“FIRST RULE OF WAR IS TO KNOW YOUR ENEMY!”
A White House Comedy Policy based on Cowardice
“Religious fundamentalism alone is not a Risk Factor.”
Before I was Stationed in the Islamic Middle East Zone
And read the Koran, I employed the Use of ‘No Comment.’
I Now Hold The Same Opinion As Dr.
Charles Krauthhammer
July 7, 2010
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
The author of the 2,300-year-old treatise The Art of War, Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu, warned, “If you know yourself but not your enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.”
One of the major tenants of a correct analysis is to know your enemy.
And one of the greatest mistakes in analysis is to make your enemy fit into your preconceived mold that accomplishes your political purposes.
Obama is leading America down a garden path of political correctness based on the imagination of a novice.
Begin Excerpt from Investor’s Business Daily (INVESTOR’S.COM)
The Cowardice Of Not Calling Them Enemies
By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER
Posted 07/02/2010 06:59 PM ET
The Fort Hood shooter, the Christmas Day bomber, the Times Square attacker. On May 13, the following exchange occurred at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee:
Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas: Do you feel that these individuals might have been incited to take the actions that they did because of radical Islam?
Attorney General Eric Holder: There are a variety of reasons why I think people have taken these actions. …
Smith: OK, but radical Islam could have been one of the reasons
?
Holder: There are a variety of reasons why people —
Smith: But was radical Islam one of them
?
Holder: There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious-based.
Potentially, mind you. This went on until the questioner gave up in exasperation.
A similar question arose recently in U.S. District Court when Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square attacker, pleaded guilty. Explained Shahzad: “One has to understand where I’m coming from … I consider myself a mujahid, a Muslim soldier.”
Well, that is clarifying.
As was the self-printed business card of Maj.
Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, identifying himself as SoA: Soldier of Allah.
Holder’s avoidance of the obvious continues the absurd and embarrassing refusal of the Obama administration to acknowledge who out there is trying to kill Americans and why.
In fact, it has banned from its official vocabulary the terms jihadist, Islamist and Islamic terrorism.
Instead, President Obama’s National Security Strategy insists on calling the enemy — how else do you define those seeking your destruction? — “a loose network of violent extremists.”
But this is utterly meaningless. This is not an anger-management therapy group gone rogue. These are people professing a powerful ideology rooted in a radical interpretation of Islam, in whose name they propagandize, proselytize, terrorize and kill.
Why is this importan
t? Because the first rule of war is to know your enemy.
If you don’t, you wander into intellectual cul-de-sacs and ignore the real causes that might allow you to prevent recurrences.
The Pentagon report on the Fort Hood shooter runs 86 pages with not a single mention of Hasan’s Islamism. It contains such politically correct inanities as “religious fundamentalism alone is not a risk factor.”
Of course it is. Indeed, Islamist fundamentalism is not only a risk factor.
It is the risk factor, the common denominator linking all the great terror attacks of this century — from 9/11 to Mumbai, from Fort Hood to Times Square, from London to Madrid to Bali. The attackers were of various national origin, occupation, age, social class, native tongue and race. The one thing that united them was the jihadist vision in whose name they acted.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.