Dissimulation Exposed

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Dissimulation on Display

The Western World is in a tragic state. When confronted with a direct threat from a murderous Islamic movement, we equivocate. We try to excuse their brutality by appealing to arguments of moral equivalence; by enumerating the many legitimate and illegitimate grievances as insisted by Muslim apologists.

This is precisely what our enemies hope -- and expect -- we will do. The idea that the West is being justly punished by an enemy David finally lashing out at a brutal Goliath is the main thrust of al Qaeda statements prepared for consumption in the West. But the statements al Qaeda prepares for its fundamentalist allies and potential recruits deliver a far darker, more insidious message. It is the message of unending, offensive jihad.

Raymond Ibrahim skillfully explains this duplicity in his article The Two Faces of Al Qaeda. Therein, he cites former jihadi Hassan Butt's article I was a fanatic[...]".

These articles are required reading for those who wish to defeat the lie that many in the West believe, that -- as claimed by bin Laden in his "Why Did We Not Attack Sweden" speech -- if we only left the Middle East the West would be free of this threat.

This dissimulation must be exposed, for if we surrender, our enemies will not let allow us to live in peace. As intrepid journalist Michael Ware reports from Iraq:

"You [an insurgent] once said to me [Michael Ware] if the Americans left, your war was over. What now, if the Americans leave, what will you do?" He [the insurgent] looked at me straight back and said, "If the Americans leave now, I must follow them wherever they go."


  • The real problem is that yes, many Middle Easterners are a David to the USA's very real Goliath. Through occupations and many other insensitivities, many Middle Eastern people feel snubbed and disrespected by the West.

    And the Islamists are right there to swoop in and take advantage of that resentment.

    The real solution is to remove the resentment. Act politely to other nations. In some cases this will be a hard thing to do, but putting an end to military activity abroad that isn't part of a declared war is paramount. I know some may feel a moral obligation to send soldiers overseas, and the foreign countries may even ask for it, but we have to have the courage to say NO.

    If our foreign policy is of peace, communication and open and vigorous commerce with all, but military entanglements with none, any "resentment" toward the USA will be met with little more than a chuckle or a shrug. The Islamofascists would have no one to convert, and they would die out as a threat.

    It might be easy to think of the Islamofascists as unreasoning monsters, but they all start out as a Muslim who feels disrespected by the West. The hard fact to face is that the USA has acted disrespectfully over there several times over the decades. This is not your fault, nor is it mine. It is not "America's" fault either. It is the fault of policy makers who have failed to live up to the American ideal. Vote them out and move on, by voting in someone who will let America lead. Good leaders lead through wisdom, and respect and servitude to others, not with a hammer and fist.

    Consider Ron Paul.

    By Blogger BJT, at 5:14 PM  

  • Dear Jared,

    Sorry to clutter your combox with an off-topic remark, but since I don’t have you email address, this is my only means of contact.

    Someone (not a friend) directed me to Malcolm Nance’s article as if it were a definitive refutation of waterboarding. Reading through the combox, I ran across your interaction.

    I want to take the opportunity to congratulate you for the valiant attempt you made to bring some rational and moral clarity to the debate, despite the personal abuse you suffered in the process.

    Aside from the fact that some people are simply knee-jerks, a lot of folks operate with a wooden deontologism in which every action is either right or wrong, period—irrespective of motives, circumstances, objectives, or consequences. This is ethically simpleminded—and, ultimately, it’s quite unethical.

    Thanks for attempting to bring a more complete set of principles to bear in moral valuation.

    Steve Hays

    By Blogger steve, at 12:49 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home