they do not mind how many Americans get killed as long as Washington keeps pursuing the interventionist foreign policy they believe benefits their friends overseas and their benefactors at home. --- The policy of intervention to support democratic governments was originally part of the policy of containment of communism. What's their excuse now?
On May 1, 7:47 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Why Are Limbaugh, Levin, and Hannity So Eager To See More Dead Americans?by > Michael Scheuer > Last week on FOX, I spoke about the reasons why America is losing the war > with the mujahedin and it seems to have rattled and angered Rush Limbaugh, > Mark Levin, and Sean Hannity. I know this not because I regularly tune into > them, but because acquaintances of mine, who have a much higher tolerance > than I do for that trio’s vacuity and deceit on this issue, have sent me > video clips and transcripts. So to follow up more fully on what I said on > FOX, here are few things to remember about the war in which the United States > is engaged with an increasing portion of the Islamic world. I will try to > keep this as simple as possible to assist Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Sean > Hannity. > a.) America’s war with the mujahedin is preeminently a religious war. The > Islamist mujahedin we are fighting – especially the late-Osama bin Laden’s > al-Qaeda and its allies – are "good Muslims," in that they are following > religious injunctions that demand Muslims resist foreign intervention, > invasion, occupation, and domination. When you hear spokesman for many Muslim > organizations in the United States and governments like those in Egypt and > Saudi Arabia say that the mujahedin are not "good Muslims" and have > "hijacked" the Islamic faith – oddly, the same phrases you hear from Obama, > his CIA Director Brennan, Mrs. Clinton, and Senators Graham, Lieberman, and > McCain – they are lying and trying to lure Americans into complacency, for > they, even more than the mujahedin, dream of forcing the entire world to be > Islamic. > b.) Therefore, the mujahedin are the "bad guys" from the perspective of the > United States and – as always – from mine; that is, they attacked us first, > they caused the war. The mujahdein, their infrastructure, and their > supporters merit destruction as complete as we can possibly inflict for > starting a war with us. > c.) But here is where Rush, Mark, and Sean deliberately cock-up chances for > Americans to understand the enemy they face and must defeat; none of the > three celebrities seem to know the difference between the words "cause" and > "motivate." Instead of understanding the very simple concept that the > Islamists who attack us are reacting to what the U.S. government does and > following the duties imposed on them by their faith, Democrats, Republicans, > Israeli officials and their U.S.-citizen champions, Neo-Conservatives, and > Rush, Mark, Sean, and others of their ilk depict the mujahedin as acting on a > religion that demands they attack the United States because of the way we > vote, drink, and send girls to school. Although insane, this explanation > conveniently makes all Muslims crazy, and gets the United States off the > hook; to wit, America did not do anything to offend anyone. > 4.) As Sister Mary Lawrence taught at All Saints grammar school, and which > anyone knows who has scuffled on a school playground, every action elicits a > reaction. This is not rocket science; if it was, it could not come from me. > The reality is, therefore, that the religious doctrine adhered to by the > mujahdein needs a trigger to activate it; that is, to motivate the decision > to attack us. The U.S. government’s foreign policy in the Islamic World – one > that is mirrored by nearly all NATO countries – is that trigger. For example: > Invade Libya – get an Islamist-dominated country and get your ambassador and > three other Americans killed by the mujahedin. Support Israel and Arab > tyrannies for a half-century – get the Islamist attacks of Kenya, Tanzania, > the USS COLE, and 9/11. And soon, invade Syria – get an al-Qaeda-like regime > in Damascus and the fall of the Jordanian regime. (NB: Are you following, > Rush, Mark and Sean?) > 5.) This reality does not excuse or condone mujahedin attacks – those boys > need to be destroyed if we can find any part of the U.S. military that has a > clue about how to fightand wina war. That said, Washington’s foreign policy > is the main motivator of the mujahedin, and the main factor that makes them > decide to attack us. Does that make the United States responsible or – in the > words of Rush, Mark, and Sean – "to blame" for the mujahedin attacks? No, > certainly not; those who attack us have a free will and on them falls the > blame for the deaths and destruction that results from their attacks. They > merit annihilation. > 6.) So the equation is clear: > a.) Islam is a faith that requires its adherents to defend their religion and > brethren against invasion, occupation, and domination, not unlike the > Catholic faith that waged the crusades to retake the Holy Land, and multiple > Popes who promised heaven to those crusaders who died killing Muslims; > b.) Western interventionism usually takes one of the above forms and so > triggers a religious responsibility to defend faith and brethren, one which, > since the 1980s, has been consistently taken up by the mujahedin. (NB: One > notes that Islamist attacks on the United States were almost non-existent > until Washington began its long and gradually intensifying history of > intervention in the Muslim world in 1973. The fact that Islamism has been a > vibrant force in the Muslim world since at least the 1920s, and only began to > regularly attack U.S. interests after 1973, suggests that the Islamists > needed U.S. actions as the motivating trigger to make them decide to attack > America.); > c.) Because of the motivational force of their interventionist foreign > policy, the United States and its Western allies have been repeatedly > attacked by Islamists and have allowed their militaries to be shamefully > defeated, and all the while they have continued to cultivate more Islamist > enemies by continuing the interventionism that is the central and critical > factor that motivates the decision of the mujahedin to wage war. > d.) In simple Sister Mary Lawrence-ish terms, when the United States and its > allies are perceived by Muslims to be kicking Islam – rearming the Israelis > to kill more Palestinians, kowtowing to the Saudi tyrants, invading Iraq, > stealing land and oil from Muslim Sudan and giving it to a new "Christian > state," etc. – the mujahedin kick back as "good Muslims" who are following > the duties imposed by faith. > 7.) Now, Rush, Mark, and Sean are reputed to be smart and patriotic men. If > the foregoing is correct – and it is – why are they not smart or patriotic > enough to help Americans understand why their soldier-children are being > killed overseas; why they and their little kids are being killed at marathons > at home; and why their civil liberties are being whittled away by a cowardly > bipartisan governing elite – corrupted by Arab princes, pro-Israeli U.S. > citizens, and political correctness – which is conducting a self-defeating > effort to defeat the Islamists while knowingly hiding the fact that they > themselves are motivating our Islamist enemies. In short, why are Rush, Mark, > and Sean so eager to get more Americans killed, and to keep cultivating > Islamist enemies who ultimately will bleed America to death in terms of > money, lives, and the growth of tyrannical central government acting in the > name of homeland security? > 8.) The answer of course is that Rush, Mark, and Sean have no intention of > educating Americans about the Islamist threat they face if they must > acknowledge the fact that Washington’s foreign policy motivates the mujahedin > to attack us. > a.) Never from their deceitful mouths will you ever hear that Washington’s > unquestioning support for Israel motivates the mujahedin to kill Americans, > and that activities of pro-Israel groups in the United States have corrupted > not only our politics but also are media. (NB: On this last point, think > about Rush, Mark, and Sean.) > b.) You will never hear from their mouths the truth that almost all people – > be they Muslims, Christians, Jews, or Buddhists – dislike being invaded, > bombed, or occupied, and more often then not react to such events with > justifiable violence, not unlike our Founders did when the British Army > invaded and occupied Boston and sought to disarm Americans. > c.) You will never hear from their mouths that their cheer-leading for > Washington’s bipartisan campaign to impose-by-bayonet secular democracy on > Muslims is helping to realize Professor Huntington’s "clash of > civilizations." What Dr. Huntington never expected is today’s reality, one > that sees the clash he predicted being instigated by secular (pagan?) clerics > from Harvard, Yale, and the rest of the Ivy League and not from Islamic > universities in Mecca and Cairo. > d.) You will never hear from their mouths any condemnation of the many tens > of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars that have been wasted – much of it > flowing to flim-flamming psychiatrists and the venal hucksters of social > science – in trying to figure out what "radicalizes" people like the Boston > bombers. The answer is obvious and available for free: U.S. interventionist > foreign policy = the motivation that radicalizes Muslims. > And most of all, you will never hear directly from the mouths of Rush, Mark, > and Sean what they are implicitly telling Americans; that is, that they hate > virtually everything the Founding Fathers thought and prescribed for U.S. > foreign policy – in short hand, do not stick your nose in other peoples’ > affairs in which you have no interest – and that they do not mind how many > Americans get killed as long as Washington keeps pursuing the interventionist > foreign policy they believe benefits their friends overseas and their > benefactors at home. Indeed, if you reflect on their words, it would not be a > surprise to find the fingerprints of Rush, Mark, and Sean – like those of so > many U.S. politicians from both parties – on the detonators of those > pressure-cooker bombs in > Boston.http://non-intervention.com/1108/why-are-limbaugh-levin-and-hannity-so-eager-to-see-more-dead-americans/ -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
