I think they only thing the zealots understand is the old adage: "If you bring a knife to this fight, I'll be bringing a gun. You put one of mine in the hospital, I'll be putting three of yours in the morgue.

The Pagan Temple said...

"It doesn't ever burn out completely. It just dies down for a while, and after a period of smoldering, it flares up again, eventually. Maybe one of these days Islam will go through this reformation period I've been seeing people suggest"

That's what it needs. A friend of mine who spent some time in the Eastern bloc and visited a few Middle Eastern countries told me back in 1986 that Soviet Communism was crumbling and militant Islam was going to be the next big global problem. I remember the conversation well because I thought his "prediction" was so unbelievable. I'm amazed at how accurate he was.

Anonymous said...

Your first problem is respecting Stephen Schwartz.