The Sum of All Fears

Getty Images

How long until al-Qaeda nuke one of the major cities in the U.S?

British Prime Minister, Tony Blair has vowed to "root out extremism". Does the Constitution allow the U.S. to do the same? According to fellow blogger Hugh Hewitt, it would be difficult:

"The principle is that the Constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action" (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969).

In England, Tony Blair has announced his Government's intention to change the rules of asylum and immigration to reflect an end to the safe haven for radical Islamists, which England has become over the past decades.

The new rule will include the use of writing, preaching, public speaking, a website or a position of responsibility to forment terrorism, justify or glorify terrorism, forment other serious criminal activity, further hatred and advocate violence in support of particular beliefs.

A database would be created of individuals who had demonstrated "unacceptable behaviour", as well as a list of any foreign imams to ensure that they are suitable to preach in the U.K. Mr. Blair will be consulting Muslim leaders in order to obtain such a list.

Blair was quite specific:

" New grounds for deportation and exclusion will include fostering hatred, advocating violence to further a person's beliefs or justifying or validating such violence.... Let no one be in any doubt. The rules of the game are changing."

Meanwhile in the U.S, it is only a matter of time until a major city is being nuked by al-Qaeda. Given the First Amendment protections covering extreme speech undertaken without both the present intention and present ability to intice immediate violence, one doesn't forsee the U.S. being able to make the same move. The "The Sum of All Fears" in the remaking, only, hunky Ben Affleck won't be in the starring role.

Churchill, as always, had the foresight when he observed:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities - but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

Comments

[Mr. Snitch!]

"How long until al-Qaeda nuke one of the major cities in the U.S?"

Find out how long can we keep terror groups off-balance and you will have your answer. As soon as we stop being aggressive in our efforts, as we were before 9/11, they will stop worrying about survival and small insugencies and start planning the next 'statement' attack. Which could take on any number of forms. And that is essentially the problem - we'll never be able to predict the form of the attack. All we can do is think and act pre-emptively.