It had been assumed by many that with the end of the Cold War
barbarism would have been a condition civilized people had left
behind, a relic of a bygone era. But like so many predictions of
contemporary society, this one is wrong.
After September 11th 2001, we have entered a period in which our
enemy, radical Islam, is out to destroy America and other Western
democracies. As Osama bin Laden noted in 1998, Muslims have an
obligation to kill Americans, albeit most Muslims do not accept his
argument. “The ruling to kill all Americans and their allies —
civilian and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who
can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it.” In
addition, there is the belief among radical Islamists that the
infidels, namely Christians and Jews, must be forced to submit to
Islam or die. “Our struggle is not about land or water,” the late
Ayatollah Khomeini said in 1980, “it is about bringing by force if
necessary, the whole of mankind onto the right path.”
Radical propagandists have attempted to inflame Muslims with
overheated rhetoric. The examples cited are merely the tip of the
proverbial iceberg.
Al Manar, Hezballah’s main vehicle for spreading anti-American
propaganda, asked, “What structure built of gray sandstone in 1792
became a source of all oppressive decisions the world over? The
answer: “The White House.” In May 2004 Sheik Nasrallah said he is
prepared for martyrdom. “Let Bush, Powell, Rumsfeld and all those
tyrants in Washington hear… there will only be room for great
sacrifice, for the call to martyrdom.” The editor of Egyptian
weekly Al Arabi is quoted in Memri as saying,
“Anti-Americanism is like music” to his ears. He calls America “a
plague” and “an ongoing crime.” The head of the Sunni religious
courts in Lebanon, Sheik Muhammad Kar’an, called America “the
garbage of all nations.” A professor of political science at Notre
Dame University in Lebanon, Dr. George Hajjar said, “America is the
New Nazism.” He added, “I hope that every patriotic and Islamic
Arab will participate in this war, and will shift this war not only
to America, but to all corners… wherever America may be.” Anis al
Naggash, who was involved in terrorist attacks in the '70s and
'80s, appeared on Al Manar in August 2005. He said, “The U.S. is
the enemy of Arabs and Muslims… every person must resist it… if
he can resist with weapons, it is his duty, mandated by the Koran.
Any cleric with knowledge of Islam must declare jihad against the
U.S., England, and their allies.”
As late as this January three would be terrorists were arrested
in Italy after vowing to launch an attack in the U.S. that would
dwarf 9/11. Curiously, with the exception of the Philadelphia
Inquirer, this story was conspicuously ignored by the U.S.
press corps.
Through conversations that were wiretapped, Italian officials
heard Algerian terrorists plan to kill tens of thousands of
Americans. This is by no means the only plot to harm our citizens.
In June 2006 FBI agents arrested seven Muslims in Miami in what was
described as an early stage plot to attack Chicago’s Sears Tower
and other sites across the country.
Recognizing the anger and capability of the enemy, President
Bush told graduates at the U.S. Air Force Academy, “We must keep in
mind the nature of the enemy. No act of America explains terrorist
violence, and no concession of America could appease it.”
Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times argues there is
a better than even money chance a nuclear device will be set off
killing 500,000 people or more. The 9/11 Commission report contends
such an event is not merely a possibility; it is probable. And
Osama bin Laden claims he has a religious duty to kill at least
four million Americans.
DESPITE AN UNDERSTANDABLE DESIRE to deny this horrendous scenario,
it must be confronted. Should we be unable to do so, or find that
the sacrifice is too much of a burden, the threat will assuredly
increase.
This is not an exaggerated claim since the threat was borne out
on 9/11, and even before in the attacks on: the U.S. Embassies in
Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S.S. Cole, the Marine
installation in Saudi Arabia, the 1993 explosion at the World Trade
Center and dozens of other violent episodes, including the
explosions in the British Underground and the Spanish rail
system.
In order to counter other potential attacks intelligence is
critical. We must be able to watch, listen and anticipate the evil
deed over the horizon. We must realize that in the radical desire
to sacrifice human life in order to serve a vision, every belief we
value is in jeopardy.
There are some well-meaning critics who contend that every step
taken to ferret out radical Islamic plots not only “dehumanizes”
the enemy but dehumanizes ourselves. The ACLU in its effort to
protect civil liberties seems to short-change the threat we now
face. It is obvious that in the freedom-security equation, some
freedom may be temporarily reduced in order to thwart the dangers
that lurk in our midst. President Lincoln, after all, suspended
habeas corpus during the Civil War.
The Patriot Act may be a small price to pay for bolstering
intelligence operations that could forestall attack. It should be
pointed out to libertarians who superordinate liberty that before
liberty can be entertained, survival must be assured.
My major gripe with those who promote civil liberties to the
exclusion of other concerns is their seeming unwillingness to
consider enemy motives and potential actions. Surely we can take al
Qaeda spokesmen at their word. What they say is that war is
necessary, democracy is evil, science is misguided, and Islam must
prevail even if Armageddon is fostered.
We are a long way from a “police state,” which is glibly
asserted as a criticism after every action taken by the Attorney
General in the war against terrorists. Moreover, I am all for
glorifying liberty which the United States has provided to its
citizens in ample measure. Yet as a prerequisite for our future, we
must recognize the threat that exists and in the process, glorify
life even as we glorify liberty.
STILL, IT IS NOT ENOUGH to say glorify life; there are specific
measures that must be taken to thwart possible terrorist acts in
our nation. The wall of separation erected between law enforcement
and national security agents must be shattered. Human intelligence
assets — emasculated by the Church Commission — should be
restored. Spying is a nasty, but necessary, business in a world as
dangerous as ours.
Similarly, preemption is a critical feature of prevention. We
must use every legal, i.e. constitutional, means at our disposal to
undermine terrorist cells. We should encourage the INS (Immigration
and Naturalization Service) to deport non-citizens who foster
violent activity. It is noteworthy that more than 80 percent of
mosques preach anti-American dogma and some actively promote
terrorism, according to Steve Emerson’s recent studies.
And last, despite a reluctance to consider profiling —
understandable since racial and ethnic differentiation is
appropriately frowned upon — it should be noted that 80 year old
grandmothers from Des Moines haven’t been identified as terrorist
“sleepers.” Yet remarkably they are often treated in the same
fashion at airports as those carrying Saudi Arabian passports. This
defies common sense and introduces a degree of unnecessary
risk.
In many respects the radical Islamic response to modernity is
like the Hieronymus Bosch painting “The Garden of Earthly
Delights,” which depicts a hell of obscurity and insanity, a world
without reason or hope. Either the world submits to Islam, or the
world is turned into the hell of destruction. In radical Islam
religion is “flesh and blood” and unless one submits, death is the
only recourse. Hence a persistent refusal to use power against this
threat must be overcome. We don’t need martyrs to survive, but we
do need vigilance, intelligence and legal mechanisms that
realistically recognize the threat we are now facing.
