In Denial

 

We are in for a long struggle, especially now as 'assertion' has replaced 'truth' in politics, and as 'sensationalism' has replaced 'journalism'.

Venerable Canadian magazine, Maclean's published an important interview with David Harris, who is one of Canada's leading terrorist experts.

"A former chief of strategic planning for CSIS, he is now director of the international and terrorist intelligence program at Insignis Strategic Research in Ottawa. One of Harris's most important qualifications as a Canadian terrorism expert is his almost unique willingness to speak publicly and fearlessly about Islamic extremism. In 2004, Harris was sued by CAIR-CAN, the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations, for raising questions about the connections between CAIR-CAN and Islamic extremist ideology. In April, CAIR-CAN dropped its suit against Harris with no damages, costs, apologies, clarifications, "or cab fare."

It is important, because it is a blue-print for the widespread denial and trivialization both here in the U.S. and in Europe (h/t my friend Michael van der Galien). Harris summarized it best: "In terms of facing the enemy, we must first face the facts. And our ability to face those facts is completely blocked by official efforts to obfuscate the nature of the adversary."

If we don't, uncertainty will "leave the door wide-open for America’s opponents – those among western powers who seek to thwart America’s hegemony in the Muslim world and those amongst the Islamists who desire to re-establish the Caliphate. In both situations the winner is political Islam."

Back to the Harris interview:

You have said that Canadians are in denial about terrorism. After the events of last week, do you still believe that's true?
By and large, yes. I think we've seen a transient awareness, but underlaid by a gigantic inertia. We've had warnings and indications for a great many years that extremists -- particularly Islamic extremists -- have infiltrated and targeted us, yet we persist in pretending that this is not a particularly pressing threat. [...]

The MSM of course is quick to blame the war on terror for what they call "a new domestic phenomenon", with Senator Biden jumping swiftly on the bandwagon: "I find it absolutely on the verge of criminal", that the Administration is proposing to cut back counterterrorism funding. Why, I thought Islamic Jihad is all a bunch of hype and typical Republican scaremongering; what happened to the ridicule, "What threat...?! A bunch of lunatics with boxcutters... pleeease."  A new phenomenon, indeed!

In your opinion, how radicalized is the Canadian Muslim population? What kind of numbers are we up against?
Well, of course, it's impossible to assess -- there is no poll measuring the support for Wahhabism amongst our communities. But one can look at some of the statements by genuinely moderate clerics concerning the situation in North America. Imam Palazzi has claimed that 80 per cent of mosques in Canada are under the influence of radicals, though he does not by any means appear to suggest that 80 per cent of Canadian Muslims are themselves radical. [...]

But the underlying premise is that our country is full of radicalized imams -- leading a non-radicalized population?
But that won't last long.

Because the imams are so influential?
That's right. Especially if you're dealing with a culture, a community of religion that's inclined to idealize "men of God" -- clerics -- and hand their children over to such folk for extended periods, you can predict what the outcome could be. And this is why it is of great concern that radical Wahhabist Saudi money is being injected into certain Canadian mosques and Islamic facilities. There seems to be quite a correlation between that sort of influx of cash and radicalism.

And there's nothing illegal about that money coming in, correct?
Correct.

Should there be?
I believe so. I believe funds from Saudi and Saudi-related sources should be banned from that kind of thing. [...]

But in the case of radical Islam, we are not prepared to call it for what it is.
That's a key point. In terms of facing the enemy, we must first face the facts. And our ability to face those facts is completely blocked by official efforts to obfuscate the nature of the adversary. I was disbelieving when I listened to some of the briefings by police and security officials who refused to pronounce the "I" and "M" words -- Islam or Muslim -- or their derivatives.

They're very proud about that. They think it proves what nice people they are.
Yes, and I'd say this is completely unacceptable, particularly for those of us who have freely and without intimidation in the past identified Christian terrorists, Jewish terrorists, and Sikh terrorists in precisely those terms when it was clinically appropriate. This idea of not defining the enemy concerns me. In order to position ourselves to deal with an enemy we must understand the enemy's doctrine and mindset. And we can't do that if we don't recognize the realities. But a secondary aspect is that it also -- how would I put this? -- it also subverts the basic egalitarianism of our society, because it offers special treatment to one ethno-cultural or religious group over all others, and that would be very satisfying to some of the fifth- and maybe sixth-column organizations that seem bent on Islamicizing Canada. [...]

It's so unnerving because we know that they are determined to commit the mass murder of Canadians . . .
And we're not showing comparable determination. Political correctness in counter-terrorism could kill us. To listen to security officials at press conferences practically presenting a burlesque on the theme of political correctness is devastatingly unnerving. What we were hearing was surreal. It's also unprepossessing to see police officers and other public officials indulging in theological moonlighting. I do not want to hear from my local cop a detailed analysis of the relevance of Islam to violence.

Is part of the problem that the police don't want to speak in a way that will inspire "backlash"?
One of the terrible developments has been the extent to which radical self-styled Islamic representative organizations in Canada have exaggerated and even fabricated scare stories about imagined anti-Muslim behaviour or threats. This has caused immense damage within the Muslim community, and alienation. In doing so, I believe it has enhanced the prospects for recruitment of otherwise moderate Muslims by extremists.

You are saying that some cases of "backlash" have been exaggerated with the purpose of fuelling the fire?
In general there's been near-hysteria on the part of certain national Canadian, Arab and Islamic organizations claiming all kinds of abuse rather than trying to bring Muslims more constructively into the fold. It's not clear whether it's by design or accident that this kind of behaviour has been sustained. [...]

What do you say to people who say: "Well, this is all because of our increased role in Afghanistan. If we had taken a different path these guys wouldn't be so upset"?
Yeah, it's funny. I guess I'm inclined to draw a parallel. It's a hint exaggerated -- I don't want to be insensitive -- but to me it's a little like going up to a black in the southern U.S., say in the '20s, fresh from lynchings in the area, and a fairly sound beating, and there's a white guy next to him who looks hostile, and you as a good Canadian wanting to resolve issues -- you go up to the black guy and say: "Consider the root causes of this. There must have been some way that you contributed to this? And therefore, together, perhaps, we can dig ourselves out of this challenge."

So what you are really saying is that in order to protect ourselves, we have to be honest about the true nature of our problem?
That's right, without honesty we're lost. And the enemy knows that too, and that's why some of their sophisticated elements are playing us for all we're worth.

Hell, yes. Why not start at home. This should get us started... LOL

Comments

[b]

Some out of power partisans within (and without) the military are working to undermine the military, sow discord, and turn the troops against their commanders.

[gringoman]

mmm...
FROM CRUSADER
I wonder if we Christians have to get ready to be martyred in the next few years...

(Gringo: Why so pessimistic? With leaders like Democrats and Republicans, it may not happen for at least five more years? Precise prediction has always been a bitch.)

I just don't see the West defeating Orthodox Islam in time

(gringo:With an attitude like this, how will you get invited even to a Republican brunch?)

....but I think the successor states like India and possibly a reunified Mongolia might finally drive on the Moslem heartlands, much like the great Ginghiz Khan If they did such a thing, it would be to the extermination I think. There will be no-one left to stop them.

(gringo:Nostalgia for the 'Golden Horde' may be understandable when you look into the eyes of the Mullahs and this Ahma squirt, but today's Mongolian heartland doesn't seem to be having a birth rate that demands, for example, the conquest and extinction of every recalcitrant muslim in the Middle East. India? Sure, they detest muslim fanatics, but they're too vegetarian for great military expeditions.)

Come to think of it, a Russo-Chinese alliance could knife through the Arab and Persian heartland and seize all that oil in pretty short order. Islamic lands are a trivial matter to conquer if you kill everything that moves without equivocation. Just ask Ginghiz, or the Ottoman Turks.

(gringo:The Russians can barely arm their own soldiers. China has never fielded a trans-continental Army. They both still want to collect back payments on the UN Oil-For-Food swindles and thievery. Moreover, while American man is now too feminized and politically correct to conquer the Arab world for its own good, to bring it kicking and screaming into the new millenium, he is also, understandably, too bitchy and jealous and fearful of letting somebody else do the job. You know, it might reflect on his manhood, not to mention global markets and the US dollar system and who knows what when you let somebody else do your work for you? Can you really depend on the help for important tasks? In other words, welcome to Hamlet. To do or not to do what the pricey consultants tell you?

gringo Conclusion: Americans can always hope for a moderate martyrdom, with hot water and the power grid still on line.

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Hmmm...

I wonder if we Christians have to get ready to be martyred in the next few years...

I just don't see the West defeating Orthodox Islam in time, but I think the successor states like India and possibly a reunified Mongolia might finally drive on the Moslem heartlands, much like the great Ginghiz Khan. If they did such a thing, it would be to the extermination I think. There will be no-one left to stop them.

Come to think of it, a Russo-Chinese alliance could knife through the Arab and Persian heartland and seize all that oil in pretty short order. Islamic lands are a trivial matter to conquer if you kill everything that moves without equivocation. Just ask Ginghiz, or the Ottoman Turks.

[Luther McLeod]

gringoman, yes, depressing.

[gringoman]

Ah, yes, but just when you think that maybe, maybe, maybe Americans really are more 'realistic' or 'tougher' and possibly even 'smarter' and our Bush looks so impressive flying into Baghdad, Zarqawi bagged, maybe some light at the end of that sandy tunnel and it does seem that Americans, if not the dhimmi Democrats and the elite sufferers of White Guilt Syndrome have a clue or two, a particular, little- publicized news item emerges. And it indicates that even the 'toughest of the tough," their neutering beginning with the Clintons (if not further back)are now, under the "warrior Bush," being softened up even further.

Not what voters expected? No? They didn't expect Bush to have such Clinton-like nice fuzzy feelings, maybe even let's-all-get-along and learn to sing Kumbaya in Arabic? Or did they expect this? Did they in fact vote for Bush in order to turn the U.S. military into an increasingly politically correct wasteland? You mean you don't know what's happening even to the Marines? (Let's forget the ones shackled in the brig at Camp Pendleton for now, in order to satisfy the pc overseers.) You didn't know that the fearsome Marines are now building a fine mosque even in Quantico? You don't know that the Wahabbi-trained muslim chaplain, Naval Lt. Abuhena Mohammed Saifulislam has clearance to encourage Marine converts to Islam (the blacks especially susceptible, as are the blacks in the equally taxpayer-supported prison system)? This chaplain, of course, is a "moderate muslim," like the kind that "conservative" Republican honchos in the Beltway cut deals with, like the one that will enable the Dubai "moderates" to take over a U.S. company (Doncasters?) building precision guidance systems for the military---such friendship, even though it apparently does not extend to reciprocal prosyletizing for Christianity in the muslim homelands, where officials are never seen doing what Marines are now doing---catering to the other faith, handling the holy books with utmost respect, meal preparations according to religious specifications (and certainly not shredding Korans as the Bible can be shredded in Saudi Arabia.)

You don't believe it? You don't see George Bush as a true believer that Islam is "a religion of peace"? You really think that people like this (and Bush is a "strong" American leader, speaking relatively)have the character or mentality to hold off Islam much longer than the advent of Eurabia? You don't see them the way any intelligent muslim can see them? You need further details about the mosquification of the proud United States Marine Corps? You have the stomach for it?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22845