Against Terrorism — But For What?

Photo credit: Ekaterina Pokrovsky /  Ekaterina Pokrovsky /

Following the Charlie Hebdo massacre, Prime Minister Manuel Valls said that France “is at war with terrorism, jihadism and radical Islamism.” This tells us what France is fighting against.

But what is France fighting for in this war on terror? For terrorism is simply a tactic, and arguably the most effective tactic of the national liberation movements of the 20th century.

Terrorism was used by the Irgun to drive the British out of Palestine and by the Mau Mau to run them out of Kenya. Terrorism, blowing up movie theaters and cafes, was the tactic the FLN used to drive the French out of Algeria.

The FALN tried to assassinate Harry Truman in 1950 at Blair House, shot up the House of Representatives in 1954, and, in 1975, blew up Fraunces Tavern in New York where Washington had bid his officers farewell. The FALN goal: Independence from a United States that had annexed Puerto Rico as the spoils of war in its victory over Spain.

What did the FLN, FALN, Mau Mau, Irgun, and Mandela’s ANC have in common? All sought the expulsion of alien rule. All sought nations of their own. All used terrorism for the same ends as Uighurs do in China and Chechens do in the Caucasus.

Osama bin Laden, in his declaration of war upon us, listed as his casus belli the presence on the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia of U.S. troops and their “temple prostitutes.” He wanted us out of his country.

What are Valls’ terrorists, jihadists, and radical Islamists fighting for? What are the goals of ISIS and al-Qaida, Boko Haram and Ansar al-Sharia, the Taliban and al-Shabab?

All want our troops, our alien culture, and our infidel faith out of their lands. All seek the overthrow of regimes that collaborate with us. And all wish to establish regimes that comport with the commands of the Prophet.

This is what they are recruiting for, killing for, dying for. We abhor their terror tactics and deplore their aims, but they know what they are fighting for. What are we fighting for?

What is our vision that will inspire Muslim masses to rise up, battle alongside us, and die fighting Islamists? What future do we envision for the Middle East? And are we willing to pay the price to achieve it?

Comes the reply: America is fighting, as always, for democracy, freedom, and the right of peoples to rule themselves.

But are we? If democracy is our goal, why did we not recognize the election of Hamas in the Palestinian territories, or of Hezbollah in Lebanon? Why did we condone the overthrow of the elected regime of Mohammad Morsi in Egypt? Why do we not demand democracy in Saudi Arabia?

But hypocrisy is the least of our problems. The real problem is that hundreds of millions of Muslims reject our values. They do not believe all religions are equal. They do not believe in freedom of speech or the press to blaspheme the Prophet. Majorities in many Islamic countries believe adulterers, apostates, and converts to Christianity should be lashed, stoned, and beheaded.

In surveys, the Muslim world not only rejects our presence and puppets, but also our culture and beliefs. In a free referendum, they would vote to throw us out of the region and throw the Israelis into the sea.

For many in the Mideast, collaboration with America is a betrayal. And our presence spawns more terrorists than our drones can kill.

This week, Valls conceded there are “two Frances,” adding, “A territorial, social, ethnic apartheid has spread across our country.”

Have her five million Muslims become an indigestible minority that imperils the survival of France? Have France and Europe embraced a diversity more malignant than benign, possibly leading to a future like the recent past in Palestine, Cyprus, Lebanon, Sri Lanka and Ukraine?

T. S. Eliot said, to defeat a religion, you need a religion.

We have no religion; we have an ideology — secular democracy. But the Muslim world rejects secularism and will use democracy to free itself of us and establish regimes that please Allah.

In the struggle between democracy and Allah, we are children of a lesser God. “The term ‘democracy,’” wrote Eliot, “does not contain enough positive content to stand alone against the forces that you dislike — it can easily be transformed by them. If you will not have God … you should pay your respects to Hitler or Stalin.”

Germany used democracy to bring Hitler to power. Given free elections from Morocco to Mindanao, what kind of regimes would rise to power? Would not the Quran become the basis of law?

If Charlie Hebdo were a man, not a magazine, he would be torn to pieces in any Middle East nation into which he ventured. And what does a mindless West offer as the apotheosis of democracy?

Four million French marching under the banner “Je Suis Charlie.”

Whom the gods would destroy …


The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

STUNNING VIDEO: Look How John Kerry Just Tried To Make Nice With France After Paris No-Show

WCJ images Kerry Taylor

By almost any standard, in virtually any context, this will no doubt rank in the minds of many as one of the more bizarre moments in U.S. diplomacy — not only bizarre but also eye-shielding awkward, even surreal.

A no-show at the recent Paris solidarity march to protect freedom of expression and to protest Islamic terrorism, Secretary of State John Kerry was in the French capital today to give our allies what had been billed as a “big hug“.

It was a kind of make-up gesture after the Obama administration came under heavy, sustained fire for not sending a high-level official to join some 40 other world leaders at the Paris rally.

In addition to Kerry’s words of support and solidarity for the French, America’s chief diplomat also brought live entertainment to the Paris stage. Singer James Taylor performed his 1970’s classic “You’ve Got A Friend” as Kerry stood by rather uncomfortably.

When you watch the stunning video, you’ll see that not only was the Secretary of State uncomfortable, but so was the music legend as he had to hunch over to sing into the microphone intended to pick up his guitar. Technicians scrambled to provide a vocal mic for Taylor.

The whole scene was reminiscent of then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ill-conceived reset-button experience with the Russians.

Watching the poorly conceived, embarrassingly executed pop-song style of U.S. relations with a key European ally, one can reasonably ask if this memorable moment in terror-rattled Paris will come to represent the level of maturity and sophistication of Barack Obama’s foreign policy.

You can watch James Taylor try his best to deliver a worthy rendition of his hit song, “You’ve Got A Friend,” by clicking on the video above. You can also imagine how feverishly the comedy writers of “Saturday Night Live” are scrambling to rewrite this weekend’s show; or the satirical cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo rethinking their next cover.


H/T: The Daily Caller    Image Credit: youtube

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

“Moderate Muslims” Are Irrelevant To America And The World

Photo credit: scottmontreal (Flickr)

Many argue that terrorist attacks are committed by extremists. However, as I have repeatedly argued, a small minority has always been responsible for implementing violent ideology to overtake the “peaceful” and “moderate” majority.

Consider this: of the 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide, national security organizations estimate “radical Muslims” account for 15-25 percent.

That equates to approximately 180-300 million “Radical Muslims,” nearly the entire population of the United States, dedicated to destroying Western civilization.

Consider how “moderate” and “peaceful” Muslims prevented or responded to the acts committed by “extremist,” “isolated,” “lone wolves”:

  • The 2015, 2012, and 2010 Charlie Hedbo attacks
  • The 2014 Paris suicide driving attacks and car bombs
  • The 2014 (and ongoing) Boko Haram kidnapping and selling of women and children
  • The 2014 AirAsia flight 8501 disappearance
  • The 2014 Malaysian Flight 370 disappearance
  • The 2014 Oklahoma beheader
  • The 2014 machete NYPD murderer
  • The 2014 Army Peshawar Public School massacre and murder-by-burning of Pakistani teacher by recently released GITMO prisoner
  • The 2014 Fort Hood Murders
  • The 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings
  • The 2012 Benghazi U.S. Embassy Attack
  • The 2008 Bombay & Mumbai India Attacks
  • The 2005 London Subway Suicide Bombings
  • The 2004 Madrid Train Bombing
  • The 2004 Besian Russian School Attack
  • The 2002 Beltway Sniper Shootings
  • The 2002 U.S.S. Cole Attack
  • The 2002 Moscow Theatre Attack
  • The 2002 Bafi Nightclub Bombing
  • The 2001 multiple airline hijackings and attack on Pentagon and WTC
  • The 2001 Shoe Bomber
  • The 1998 Kenyan U.S. Embassy Bombing
  • The 1996 Saudi Khobar Towers U.S. Air Force housing attack
  • The 1994 Buenos Aires AMIA bombing
  • The 1993 World Trade Center attack
  • The 1986 Nigerian underwear bomber attack
  • The 1985 Achille Lauro Cruise Ship Hijacking
  • The 1983 Beirut Marine Barracks bombing
  • The 1983 Beirut U.S. Embassy bombing
  • The 1980 Iranian Embassy Hostage Crisis
  • The 1976 Air France Entebbe Hijacking
  • The 1972 Munich Israeli Olympic Team Murders
  • The 1970 Pan-Am flight #93 Hijacking

And those are only a few that have occurred within my lifetime.

This list excludes the ongoing ISIS, Muslim Brotherhood, and Al-Qaeda terrorist threats to Christians, Kurds, and Jews worldwide–specifically cataloged by The Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Monitor and Center for Security Policy reports, among others.

Consider how no intentional, orchestrated, or funded terrorist attacks and/or violence is committed among these groups who actually live peacefully amongst each other:

  • Buddhists living among Hindus, Sikhs, Shintos, and/or Atheists
  • Hindus living among Christians, Jews, and/or Baha’is
  • Christians living among Shintos and/or Jews
  • Shintos living among Confucians and Atheists
  • Confucians living among Baha’is and Hindus
  • Baha’is living among Jews and Christians
  • Jews living among Atheists and Buddhists
  • Sikhs living among Hindus
  • Atheists living among Confucians

Since Islam was invented in the 7th century, Muslims have followed Muhammad’s example to commit violence against Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Sikhs, Baha’is, Shintos, and Atheists. Islamic ideology is political, designed to dominate the world under one totalitarian Sharia system clearly outlined in the Qur’an.

This is no different than a brief recounting of history throughout which the “radical” minority overpowered the “peaceful” and “moderate” majority.

In 1939, only 6 percent of Germans were members of the Nazi party. Within less than ten years, however, that 6 percent caused the death of more than 66 million people and the destruction of entire European regions.

The peaceful majority of Germans were irrelevant.

Stalin killed more than 50 million people, nearly one third of Russia’s population. The peaceful majority of Russians were irrelevant.

The Ottomans massacred more than 1 million Armenians in 1915. The peaceful majority of Muslims were irrelevant.

The Japanese slaughtered more than 30 million throughout Southeast Asia. And Mao Zedong’s regime killed well over 50 million people, over 30 million alone during his “Great Leap Forward.” The peaceful majority living throughout the entire Southeast and Asian region were irrelevant.

More significantly, on September 11, 2001, there were 2.3 million Muslims living in America. It only took 19 “radicals” to kill nearly 3,000 Americans.

The majority of “peaceful” and “moderate” Muslims in America and worldwide are irrelevant. The reality is that nearly the entire population of America, among one group, is devoted to destroying Western civilization.

The question remains: who will be irrelevant in America?

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

White House Refuses To Use Term ‘Radical Islam’ To Describe Charlie Hebdo Attack

Image Credit: Facebook/NBC Nightly News

Even though socialist President Francois Hollande used the term ‘radical Islam’ to describe the attack on satirical publication Charlie Hebdo in Paris, the White House will not. This was demonstrated Tuesday by White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest, who contended that saying ‘radical Islam’ to describe the attack in Paris last week does not “accurately describe what happened.”

Earnest made the comments in an exchange with Mara Liasson of National Public Radio (NPR) Tuesday, who asked him why the term has not been used by the White House.

 “What they did is they tried to invoke their own distorted deviant view of Islam to try and justify them, Earnest said. “And I think that is completely illegitimate, and what we should do is call it what it is. And it is an act of terror and it is one we roundly condemn.”

Liasson challenged Earnest. “You have bent over backwards to not ever say [radical Islam],” she said. “There must be a reason.”

“I certainly wouldn’t want to be in a position where I’m repeating the justification they have cited that I think is illegitimate. They had invoked Islam to justify their attacks,” Earnest answered.

I think what I’m trying to do is describe to you what happened and what they did. These individuals are terrorists… We have chosen not to use that label [of radical Islam] because it doesn’t seem to accurately describe what happened.

Last week, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper gave a powerful statement condemning the terrorists:

The fact of the matter is this, ladies and gentlemen, that the international jihadist movement has declared war. They have declared war on anybody who does not think and act exactly as they wish they would think and act.

h/t: The Washington Times

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Mark Steyn: Media Retreating Further Into Self-Censorship

Fox News Channel

Conservative political commentator Mark Steyn was a guest on Fox News Channel’s The Kelly File, where he blasted the lack of so-called solidarity with the dead journalists of the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo following the brutal terrorist attack on Wednesday.

I see all these teary candlelit  vigils and everyone suddenly claiming to be for freedom of speech.  I think a consequence of this is a lot of people will retreat even further into self-censorship.

Steyn had some choice words for the New York Daily News for blurring the Charlie Hebdo cartoon of Muhammad.

The New York Daily News won’t even show – dishonors the dead in Paris – by not even showing properly the cartoons. They pixelated Muhammad out of it so it looks like Muhammad is in the Witness Protection Program but they left the hook-nose Jew in. And that exactly gets to the double standard here. You can say anything you like about Christianity. You can say anything you like about Judaism. But these guys, everyone understands the message, that if you say something about Islam these guys will kill you. And we will be retreating into a lot more self-censorship if the “pansy-ified” western media doesn’t man up and decide to disperse the risks. So they can’t just kill one little, small French satirical magazine, they gotta kill all of us.

Steyn had contempt for President Obama’s United Nations speech after the Benghazi attack in 2012 when he said that “The future shall not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

He talked the talk. These savage murdering fanatics in Paris today walked the walk.  So words matter.

h/t: The Right Scoop

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom