But that's not what the Republican political approach to terror has been. It's a political winner! And as such, they want to create maximum fear, maximum xenophobia, because it motivates their crowd. Remember Mitt's incoherent rant on Islam from the campaign?
“We'll move everything to get him [Bin Laden]. But I don't want to buy into the Democratic pitch, that this is all about one person, Osama bin Laden. Because after we get him, there's going to be another and another. This is about Shi'a and Sunni. This is about Hezbollah and Hamas and al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the worldwide jihadist effort to try and cause the collapse of all moderate Islamic governments and replace them with a caliphate. They also probably want to bring down the United States of America. This is a global effort we're going to have to lead to overcome this jihadist effort. It's more than Osama bin Laden. But he is going to pay, and he will die.” '
As Juan Cole asked, “Is he saying that all Muslims of both major branches are his targets, and that he associates them with al-Qaeda?” Well Juan, considering that he and Rudy actively mock any attempt to disentangle those ideas as so much “political correctness”, yeah, I'd say that's pretty much what he's saying.
The irony is that we damn well need moderate Muslims around the globe to help us out in fighting terrorism, since plainly our intelligence adnd language resources are not, cannot be, and would never have been enough by themselves. We cannot do it alone. But every time moderate Muslims across the world hear this crap from major figures in the ruling party, they're just as likely to say “screw you — go get 'em yourself.” Rudy and Romney are playing domestic xenophobic politics to the precise detriment of national security.
Let's be clear: Ironically, Obama has done very little to battle this kind of viciousness, even as he's been the victim of anti-Muslim prejudice wrapped inside lies. Can you imagine if those emails were suggesting that, instead of being a UCC-going guy, he was actually a Methodist? Well then, maybe lying about his religion is not really the problem; it's the bigotry beneath. And Obama has in fact made sure that Muslims are literally out of sight, out of mind on his campaign. Maybe he figures he can only fight that battle on one front at a time, which on a strategic level I can understand. Still, no profiles in courage from him, here.
I don't tend to hear a lot of objection on the left to this kind of stuff — partly because there are always other fires to fight, and because it's perceived that it's not a hearts-and-minds winner of an argument, at least not now. But it cannot be right to leave people of one of the world's largest religious groups — even if a small minority in the US — vulnerable to such hateful rhetoric, without objection from the rest of us.
OK, so maybe he didn’t use the words “radical Islamic terrorism”, but I distinctly remember Obama saying in his acceptance speech, “He (McCain) has vowed to follow Osama bin Laden to the Gates of Hell, but won’t even follow him to the cave in which he lives!”
<
p>As a UCC member myself I’m glad Obama has addressed his form of Christianity, but I agree that he should more forcefully also say, “So what if I were?” to the Muslim rumor. The inauguration is often the one time we hear a President’s full name, so just to get a rise out of certain people I hope he makes a point of beginning his oath with, “I, Barack HUSSEIN Obama II do solemnly swear…”
I think Giuliani is right. He wasn’t slamming Muslims, he was mocking liberals! Progressives have some sort of pathological inability to admit that much of the serious terrorism worldwide is inextricably linked with the religion of Islam.
<
p>Saying that all Muslims may not be terrorists but all terrorist are Muslin may be banal, but the generalization is also mostly right (yes, yes, I know, there’s Timothy McVeigh, skin heads, and Code Pink.) Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, and Hezbollah, are all terrorist organizations (define as such by the US government,) and have hijacked Islam to suit their terrorist purposes. They are all Muslim organizations. Why is it wrong to point this out?
<
p>Even moderate Muslims know they have a problem with radical Islam and their terrorist foot soldiers. What was “The Awakening” in Iraq of not the local Muslim leadership there acknowledging it, rejecting it, and doing something about it? In combination with the Surge, it has snatched victory from the jaws of defeat.
<
p>Muslims are blown up in Pakistan by Muslims. Often. How is it possible not to discuss Islam when discussing the problem?
<
p>What PC fetish makes it impossible for progressives and liberals to discuss “radical Islam” or “Islamic terrorists” without claiming it is intentional Republican code-speak appealing to religious bigotry?
<
p>Is there an entry in DSM-IV for this affliction?
<
p>
Why is it so important to put that identification front and center? When you’re discussing a group’s particular motives, by all means discuss the religious angle. But what compels you and Rudy to want the word “Islamic” in the name of the issue, every time it’s mentioned.
<
p>In the UK from the 60s-80s, “all terrorists” were Irish. Even this year, the bulk of terrorist “chatter” that British intelligence picks up is Irish.
<
p>Do “the Irish” or “Catholics” have a terror problem? That’s not in the realm of fact, but of interpretation. The facts speak of dissident IRA factions, clearly named and explained, plotting violence.
because to drop the “Islamic” is to deny that Islam is the common thread and is part of the problem with this strain of terrorism.
<
p>What do you propose it be called? Help me out.
<
p>Wikipedia defines Al Qaeda it as an “international Sunni Islamic movement.” It’s is comprised of lots of different people, including Saudis, Iraqis, Egyptians, Brits, Indonesians, Filipinos, Kuwaitis, Sudanese, even Americans. The unifying thread is Islam.
<
p>The “I” in IRA describes much about the origins, motivations, and solutions to the UK terror problem. It’s by definition an Irish terror group. Any Greeks in the IRA? Don’t think so, not their cause.
<
p>Same with ETA. Does the Guardia Civil discover Sicilians or even FARC helping out? (I put aside, for this discussion, reports of terror organization helping each other out, like Hamas & Hezbollah, or FARC and Hezbollah, or even a FARC-IRA-ETA collaboration.)
<
p>If you refuse to call it what it is, you’ll never solve it.
<
p>
Please, please tell us about that one.
Most likely meant to say William Ayers.
<
p>Um, not so much. You got your commie groups: Shining Path, ETA, FARC, Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front, and the Naxalites. You’ve got your eco-terrorists: ALF, ELF, ARM, Earth First, etc. You’ve got your nationalists, including the PIRA and RIRA as well as the Red Hand Defenders in Northern Ireland, LTTE in Sri Lanka, and the ETA in Spain. You’ve got your ethnic terrorists, which include Kach, the KKK and the C18. You’ve got your Christian terrorists, like the Lambs of God, AOG, AN, Phineas Priests, Christian Patriots, NLFT, Guardians of the Cedars, Tsar Lazar Guard.
<
p>There are all kinds of terrorist groups, doing all sorts of evil things. Most, however, only kill a few at a time and so long as they keep it that way the American media will only focus on homemade bombs that go off in Iraq, Israel, and tUSA — or if they involve a Muslim group.
<
p>
<
p>Code Pink, however, is certainly not a terrorist organization. I mean, these are 50 year old women who interrupt public events by yelling and wearing pink, advocating for the end of all wars and the reallocation of those resources for things like health care.
just pulling your leg. Lighten up.
But I stick with my 2 previous positions that (1) it’s Islamic terrorist posing the biggest threat to America, and for that matter, the West, and (2) progressives cannot bring themselves to admit the interconnection of this certain brand of terrorism with the religion of Islam.
<
p>WTC I, the USS Cole, US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, WTC II, the Pentagon, Shanksville, PA … these are direct attacks in and on the US. All perpetrated by Islamic terrorist. Death toll, what, 5,000?
<
p>The Tamil Tigers, ETA, and FARC haven’t really posed as clear and present a threat to America, have they? What’s the combined death toll for all the groups you list? Has ELF killed anyone?
3244.
an Irish-Catholic Terrorist or just a terrorist? Terrorism is just that. Frankly we should be concerned with fighting all terrorism, not just Islamic terrorism as Rudy says.