Wednesday, July 10, 2013
The war on terrorism is over. The Islamists have won. The Islamists’ enemy is what used to be called “the American Way of Life” —essentially freedom from government control and intrusion, liberty, the protection of privacy and other rare and profound rights associated with a constitutional republic. The U.S. government (most especially the current regime and its apparatchiks) has basically agreed with the Islamic terrorists that this way of life is disposable. Why?
The only credible, consistent, and truly dangerous terrorist threat to the U.S. and its interest is posed by Islamists. Everyone knows this. Sure, there will be an occasional uni-bomber with Al Gore’s book on his nightstand, a Tim McVeigh motivated by who knows what, or other widely dispersed in time nut jobs engaged in senseless acts of violence. These characters pose no real threat to the U.S. or our once cherished way of life. In a country in which 92 people are shot over Fourth of July weekend in Chicago they are merely a nuisance.
So why, instead of focusing on Islamists, is every American treated as if he were a terrorist? Why is everyone’s mail photographed? Why is everyone’s email read and saved? Why is everyone’s cell phone tapped and listened to? Why does the government have to know and identify who has boarded every plane that takes off? Since the Islamists are the only credible threat to our national interest, why are these extraordinary intrusions made? In a phrase: why has American been turned into an Orwellian surveillance state an old line Soviet would enjoy?
Why has America and have Americans surrendered to the terrorists? On the immediate level, the answer to the question is: the elites who preach political correctness and multiculturalism have from the beginning insisted that the attacks against U.S. interest, persons, and way of life have nothing to do with Islam or Islamist. In spite of the fact that Islamists announce to everyone who will listen that they hate America, what it stands for and anything remotely connected to individual freedom the PC elites insist that all varieties of terrorists abound AND EVERY AMERICAN MUST BE TREATED AS A CRIMINAL —actually worse since criminals have constitutional rights.
The PC fifth column is the wedge used to pry Americans’ freedoms from their grasp. In place of selective surveillance and prudent efforts to thwart Islamists a huge and complex Orwellian monster has been created since anything short of that would be unfair and discriminatory. Succinctly: it might make some Muslims feel bad to say or act on the truth. It is not my fault or any American’s fault that virtually every act of terrorism committed anywhere is committed by Muslims. Sticking one’s head in the sand will not change that. Islamo-terror is here to stay for a very long time. Giving up every American freedom except the right of Muslim’s to never feel offended will not end the terrorist threat. It only makes it worse by distracting those that are “protecting” us. But the PC elites have made a rational defense policy impossible.
Even the wise (many of whom I respect) seem to think an Orwellian surveillance state is “essential to our safety”. This is apparently necessary in spite of the fact that terrorists have killed on U.S. soil fewer American’s than were slaughtered on one day at Omaha beach? Have we become such cowards that a few thousand American’s killed means we must cease being Americans?
Perhaps all of this is merely a smokescreen. The statist use the PC elites to justify the surveillance state — a state in which the Attorney General was reluctant to categorically say that the regime could not use drones to kill Americans on American soil. What will happen when the Orwellian surveillance state is in the wrong hands? Will the people always be wise enough to select leaders not inclined to use this apparatus for their own purposes? They will know where the guns are. They will know the names of those who oppose them. Or maybe it will be enough to just data mine these troves of information to ensure winning enough elections to control the state?