What Kind of People?
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
This Thomas Sowell column does an excellent job of concretizing the unworldy motivations of our enemy and their practical results, for the benefit of anyone who might want to remain alive and continue enjoying his life. (For those who may have followed a link to a Thomas Sowell column from the comments of a recent post, this is a different column.)
[A] once-proud, dynamic culture in the forefront of world civilizations, and still carrying a message of their own superiority to "infidels" today, is painfully visible to the whole world as a poverty-stricken and backward region, lagging far behind in virtually every field of human endeavor.This is not a perfect analysis by any means, but I think it does one of the better jobs of succinctly conveying to the average, implicitly-rational, this-worldy American an incredible truth he may not fully grasp: There are people so devoted to mysticism out there that they would rather kill or hurt us than benefit from our obviously superior knowledge. Furthermore, we will have to countermand our natural tendency towards benevolence for a time in order to make them stop.
There is no way that they can catch up in a hundred years, even if the rest of the world stands still. And they are not going to wait a hundred years to vent their resentments and frustrations at the humiliating position in which they find themselves.
Israel's very existence as a modern, prosperous western nation in their midst is a daily slap across the face. Nothing is easier for demagogues than to blame Israel, the United States, or western civilization in general for their own lagging position.
...
What kind of people provide a market for videotaped beheadings of innocent hostages? What kind of people would throw an old man in a wheelchair off a cruise liner into the sea, simply because he was Jewish? What kind of people would fly planes into buildings to vent their hate at the cost of their own lives?
These are the kinds of people we are talking about getting nuclear weapons. And what of ourselves?
Do we understand that the world will never be the same after hate-filled fanatics gain the ability to wipe whole American cities off the face of the earth?
-- CAV
(HT: Chris Gaudet)
10 comments:
I've noticed that people are now beginning to speak up and state the obvious. We've had five years to see how the enemy acts. I've read that if the government isn't willing to protect their people, then it is up to the people to protect themselves. This is correct, of course. Free people know how to act in such a situation; it is why they are free.
In other words, unlike the submissive character of the enemy, we do not automatically bow to the wishes of the authorities. The enemy makes a mistake to think that the government has the last word in a free society.
The commentators who, like Mr. Sowell, have ratcheted up their words, the things I read in the comments sections of the right blogosphere, which I've summarized above, the actions of ordinary citizens (such as staging a mutiny on an airplane because they didn't like the Muslims flying with them), even the fact that Bush finally put a name to the enemy (pigs flying all over the place), all point to a heightened awareness and frustration with the way the West in general is handling this war.
Every voice counts these days.
"The enemy makes a mistake to think that the government has the last word in a free society."
Excellent point.
And there have now been two "airline mutinies". The West may indeed be waking up!
Gus
If only the government would have some special type of screening for all mid-eastern looking males within a certain age-range, passengers would not have do this type of profiling for themselves.
As someone who would fit the profile perfectly, I have no qualms about being taken aside for extra screening. I hate what people who look like me are doing, and understand that special care is their fault.
Polite and objective profiling should reduce rather than increase the number of stares I get once I'm past the security check.
Thanks for your input, SN. You are not the first "dangerous-looking" guy I've heard say that, but the more the better as far as I am concerned.
I haven't noticed getting stares, but I have been told I look vaguely Middle-Eastern. I'd much rather get searched every time on that basis, too, than continue to see our government wasting its resources and everyone's time inspecting little old ladies.
Gus
Here's another view, of the "Nothing to fear but fear itself" column, from an article originally in Wired:
"What do the terrorists want?" at
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/08/what_the_terror.html
As has been discussed elsewhere, the terrorizing of populations occurs whether any particular plot succeeds or not. How would things be different for travelers today had the latest plot succeeded?
I have mixed feelings about this article, but at least the writer calls for rational, critical thought. ;^)
Thanks for the link, Janet.
After a quick scan, I find it interesting, among the things he brings up, that the plot would still have faced a small chance (link at "debunked", I believe) of success had it actually been attempted....
Gus
I think it's disgusting that the United States is willing to risk the safety of its citizens (Remember, protecting its people is the American government's only duty) because Uncle Same is too afraid to offend someone who looks like a terrorist; it's illogical enough to the point of endangerment.
In a related story, a blogger wearing a T-shirt with Arabic script on it says the cops at JFK asked him to change it if he wanted to board his flight.
(Link)
SN,
It appears that this was unavailable or perhaps some medium that cannot run on Unix. In any event, I was directed to a transcript. Of course, I cannot verify whether this I is the right transcript.
It appears, based on this anyway, that the guy's probably some kind of peace activist and, in addition an ambiguous tee shirt made menacing to most people by the presence of Arabic script, I would be unsurprised to find that he did other subtle things to provoke attention from authorities in the name of advancing a multiculturalist agenda.
I see two things here that he doubtless wants to remain confounded: (1) The legitimate concern that without appropriate law enforcement action, mobs will overreact to those who look like they could be Moslem and (2) the fact that law enforcement must err on the side of caution WRT terrrorism. Freedom of speech is a red herring. We don't have the right to shouut "fire" in a crowded theater. This guy is arguing the equivalent of "But I only said. "The theater is on fire in a loud, clear voice."
Again, as you point out, this apparently deliberatly ambiguous case would not have happened if officials could openly profile without fear of reprisals. People would know this guy'd been screened and probably wouldn't give the Arabic script a second thought.
Very interesting link.
Gus
Daniel,
True indeed, as SN points out.
Gus
Post a Comment