Skip to content

It’s Still a Big Deal

July 8, 2010

Greenwald has a piece up lambasting Krauthammer for using Faisal Shazhad’s admission that he is a “Muslim soldier” to criticize the President for not acknowledging that Islamism is the cause of terrorism when the terrorist himself will say it.  This, among other things, makes Krauthammer a “rank propagandist” according to Greenwald because the WaPo columnist refuses to recognize that a lot of terrorism is a result, not a cause, of our actions in the Middle East — indeed, Shazhad’s own words confirmed this:

When pleading guilty, Shazhad explained that his attempted bombing was in response to the violence and wars which the U.S. is perpetrating in the Muslim world, telling the court that violence aimed at Americans will continue unless and until the U.S. stops waging wars and spawning violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other Muslim countries:


Shadzad was a Muslim the entire time when he was building a law-abiding, peaceful, middle-class American life over the last decade, but emails obtained by The New York Times reveal that he became increasingly angry and radicalized as a result of U.S. actions in the Muslim world:  the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, drone attacks, Israeli violence against Palestinians and Muslims generally, Guantanamo and torture were among the policies against which he railed.  In one email, Shazhad asked: “Can you tell me a way to save the oppressed? And a way to fight back when rockets are fired at us and Muslim blood flows?”

Okay, so what’s the point here?  Is it just that Krauthammer is a bad guy?

But the truth issue is paramount:  our refusal to recognize the causal relationship between our own actions and the Terrorism with which our political class is ostensibly obsessed ensures that it not only continues indefinitely but worsens as a direct result of what we do.  As I wrote when discussing Shazhad’s court statements:  “It’s really quite simple: if we continue to bring violence to that part of the world, then that part of the world — and those who sympathize with it — will continue to want to bring violence to the U.S.”  This is the central fact that rarely rears its head in establishment discussions of Terrorism, and the principal reason for this self-defeating behavior is because of deceivers like Krauthammer, whose agenda is served by fabricating false causes while concealing the real ones.

This whole things begs the question: so what?  So what if war in that part of the world makes Muslims want to make war in this part of the world?  Does that not count?  Is that not still Muslim extremism?  Is it somehow not Islamism if it’s in response to our actions in the “Muslim world”?  Would it be okay if some Christian people (never mind a bunch of atheists) decided to blow up some buildings in the Middle East because of “violence in the Christian/secular world”?

Fine, I’ll recognize that “punches thrown in bars spark more punches.”  It’s important to note that the “more punches” is still Islamism.  I think most people have recognized this fact and made their peace with it.  Waging war isn’t going to make everybody happy, but if you think that our national security interests are invested in this war — which I’m not saying I do — then you should be able to deal with the fact that there’s going to be a reaction.  Which I think most pro-war people are.  That doesn’t mean radical Islam isn’t still a problem.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: